Featured
PED gives more details on how implementing the controversial 180-day rule will work.
Published
Modified
Reviews are mixed on the New Mexico Public Education Department鈥檚 decision, announced last week, to move forward with a controversial rule to require public schools to spend 180 days with students per school year, with some key changes.
On one hand, Education Secretary Arsenio Romero says many families have recognized the need to boost their children鈥檚 reading proficiency and to make academic calendars more cohesive.
鈥淪ometimes, there鈥檚 a lot of broken-up weeks, and that can be hard on families,鈥� he told the Journal. 鈥淎nd so they鈥檙e really looking forward to having more time with their teachers and having a more full, complete school year.鈥�
But while changes the department made to the rule 鈥� allowing schools to operate on four-day school weeks and to earn waivers from the 180-day requirement if they reach certain reading proficiency goals 鈥� eased the minds of some, the department鈥檚 decision to move forward on it stoked the ire of others.
That includes National Education Association New Mexico President Mary Parr-S谩nchez, who said she was 鈥渄isappointed because they鈥檙e not following the order of operations that I would follow to solve the problem of children attending school.鈥�
鈥淏efore you try to add extended learning, before you try to add weekend learning, learning from the mountaintop, you need to figure out why kids aren鈥檛 going to the learning that you already have scheduled,鈥� she said.
She noted she received feedback from educators throughout the state, some of whom said they鈥檙e poised to leave the profession, or at least their jobs in New Mexico, following the PED鈥檚 decision.
鈥淭his rule/violation of the democratic process will reconfirm my decision of my date of retirement,鈥� one Santa Fe educator wrote in a response provided to the Journal.
The PED鈥檚 announcement last week came after the governor line-item vetoed a provision in the state budget bill that would have barred the department from spending money on implementing the rule. Along with parents and educators, some lawmakers and districts have also previously criticized the 180-day requirement.
Implementing the rule
Pointing to the array of calendars operated by districts and charter schools around the state, Romero said it鈥檚 difficult to estimate how many days, on average, they would need to add come July 1, when the rule goes into effect.
Still, the endeavor is expected to run a big tab.
To fund the new rule, the PED pointed to allocations the state Legislature set aside in this year鈥檚 session for transportation costs and school meals, the latter of which would cost some $712,000. The PED could not immediately answer how much was set aside for transportation.
Funding for the rule is also coming from part of an additional $20 million earmarked for the state鈥檚 K-12 Plus program, which gives schools financial incentives for holding additional class time beyond 180 days under a normal school week and beyond 155 days under a four-day school week.
With the adoption of the rule, the department anticipates more districts will take advantage of the program. The additional funding, Romero said, would help cover the costs of educators鈥� additional contract days.
One of the most significant changes made to the rule was an allowance for districts and charter schools to apply for waivers from the 180-day rule, provided they can prove they鈥檙e improving the reading proficiency levels of their students.
Close to 130 districts and state charter schools are below 180 days, according to PED data from August.
Decisions on waivers won鈥檛 be made for months. Romero said schools and districts vying for waivers must first submit two possible academic calendars, one meeting the 180-day requirement and the other that doesn鈥檛.
Decisions on which of the two calendars the department approves would then be contingent on data Romero said he expects in mid-June showing that district鈥檚 academic growth.
Under the rule, if a district鈥檚 students are less than 45% proficient in reading, they must have seen gains by 15 percentage points over the past year. If they鈥檙e between 45% and 65%, they must have seen 10-point gains; from 65% and 80%, eight points; and if a district鈥檚 students are above 80% proficient in reading, the district automatically qualifies for the waiver.
Romero argued the benchmarks are 鈥渁bsolutely attainable.鈥�
鈥淔ifteen percent 鈥� it is lofty, it is dramatic, it is 鈥� but it鈥檚 needed,鈥� he said.
Some people, though, have expressed hesitation on the benchmarks the PED laid out, with Parr-S谩nchez questioning where the department got the numbers it used and how fair they were.
鈥淲ill any districts make that cut score? Surely Los Alamos probably will,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut I think if you overlay those districts with the level of poverty in those districts, you鈥檙e going to see that the districts that are making the gains are probably not the districts that have the most poverty.鈥�
