It’s been all over the news recently: “Test scores send Four District 150 schools into restructuring.” Because four District 150 schools did not make “adequate yearly progress,” or AYP, for the sixth consecutive year, “Sterling, Loucks-Edison, Lincoln and Trewyn middle schools have entered the restructuring process,” reports the Journal Star.

But what exactly is “restructuring”? There’s a very informative memo on the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) website that details this process. According to the memo, restructuring means that the district must undertake “a major reorganization of a school, making fundamental reforms, such as significant changes in the school’s staffing and governance.” Whatever plan they develop has to be approved by the school board and the State Superintendent of Education.

What do they mean by “major” reorganization or reforms?

Under federal and state law, each school restructuring plan developed by the district must indicate the district is planning to undertake one or more of the following actions in the affected school:

1. Charter School: Reopen the school as a public charter school, consistent with Article 27A of the School Code (105 ILCS 5/27A);
2. Staffing: Replace all or most of the school staff, which may include the principal, who are relevant to the school’s inability to make adequate yearly progress;
3. Contracting: Enter into a contract with an entity, such as a private management company with a demonstrated record of effectiveness, to operate the school as a public school; or
4. Other Major Restructuring: Implement any other restructuring of the school’s governance that makes fundamental reform in:
   i. Governance and management; and/or
   ii. Financing and material resources; and/or
   iii. Staffing.

So, what option is the district taking? Option #2. But if you’re scratching your head wondering why you haven’t seen a huge turnover in employment, it’s because that option is rather broadly defined. For instance, in the document cited above, the ISBE says that one possible application of option 2 is to “transfer the locus of staffing decisions, start to finish, to a turnaround specialist or to the district level from the principal or vice versa.” Two of the restructuring plans (Lincoln and Trewyn) are utilizing the “turnaround specialist.”

I obtained copies of their restructuring plans via a Freedom of Information Act request, and you can read them here:

Lincoln Middle School
Loucks-Edison Jr. Academy
Sterling Middle School
Trewyn Middle School

Charter Schools

An interesting option that is not being considered is charter schools. There are currently 37 charter schools in Illinois and there can be up to 60, so this is a possibility. Charter schools in Illinois are governed by the Charter Schools Law, 105 ILCS 5/27A.

A charter school in Illinois is a public school that has a contract (or charter) of operation with the local school board or directly with the state. It has to be public (i.e., can’t charge tuition but is eligible for public funding), nonsectarian, nonreligious, non‑home based, and non‑profit. In fact, it’s set up like a non-profit corporation with its own board of directors, and can make decisions independently of the district, but within the bounds of its contract (charter).

However, the charter gives the school considerable flexibility — for instance, they can choose their own curriculum and disciplinary policies, set their own hours of operation and school calendar, hire their own employees/teachers, etc. In return, the charter school has greater accountability for student achievement. And, of course, the school is subject to common-sense regulations required of all public schools (e.g., civil rights mandates; criminal background checks for employees (click here for more info); open meetings act; state goals, standards, and assessments, etc.).

The local school board can choose this course of action, or it can be initiated directly with the state by public referendum. It takes a petition from 5% of the voters in a school district and approval of the proposed charter school contract by the Illinois State Board of Education (i.e., acknowledgment that the proposed contract complies with the Charter Schools Law) to put the question on the ballot.

Peoria actually had a charter school from 1996-1999. It was called the Peoria Alternative Charter School and it met in the old Greeley school building at 919 NE Jefferson. (Incidentally, my grandmother taught 3rd grade at Greeley before she retired in 1975. Back then, it was a K-8 grade school.) However, many felt this was not the original vision for charter schools — District 150 set this school up as a place to put disruptive students (hence the “alternative” part of the name). In fact, they even put expelled students in this charter school and were legally challenged over it.

Charter schools have never been attempted as a restructuring option for an existing primary or middle school to my knowledge. This may be an option worth exploring. It appears to be successful in Chicago.

Other Major Restructuring

Some examples (not an exhaustive list) of “other major restructuring” given by the state are:

• Restructure the school by altering the school’s grade configuration (for example, a K-2 school becomes a K-6 school) or the programs offered (for example, the school becomes a magnet school or a career academy), or both….
• Change to a site-based management school rather than centralized administration, or to centralized administration of the school rather than site-based management (non-applicable to a Title I schoolwide school).
• Align the school with an existing research-based school improvement model of sufficient size and scope such that the model, used as prescribed and intended, can affect needed change.
• Use school consolidation processes to create a new public school or schools….
• Implement a school-within-a-school model or a smaller learning community model.

These options help shed some light on recent District 150 plans to consolidate schools and abandon the primary/middle school model in favor of a return to the old K-8 model.

The Next Step?

Just out of curiosity, I wondered what would happen if the district’s attempts at reorganization failed. The answer is not pretty:

[T]hese interventions could occur in the school year following the restructuring implementation year. Under the School Code, the State Board has the authority to take one of the following actions for the school:

1. Authorize the State Superintendent to direct the regional superintendent to remove the board members.
2. Direct the State Superintendent to appoint an Independent Authority to exercise such powers and duties as may be necessary to operate a school for purposes of improving pupil performance and school improvement. The Independent Authority serves for a period of time determined by the State Board.
3. Change the recognition status of the school to “nonrecognized.” [This is more serious than it sounds at first; the document later explains, “If a district is nonrecognized, it cannot make any claim for General State Aid. …[I]f any school district fails for one year to maintain within the boundaries of the district a recognized school, the district is automatically dissolved and the property and territory is disposed of.”]
4. Authorize the State Superintendent of Education to direct the reassignment of pupils or direct the reassignment or replacement of school district personnel who are relevant to the failure to meet AYP.

In other words, the state takes over. Elsewhere, the document says that under NCLB other options include: “abolish or restructure the district,” and “appoint a receiver or trustee to administer district affairs, in place of the superintendent and school board.”

Much as removal of board members or certain district personnel may be viscerally appealing sometimes, losing local control of the school district is really not in our best interests. That’s why school board elections and good school board candidates are so important. I’ll do my best to provide information about the candidates. (Full disclosure: I am supporting Beth Akeson for school board.)