Arizona’s Superintendent of Public Instruction is continuing his two-front political battle with the state’s attorney general.
On Monday, Republican Superintendent Tom Horne emailed the Office of the Arizona Attorney General about the issue of enforcing the state’s voter-approved English language instruction model.
Horne highlighted that “the voter-protected initiative, formalized as A.R.S. §15-752, specifically states that ‘all children in Arizona public schools shall be taught English by being taught in English, and all children should be placed in English language classrooms.’ ….The voter-protected initiative is not subject to being overruled by the Attorney General, the State Board, or anyone, including me. I must faithfully execute the law as it is written.”
The email from Horne followed correspondence between a Section Chief Counsel in Attorney General Kris Mayes’ Office and Horne’s Office. The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) noted that they had “continued to receive complaints from school districts that claim ADE is requiring Waivers for any ELL students enrolling in Dual Language Immersion (DLI) classes. If that is so, ADE (Arizona Department of Education) is acting contrary to law, as Waivers are not required for Sheltered English Immersion (SEI) Models approved by the State Board of Education.”
The AGO warned that “If the Department continues to place barriers in front of schools and their students trying to register for DLI classes, like requiring Waivers under A.R.S. 15-753, the Department’s actions exposes the Agency (and potentially individuals) to legal liability.”
The Superintendent took issue with the AGO’s use of “barriers” in its email, countering, “It is not erecting a barrier that I have urged school districts to not violate the law. I have pointed out a provision of the statute: Under the initiative, if a parent of any student in Arizona sues and prevails for violation of the statute, the School Board members and Superintendents responsible can be removed from office and unable to run for election again for five years.”
Horne called the AGO’s warning “offensive and unworthy of the Attorney General’s office.” He predicted that Mayes would “not win legal arguments to ignore voter-protected initiatives by making those kind of empty threats.” He promised to remain committed to his duty to uphold state law regardless of the threats made against him and his office.
He then took time to tout the benefits of a structured English immersion model, saying, “When I took office in 2003, bilingual education was common. The one-year rate to become proficient in English was a pathetic 4%. At that rate almost no one would ever become proficient, and they would fail in the economy…After we adopted structured English immersion, and put a lot of emphasis on teaching teachers how to do it, the proficiency rate went up to 31%. At that rate, after three or four years, almost everyone becomes proficient.”
In conclusion, Horne exhorted the AGO to “pay attention to what is in the academic interests of the students, as shown by the data, and what is required by the voter-protected initiative, and stop making threats.”
The schools chief’s release added that “Horne intends to pursue this matter in a legal challenge,” assuring Arizonans that this saga between the two state officials would continue for months to come.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
This school year, Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) incorporated controversial RFID chip trackers in student and faculty ID badges.
The district approved the chips in a close 3-2 vote in late June. Board members Libby Hart-Wells, Zach Lindsay, and Julie Cieniawski approved the chips; Amy Carney and Carine Werner opposed them. The estimated cost of the chips totaled $125,000.
The chip went through a trial run at Coronado High School before being implemented districtwide. The district reportedly upgraded their ID software to enable the chip system over the last two years.
During the June meeting, the SUSD governing board counsel explained that the chips enable the district to track students when they get on and off the buses.
Carney asked why the chips were put in all student IDs, and not just bus riders. The SUSD Safety & Security team, which will oversee the program, explained that buses aren’t limited to designated bus riders: any students may board the buses if they’re attending the Boys & Girls Club, field trips, or extracurricular or athletic events.
The safety team reported that the IDs can’t be used to track daily attendance because they’re only linked to the district’s transportation software. However, the team didn’t guarantee that the chip technology wouldn’t be expanded to other uses such as attendance in the future. The RFID chips within staff badges have an extra feature: they enable access to school buildings.
SUSD reported that the RFID chip doesn’t store any personally identifiable information, and that no RFID readers were installed inside the school for the purpose of tracking a student’s location.
Director Joshua Friedman said that the RFID chip translates as a coded number within a closed system, and therefore doesn’t qualify as a digital ID. Friedman also noted that the RFID chip doesn’t work as an active GPS tracker, but a passive one: the chips only record a time and location when a student boards or disembarks from a school bus.
Board President Julie Cieniawski remarked in closing that she and the majority of SUSD leaders weren’t interested in “conspiracy theories” of using RFID technology for ulterior motives.
Some SUSD parents have expressed concern with the tracking capabilities of the RFID chips, namely the inability to opt-out from the technology and potential suspensions for tampering with the IDs by attempting to remove the chip.
