State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson speaks before the LA Unified school board yesterday.

Lawyers at the ACLU and Public Counsel plan to ask the state by tomorrow to intervene at LA Unified’s Dorsey High School and Freemont High School in a similar way that it stepped in at Jefferson High School.

The move comes after last week’s court-issued temporary restraining order (TRO) that required the state to fix an array of scheduling problems at Jefferson that led to several dozen students being placed in multiple free class periods with no educational value.

“We have documented [class problems] are present at Freemont and Dorsey. So we are proposing that the order that was issued as to Jefferson, if the defendants would agree, should be extended to those schools as well,” David Sapp, a lawyer for ACLU Southern California, told LA School Report.

Fingers have been pointed in different directions by the teachers union, the administrators union and the district as to who is responsible for the Jefferson situation. Blame has been placed on administrative turnover, teachers not altering their schedule to reflect evaporating grant funds and the district’s troubled MiSiS computer system.

The ACLU and Public Counsel represent plaintiffs in the Cruz. vs. California case that accuses the state of failing to provide an adequate education to students in nine California high schools by sticking them in free periods instead of real classes.

The TRO that was issued last week is part of the lawsuit and resulted in the LA Unified school board yesterday approving a $1.1 million plan to fix the problems, which includes adding more staff and extending the class day. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson appeared before the board and spoke in support the plan.

District officials also announced that an audit was being planned at other high schools to determine whether other students have been placed in multiple free periods as they have at Jefferson.

Sapp explained that if the state agrees to the stipulation of including Dorsey and Freemont in the TRO, a similar plan that was enacted by the state and LA Unified to for Jefferson would also be carried out at the other two schools.

“It would be the same idea of developing a plan that is appropriate to develop – it may not be the exact same plan because the circumstances at the schools may be different,” Sapp said. “But it’s the same idea, that the state is working with the district to make sure there is an appropriate action plan in place.”

Sapp said the plaintiffs’ lawyers are working to get the request to the state before tomorrow’s court hearing, when the state must submit a status report on its response to the TRO, and the plaintiffs must present a proposal for how the case should proceed.

“[Adding Dorsey and Freemont] is something that we are raising with the state defendants directly,” Sapp said. “We have not made that request to the court, and if we were to do that, we would have to file a whole other separate motion like we did as to the temporary restraining order at Jefferson. So depending on where things are by when we file the report tomorrow, in terms of the discussions with the state defendants, there may be something in our report about what the plan going forward for the other two high schools in LAUSD is, but at this point we don’t know what that would be.”

Superintendent John Deasy, in a letter to the court, supported the Cruz. vs. California lawsuit, but is currently in South Korea and unavailable to comment on the status of Freemont and Dorsey. Lydia Ramos, director of communications for LAUSD, said she had received no indication if Deasy would also support state intervention at Dorsey and Freemont.

“When [the plaintiffs make their request] then we can respond,” Ramos said.

These are all possibilities, judging from this season of potential change for the state’s public schools.

In recent weeks, a trio of separate but related actions has taken aim at the state in efforts that proponents say would improve the safety and academic performance of California’s 6.2 million public school students. But whether they would, in fact, lead to constructive change or serve merely as change for change sake remains to be seen.

If all three efforts succeed, one outcome is clear: the state and school districts would have new responsibilities aimed at providing students a better learning environment through changes that could hold important benefits for low-income and minority children.

In chronological order:

• The ACLU of Southern California and two other law firms in late May filed a class action in an Alameda County state court — Cruz v. California — on behalf of 18 students from seven schools, charging that students are being denied adequate instruction time. Two of the schools are in LA Unified — Fremont High School and Florence Griffith Joyner Elementary School. Another two are in Compton Unified —Compton High and Franklin S. Whaley Middle School.
• Early this month, a state superior court in Los Angeles delivered a stunning victory to nine student-plaintiffs in Vergara v. California, striking down a series of state laws that govern teacher protections as a way to remove ineffective teachers from their classrooms.
• Last week, with unanimous support in both chambers, the state Assembly and Senate sent a bill to Gov. Jerry Brown that would make it easier to get rid of teachers accused of immoral and illegal behavior.

