|
Phyllis
Errico, Editor
In order to understand the role of public participation
in education and educational policy it is crucial to appreciate
the historical background of public education in this country.
To do so it is important to note the respective roles of the
federal, the state and the local governments in public education.
Although the United States Constitution is silent on the issue
of education, the federal government’s role in education
dates back to the late 1700s when the federal government began
financing education in the territories. The Supreme Court
of the United States confirmed the Federal government’s
authority to support financial programs by allowing the government
to spend funds for “the general welfare.” This trend
has continued and the federal courts have routinely supported
congressional acts that establish conditions under which states
can obtain funding for educational purposes.
Although the Federal government has been involved indirectly
in public education since the 1700s its recognized role has
been to supplement the states and localities that have the
primary responsibility for the education of the citizens.
In fact the enabling legislation of the Federal Department
of Education states expressly that the primary responsibility
for education lies within the states and localities. “It
is the intention of the Congress in the establishment of the
Department to protect the rights of State and local governments
and public and private educational institutions in the areas
of educational policies and administration of programs and
to strengthen and improve the control of such governments
and institutions over their own educational programs and policies
. The establishment of the Department of Education shall not
increase the authority of the Federal Government over education
or diminish the responsibility for education which is reserved
to the States and the local systems and other instrumentalities
of the States.” 20 United State Code § 3403(a).
Despite this statutory language, by attaching conditions to
the receipt or use of federal funds for education, the Federal
government strongly influences educational policies.
Examples of federal influence over educational policy can
be clearly found in a number of federal statues including
the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, “FERPA,”
which provides for the confidentiality of student scholastic
records, in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act,
“IDEA,” which requires that all children with disabilities
receive a free appropriate public education, and in Title
IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination
on the basis of sex in any education program receiving federal
funding and most often arises in education in the context
of equal access to sports for female students.
State involvement in education was limited in the early
years of this country as most education took place at home
or in church. However the need for a trained workforce and
the forming of a democratic government promoted the need for
the provision of public education. The Tenth Amendment to
the Constitution provides that the powers not delegated to
the United States by that document are reserved to the states.
Most state constitutions including the Constitution of the
Commonwealth of Virginia provide for a system of public education.
Article VIII Section 1 of the Virginia Constitution, entitled,
Public schools of high quality to be maintained, states as
follows: “The General Assembly shall provide for a system
of free public elementary and secondary schools for all children
of school age throughout the Commonwealth, and shall seek
to ensure that an educational program of high quality is established
and continually maintained.” Most states provide some
control over both public and private educational institutions
through funding and legislation. This legislation includes
setting minimum qualifications for teachers and school accreditation
among other things. In addition state legislatures may control
education with respect to the organization, membership and
operation of local school divisions as well as through laws
regulating tenure, curriculum, testing and graduation requirements.
State involvement in education is usually carried out by the
state board of education who work through the state departments
of education to carry out the state laws regarding the provision
of education. They do so by developing policy, regulating
licensing and supplying technical and financial support for
local school divisions.
The most direct authority over education comes from the
local school boards. However, due to the various funding and
regulatory authorities exercised by the federal and state
governments this control is diluted greatly. These local school
boards govern through the provision of policies and regulations
in areas such as acquiring and maintaining property, hiring
and firing personnel, student conduct and finance and operations.
It is generally true that a local school board may enact policies
and regulations consistent with relevant statutory authority
and that a superintendent may execute and effectuate these
policies.
The degree of public participation in educational policy
and in fact the opportunities for such participation often
depends on the degree of decentralization or local discretion
allowed or provided by the state and local education authorities.
The degree and extent of public participation may also be
affected by the structure and relationship between the governor,
the legislature, the state board of education and the state
superintendent and also in how these entities and persons
interact with local school boards and local school superintendents.
Whether these entities are elected or appointed can also affect
the degree of participation in policy making
The role of public participation in educational policy has
evolved over time within the framework of the federal/state/local
control over education. Although in the past public participation
in educational policy was quite limited and for the most part
consisted of citizens contacting federal and state legislators
to voice their opinions, the role of public participation
has increased with the advent of Open Government laws and
the increased access to information provided by technology.
It is it easier today than ever before to stay informed about
the issues facing education, to interact with the educators
and the policy makers at all levels and to participate in
the process through various mediums.
The amount of public participation and involvement in educational
policy has also increased with legislation such as the Administrative
Process Act which provides for public notice and a comment
period when regulations are being considered by state or federal
agencies and boards, and the Freedom of Information Act which
allows public access to government records and public notice
and access to meetings of public bodies such as state and
local school boards.
Those who favor very active public participation in educational
policy point out that a process that allows review, comment
and input at the federal, state and local levels provides
a far better policy result because the process allows for
differing viewpoints and experiences to be considered before
a final policy is crafted. Another benefit of this process
is that more people are involved in the process, thus they
are more likely to support the outcome because they feel that
their views were heard and considered. In addition, because
of the ability to access information, the public has a better
understanding of the issues and can provide more informed
input regarding educational policy.