🚨🚨@ScottsdaleUSD does it again! After 3-2 board vote, SUSD implements RFID chip cards without parental consent. Suspension if tampered with. No opt-in. No opt-out. pic.twitter.com/P5nCUTWHnr
— TheLegalProcess (v2.0 | Post-Election Ed) (@ALegalProcess) August 13, 2023
Former state lawmaker and SUSD teacher Michelle Ugenti-Rita wrote on Facebook that the RFID chips were an invasion of privacy.
“Have they never heard of ‘Find my iPhone?’ This is a complete invasion of privacy. Parents were never notified, or given the option to opt-in to the school district’s new government surveillance program,” said Ugenti-Rita. “What didn’t they learn from masking up our children during COVID? This is something our superintendent, Tom Horne, should investigate and the Legislature should ban when they convene next year.”
No opt-out exists for families who desire to forgo use of the chips. RFID, short for radio-frequency identification, is a technology that allows scanners to engage in automatic identification and data capture (AIDC). AIDC allows for computers to obtain data immediately without human involvement; other types of AIDC include QR codes and voice recognition technology.
During last week’s meeting, Superintendent Scott Menzel said that the chip readers enable the district to locate students using school transportation. Menzel reported that on the first day of school, three children didn’t arrive at their proper location. The superintendent reported that the ID system enabled them to locate them within five minutes, as opposed to 30 minutes or more.
In response to community pushback against the chips, SUSD issued a press release on Monday to further explain the RFID software.
“RFID is not a global positioning system (GPS) and has no tracking capability on its own. Like the RFID in your credit card and debit card, it only works when tapped. The district piloted this program last year and the Governing Board approved it,” stated SUSD. “The RFID in student ID cards is ONLY scanned so that the district’s Transportation department is able to account for those students who board and exit a bus.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Applicants to Arizona State University’s (ASU) law school may have to take their admissions test on their own, but they won’t have to do their own applications.
ASU Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law will now allow applicants to use generative artificial intelligence (AI) to complete their applications. In a press release at the end of last month, the law school stated that generative AI will be a necessary tool for upcoming lawyers.
“In our mission to educate and prepare the next generation of lawyers and leaders, law schools also need to embrace the use of technology such as AI with a comprehensive approach,” stated the school.
Stacy Leeds, Willard H. Pedrick Dean and Regents Professor of Law, added that generative AI also allowed for more equitable admissions.
“Our law school is driven by an innovative mindset. By embracing emerging technologies, and teaching students the ethical responsibilities associated with technology, we will enhance legal education and break down barriers that may exist for prospective students,” said Leeds. “By incorporating generative AI into our curriculum, we prepare students for their future careers across all disciplines.”
Generative AI consists of large language model (LLM) tools: one of the most popular models is ChatGPT.
Last month, two New York lawyers were sanctioned for relying on a ChatGPT-generated brief that cited fake cases. The judge punished the pair for not conducting a proper review of the AI brief and for insisting that the fake cases cited were real, not for relying on generative AI in the first place.
The pair paid $5,000 for their oversight. The lawyers stated that they didn’t know that ChatGPT could create fake cases. However, the lawyers’ firm issued a statement disagreeing that the use of generative AI constituted bad faith.
“We made a good faith mistake in failing to believe that a piece of technology could be making up cases out of whole cloth,” stated the firm.
The New York lawyers may well become a case study at ASU. ASU’s law school also offers courses through its Center for Law, Science, and Innovation (LSI) on the legal questions of AI use, especially within the legal field.
One of LSI’s AI-centered projects, the Soft Law Governance of Artificial Intelligence, proposes using “soft law” governance for AI rather than existing legal frameworks. Soft law is a blanket term for recommendations or guidelines, rather than law. The project is funded by the Charles Koch Foundation.
ASU’s law school began allowing AI-generated applications this month.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
One of Arizona’s most-influential organizations is bringing facts to the conversation surrounding the state’s historic school choice expansion program.
Last month, the Director of Education Policy for the Goldwater Institute, Matt Beienburg, responded to the latest political attacks against Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA) program, releasing a comprehensive fact-check to promote the truth.
Beienburg’s fact-check came after the Governor’s Office issued a memo, which targeted the ESA program, showing that it “could cost the state over $943 million, with over 53% of all new K-12 education spending going towards only 8% of Arizona students.” In conjunction with the release of that memo, Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs said, “The universal school voucher program is unsustainable. Unaccountable school vouchers do not save taxpayer money, and they do not provide a better education for Arizona students. We must bring transparency and accountability to this program to ensure school vouchers don’t bankrupt our state. I’m committed to reforming universal vouchers to protect taxpayer money and give all Arizona students the education they deserve.”
The fact-check from the Goldwater Institute refuted three claims made against the ESA program. First, that “spending on ESA vouchers could account for 53.25% of all new K-12 education spending in the FY2024 budget going towards only 8% of Arizona students.” Beienburg put forward three facts in opposition to the claim: that “total spending on universal ESA students makes up just 2% of total Arizona K-12 spending,” that “Arizona public school districts are projected to receive over 60% (more than $570 million) of all new K-12 funding in FY 2024, despite making up 0% of the growth in students served this upcoming year,” and that “even under the Arizona Department of Education’s (ADE) highest projections, the ESA program would be funding the education of roughly 8% of Arizona’s students (including a disproportionately high percentage of students with severe disabilities) for less than 6% of the total taxpayer cost of educating Arizona’s students.”
The second claim refuted by Goldwater was that “there is an increased cost to the State when a student leaves a public district school and enrolls in the ESA voucher program. This occurs because the ESA award amount is based on the state funding provided to charter school students, which is higher than the state funding provided to district school students.” Goldwater issued one fact in opposition to this claim – that “the average savings per ESA student is even higher when including other (non-formula) spending on public school students. In total, JLBC reports over $3 billion (roughly $3,000 per student on average) of additional spending by state and local taxpayers per public school student outside the basic funding formula. ESA students receive none of this funding.”
The third – and final – claim refuted by Goldwater was that “new estimates indicate the ESA voucher program may cost taxpayers up to $943,795,600 annually, resulting in a potential $319,795,600 General Fund shortfall in FY 2024.” Goldwater issued four facts in opposition to this claim, including that “Gov. Hobbs’ office itself does not believe the report that it is using as the basis for these figures;” that “Gov. Hobbs’ office mistakes the cost ESA awards by thousands of dollars per student;” that “the nonpartisan JLBC continues to project ESA costs in line with the state budget; “ and that “even if the higher enrollments and total ESA award amounts estimated by ADE do materialize, they would not represent the net cost to taxpayers of the program.”
Beienburg closed his fact-check, writing, “Arizona’s ESA program now offers tens of thousands of families an opportunity to pursue the best education possible for their children at a lower cost than traditional public schooling. The governor and her budget office owe it to parents and the public to provide the facts about ESAs free of manipulation.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona’s schools’ chief is laser focused on protecting children in their places of education.
On Wednesday, Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne announced that he had “convened the first School Safety Task Force with a focus on getting more armed officers in schools in concert with social workers to protect (the state’s) schoolchildren, educators, and staff.”
Superintendent Horne formed a bipartisan school safety task force that is focused on finding solutions that keep our students safe. Protecting the lives of students is Superintendent Horne's top priority. #EducationForAllpic.twitter.com/VngcTDbwFW
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) August 2, 2023
After the meeting, Horne released a statement, saying, “Protecting the lives of our children is one of the most important issues we face. We hope that the School Safety Task Force will work to increase the number of law enforcement officers and social workers in schools as well as using our role in Career and Technical Education to encourage more people to consider law enforcement as a profession. I am grateful for all of the educators, law enforcement professionals, community leaders and both Democrat and Republican elected officials who have come together in this vital, bipartisan effort.”
Freshman Republican Representative Matthew Gress, one of the participants in the meeting, added his thoughts on Twitter, writing, “As parents send their children to school, they have every right to expect they will come home safely. With experience as a former schoolteacher and school board member, I look forward to this opportunity to productively contribute to this very important conversation.”
As parents send their children to school, they have every right to expect they will come home safely.
With experience as a former school teacher and school board member, I look forward to this opportunity to productively contribute to this very important conversation. https://t.co/EsZwb0odr9
Gress announced earlier this week that he had “accepted an invitation from Horne to serve on the Task Force recently established by the Arizona Department of Education. He noted that he had “particular interest in identifying how public schools can use available one-time funding to improve the capital facilities on campuses to improve school safety” and in “focusing attention on law enforcement response times to schools and bolstering the School Resource Officer program.”
✅FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE✅ State Representative @MatthewGress Joins @azedschools’s School Safety Task Force
“Safeguarding our schools continues to be a top concern for parents in Legislative District 4 and there is strong interest in the community to be doing more. As parents… pic.twitter.com/8j6pWx3bOm
— Arizona House Republicans (@AZHouseGOP) August 1, 2023
The Arizona Department of Education highlighted that “in the meeting, department staff reported that funding for School Resource Officers (SROs) has been utilized to expand the number of SROs from 190 in the previous administration to 301 currently.” Additionally, the Department forecasted that “the group will explore ways to integrate counselors and social workers into an effective School Safety Program, expand the definition of an SRO in accordance with state certification requirements so the applicant pool can be enlarged; and consider allowing schools to hire School Safety Officers (SSOs), review training models, and review Law Related Education.”