Those who are satisfied with a more narrow degree of public
participation in the making of educational policy argue that
this type of policy should be developed by educators who have
the background and experience necessary to make sound educational
decisions, rather than by the general public who may not understand
the complexities of certain issues in the educational arena.
In addition, opponents argue that those advocates with the
most resources can influence the process to a much greater
extent than those who do not. Therefore, you may end up with
educational policy that is slanted heavily in favor of a particular
interest group.
Many opponents of extensive public participation cite the
reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act as an example of this. The process of revising and reauthorizing
this act involved quite a bit of public comment and participation
and some feel that the end result was a federal act that provides
much entitlement for services to the student with disabilities,
but provides very little support, control or flexibility to
local school divisions who must deliver services and maintain
an appropriate learning environment for all students.
Although the establishment of educational districts or divisions
is a legislative function the issue of who represents these
districts and how they are chosen has had active voter participation
in Virginia over the last several years. Until recently, Virginia
remained one of the few states with appointed school boards.
In 1992 the Virginia General Assembly amended state law to
allow localities to choose by referendum the method of filling
school board seats. The result of this local option was that
a large number of the localities in Virginia voted to change
from appointed school boards to elected school boards, thus
signaling an interest in more direct participation and control
of public education.
In addition to this strong message by the voting public
in Virginia there has been clear evidence of an even greater
desire for public participation in education that is illustrated
by state and federal legislation and court action. It is clear
that there is an increase in litigation in many areas of educational
policy including instruction and curriculum, employment and
retention, safety and supervision, student discipline and
special education to name a few.
In addition to litigation one only has to review the various
media sources to read editorials and other commentary from
the public regarding a wide variety of opinions on educational
policy. It is important to note that although courts are reluctant
to substitute their judgment for the educational policy makers,
this has not stopped the free flow of legal challenges from
being filed and litigated against school systems and school
boards.
Over the last decade there has been a flurry of legislative
initiatives, public commentary and litigation in the area
of Open Meeting laws such as the Freedom of Information Act
(also referred to as Sunshine Laws). The issues are those
of public notice of meetings, access to public meetings and
specificity in the description of issues that are being discussed
in “closed meetings” or “executive session.”
There is also much public discussion of the Freedom of Information
Act’s access to governmental records as is evidenced
in the frequent news articles on this topic. At the root of
all this activity is an interested and active public whose
goal is to be informed of the issues that are being discussed
by the educators and the educational policy makers today
Participation in public educational policy is on the rise
at the federal, state and local level. This is due to the
fact that there are countless avenues to become involved both
as an individual and as a member of an advocacy group or association.
Perhaps the greatest area of influence on educational policy
comes from those who participate in the legislative process.
Which programs receive federal funding or federal scrutiny
in local and state practice is motivated in large part by
public participation in the legislative process. The efforts
of focused educational lobbying has resulted in greater funding
for specific programs as well as mandates for services without
complete funding, This takes place in the form of both professional
lobbying and also individuals testifying and participating
in hearings on educational issues. Many of the large organizations
such as the National Education Association and the National
Parent Teacher Association participate in the making of educational
law and policy on any number of issues in Washington and in
Richmond.
In addition, in the past ten to twenty years there has been
an increase in the participation by parent advocacy groups
on a variety of issues ranging from school safety, to curriculum
and assessment issues. . Public participation in the formation
of educational policy is also quite prevalent in the Virginia
Generally Assembly as is evidenced by the increasingly large
number of educationally related Bills introduced each year
that result in new law or in the creation of legislative study
commissions.
Laws mandating public participation in programs and committees
has also increased over the last ten years. For example, at
the federal level, the Head Start program and the Chapter
1 program require a certain amount of parental participation
in order to obtain and retain funding for such programs. In
addition, in Virginia as well as in other states, laws require
local school divisions to include parent and community involvement
in certain areas such as special education, gifted education,
vocational and technical education, health advisory as well
as other types of committees and processes.
Many states including Virginia have also enacted legislation
providing for student members of the local school board so
that the student voice has greater representation in the formation
of educational policy. Other avenues of public participation
at the state and local level include involvement in state
and local lay advisory committees, Parent Teacher Associations,
educational associations and other similar organizations.
One of the most volatile issues at the local level involves
the rezoning or redrawing of school zones within a school
division. The Code of Virginia requires published notice and
a scheduled public hearing whenever a school division is consolidating
schools or proposing a rezoning involving more than 15 percent
of the student population. Code of Virginia section 22.1-79.1.
As a practical matter most school divisions will hold such
a public hearing even if the change will not reach the fifteen
percent threshold. This issue is one which really solidifies
neighborhoods and prompts citizens to participate in the public
hearing process more than perhaps any other because it affects
their children, their neighborhoods and their property.