In May, Superintendent Horne’s school safety recommendations were approved by the Arizona State Board of Education, giving the Department of Education approximately $100 million from a combination of federal and state grants. Horne said at the time, “I have been asking the schools to prioritize school resource officers. The nightmare is that a maniac gets into a school, kills 20 children, and the parents find out that the school could have had a school resource officer to defend the students, but the school did not do so. Imagine how the parents would feel about those decision makers?”
Horne isn’t the only elected official in Arizona concentrating on bolstering safety in schools across the state. Last month, Peoria Mayor Jason Beck announced that, in keeping his promises to his constituents, there would be a police presence at all Peoria Unified School District schools during the 2023-2024 year. Beck highlighted that there would be four new SLO’s (School Liaison Officers) and rotating SLO’s at every school; that this presence would be expanded to all elementary schools; that there would be 22 Peoria schools with police coverage and an increase in SLO salary.
The mayor said, “It’s the fact that we are trying to take care of our kids. Our first priority as a city is to take care of the residents. Safety and wellbeing is our first priority.”
Earlier this year, Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne and the Arizona Department of Education released the findings of a poll, which found that “81% of Arizona Public School parents support having a police officer” and “78% of Arizona Public School parents think that safety at schools is VERY IMPORTANT.”
Protecting Arizona's children shouldn't be a partisan issue, and parents agree. School resource officers are specially trained and provide more than just protection for our students. We encourage all schools to apply for the school safety grant here: https://t.co/63Uy6DQJZPpic.twitter.com/jFaLIx5wmJ
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) April 13, 2023
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Up to 62 percent of Arizona’s public-school districts and charters have no written plan for maintaining current operations once relief monies run out next September.
Most districts’ lack of preparedness was revealed in an auditor general special report issued last week. 55 percent of those districts and charters revealed the absence of a plan in an auditor general report, with another seven percent failing to respond to the auditor general’s request for a written plan.
The COVID-19 relief funds presented an overall boon to public school districts and charters: from 2020 onward, district fund balances increased by 34 percent ($1.13 billion) and charter fund balances increased by 115 percent ($310 million).
However, the true amount of funding spent or remaining remains a mystery for over one-third of the schools. 213 districts and charters (36 percent) reported relief monies contradicting their reported fund balance.
The auditor general specifically named Gilbert Unified School District (GUSD) and Portable Practice Education Preparation (PPEP) for reporting to have spent all $41.5 million and $4.8 million of their relief funds, respectively. However, the auditor general found that GUSD had used $30.4 million for continuing costs, $24.7 million for salaries and benefits, and a fund balance increase. The auditor general also found that PPEP had only reported $2 million spent for employment retention salaries and benefits with student count declines, and a fund balance increase.
Due to the lack of transparency, the auditor general promised to add additional fund balance/reserve reporting to district and charter fiscal year 2023 annual financial reports and fiscal year 2025 budget forms.
Additionally, 9 districts and 16 charters haven’t corrected their cited noncompliance with statutory reporting requirements. In January, that number was 21 districts and 64 charters. 27 districts and 26 charters didn’t submit required follow-up reporting.
Districts and charters reported spending $2.2 billion of the $4.6 billion in relief funding through last June. The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) only spent 21 percent of its discretionary relief funding as of last June, leaving a remainder of $322 million (79 percent).
The district that received the most relief funding was Mesa Unified School District at $291.6 million, followed by Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) at $289.15 million, Phoenix Union High School District at $182.21 million, Cartwright Elementary School District at $124.76 million, Washington Elementary School District at $119.51 million, and Alhambra Elementary School District at $103.74 million.
Details on school expenditures using COVID relief funds remain murky at best. While the auditor general successfully categorized a number of expenditure types for schools — maintaining operations, mental and medical health, personal protective equipment, technology, school facilities, and food service — there remained the “miscellaneous” or “other” category of expenditures, totaling nearly $121.4 million already spent and over $196.45 million planned for future use.
“Miscellaneous” spending on classroom salaries and benefits totaled $21.66 million, and $23.63 million for other classroom spending. Non-classroom salaries and benefits classified as “miscellaneous” totaled $4.77 million, and $70.8 million for other “miscellaneous” non-classroom expenditures.
As AZ Free News reported last year, districts like Mesa Public Schools (MPS) refused to divulge how millions were issued in expenditures behind labels like “indirect costs,” “other,” and “etc.” MPS claimed it couldn’t produce records that didn’t exist.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