In addition to the methods mentioned above, public participation
in education policy has also been affected with the expanding
role of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. This Act
which is amended almost yearly by the General Assembly has
the stated purpose of providing ready access to records in
the custody of public officials and providing free entry to
meetings of public bodies where the business of the people
is being conducted. Virginia State Code § 2.1-340.1 et
seq. These public meetings in most cases provide a designated
time for public comment often referred to as open forum. This
provides an opportunity for members of the public to address
their concerns directly to the school board or other public
body. The Administrative Process act allows participation
on the front end by providing notice of agency rulemaking
and an opportunity for public comment before final rules are
developed. Hearings on proposed rules are held in various
locations throughout the state to provide access to a broad
segment of the population.
Governmental agencies and divisions created for the investigation
of state and local educational entities such as the Federal
Office of Civil Rights and State Department Education Compliance
Division exert a great deal of influence on the policies and
practices of state and local school divisions. This process
is initiated most frequently by a parent complaint regarding
a policy, practice or situation. These agencies or departments
respond with an initial letter stating the complaint or charges
alleged and requesting a detailed response from the educational
entity within a set period of time. The next step may be an
in-depth investigation which often results in an on-site visit
to a school division. These investigations can last from a
few weeks to several years and often result in a mandated
change in policy or practice even if no violation of the law
has been found.
In addition to elections and voter referendum issues which
is one of the clearest and most traditional forms of public
participation, another avenue of public participation in educational
policy is through response to surveys or polls sponsored by
the school division or other outside groups. This provides
an avenue of input and participation in a less confrontational
manner. Thus, some people may feel freer to reveal their true
opinions about the school system or education initiatives
in this method.
Technology such as public education television programming
(which may include the ability to call in and ask questions
of school officials), voice mail, fax machines, and especially
email access have greatly increased the interaction between
the educational policy maker and the public as the public
has greater access to the information and issues facing public
schools today and the ability to comment and interact with
the policy makers is made easier.
Public Participation in educational policy may cause some
concern regarding the confidentiality of student, employee
and other sensitive information. The Head Start program criteria
mandates that parents play an active roll in the hiring of
school employees. This may require training for the parents
on the sensitivity of sharing personnel information with others.
This issue could also arise from the participation of a student
on a local school board. School Boards have responsibilities
which include the hiring, and firing of employees as well
as the disciplining of students. Thus, provisions must be
made regarding the confidentiality of this information. In
addition, as the operation of government becomes more open
and exclusions from open meeting requirements are expanded,
other issues such as the negotiating of contract terms for
the purchase of real estate for the building of schools may
be compromised as it is very difficult to discuss such issues
at a public meeting without compromising the boards bargaining
position.
The issue of public participation in educational policy is
evident in almost every aspect of public education. It can
be found in funding and taxing issues, curriculum and testing
issues, hiring, licensing and disciplining of educational
personnel, the education of both disabled and gifted students
as well as in many other areas. This public participation
is manifested in all mediums available. It is exercised not
only by parents advocating for their children but also by
community groups who participate in the process in hopes of
shaping a well-rounded and well-trained citizen.
Greater participation means a public who tends to be more
educated and more invested in the success of public education
as an institution. Involvement often translates into tangible
support such as through volunteerism, donations and presence
at and support for school activities. However, overly aggressive
public participation can result in political — acrimony
and dissention and can sometimes chill the development and
execution of sound educational decisions. This type of public
participation can also result in costs to the system to satisfy
frequent demands of the public, whether it is responding to
complaints filed by parents with state and federal agencies,
or in excessive litigation over the provision of individual
services. The constant battle of wills can drain the resources
of the public school system when decisions become those of
politics rather than those of sound educational policy.
Partnerships between the policy makers, educators and the
public can be mutually gratifying and productive when there
is a positive, respectful trust and acknowledgment of what
each partner has to offer. This type of partnership can foster
the highest level of educational success for all children
through policies that are effective and productive for the
entire educational community.
Click here for summary of recent Virginia Legislative history
of “Public
Participation in Education Policy: Changing Roles.”
United States Code
Family Education Rights to Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. section
1232
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 20 U.S.C. section
1400
Title IX of The Education amendments of 1972 20 U.S.C. section
1681
Federal Department of Education enabling legislation 20 U.S.C
3401 et. seq.
Code of Virginia, Freedom of Information Act section 2.1-342
et. seq.
Administrative Process Act section 9-6.14:1 et. seq.
The Constitution of Virginia, Article VIII Section 1
Rapp, James A.Education Law, Volume 1 , Section 3, Governing
Agencies, Boards,, Officers and Authorities
Click cepi@vcu.edu to provide
comments or additional information. Please indicate in an
e-mail the copyright source and contact information for new
inclusions. Back to Top
Copyright © CEPI 2000
CEPI grants permission to reproduce this paper for noncommercial purposes if
CEPI is credited.
|