While there are no direct links among the three actions, they combine to suggest that additional measures are needed to protect the rights of school children in their quest for a quality education, which, in turn, affects their career prospects and lifetime earning potential. And the proponents in all three want to hold the state accountable.

“The state went off the rails a long time ago, and it’s becoming increasing frustrating,” said Mark Rosenbaum, chief counsel for the ACLU. “Left to its own devices, the state is not going to do anything to change.”

As obvious as the troublesome issues appear to the proponents of change, opposing forces in the lawsuits can keep the status quo in place for years through appeals.

That is certainly true in Vergara. While the state has not commented on whether it intends to appeal, its union partners — the California Federation of Teachers (CFT) and the California Teachers Association (CTA)— have said they would, arguing that the laws are fine the way they are and provide teachers important job protections.

The judge in the case, Rolf Treu, said he would stay any state action — i.e. legislation to satisfy his decision — until appeals have been exhausted.

The Cruz case is only just beginning, and Rosenbaum said he is hoping for a trial to begin “within a year.” It cites free periods, security disruptions, mid-semester course changes and transient teachers as among the causes of lost instruction time. Those factors, the suit contends “systematically deprive” students of “meaningful learning time”

The bill awaiting Gov. Brown’s signature is more narrowly defined, aimed almost exclusively at teachers accused of such offenses as felonies and child molestation.

All three actions have potential ripple effects. The Vergara trial has triggered an enormous wave of public debate across the country over case’s central issues — the benefits and proper length of tenure, how dismissals should work and the criteria districts should use to layoff teachers in times of budget cutbacks.

“It boils down to this,” said Marcellus McRae, a lawyer for the Vergara plaintiffs. “If state constitutional protections are a pathway to helping students in California, other states will say, ‘We can do this, too.’ This is a very strong reminder that that courts are an avenue and the proper place to get enforcement.”

Rosenbaum said the issues in Cruz should serve as a template for other districts in which budgets, administrative malfeasance or indifference have worked to deny students learning time.

Only the law aimed at problem teachers can initiate more immediate action. Gov. Brown has 12 days to sign it once it reaches his desk. So far, it hasn’t, according to his communications office. If he does sign, it would go into effect in January — a big change for students, with maybe more to come.

Why Educators’ Wages Must Be Revamped Now
Some districts are spending more than they need to spend, based on what other districts show is possible. But does this excess spending imply that we can simply cut back on spending without harming students? EdWeek Commentary

Glendale Unified, Police Settle Suit Over Racial Profiling
The ACLU of Southern California announced Wednesday that it had reached settlements with the city of Glendale and the Glendale Unified School District on behalf of eight Latino students who alleged that officials engaged in racial profiling and illegal searches during a 2010 incident at Hoover High School. LA Times

Districts Must Return to 180-Day Instructional Year by 2015-16
Gov. Jerry Brown and the Legislature agree: The state should again require a minimum 180-day school year, starting in 2015-16. EdSource

LAUSD Hired Other Priests Accused of Sexual Abuse, Despite Warnings
Turns out, Joseph Piña is not the only Archdiocese employee with a questionable past and a link to L.A.’s schools. KCET
See also: LA Times

Call for Digital Textbooks Back Before the Legislature
Lawmakers appear poised to test Gov. Jerry Brown’s new commitment to online learning with legislation that would require textbook publishers to make available a digital version of the content material. SI&A Cabinet Report

Small Study Says Gender Stereotypes May Still Play Role in Who Chooses to Teach
In a small study, university scholars found that gender stereotypes play a role when men discount going into teaching. Certainly that’s not the case in California, right? KPCC

Should Doctors and Teachers Protect Their Own?
I cannot support the idea that incompetent teachers should be able to keep their jobs any more than I believe that incompetent surgeons should be allowed to keep operating. Sac News & Review Commentary

Ex-Miramonte Teacher Could Face More Charges
Mark Berndt is already facing 23 counts of lewd conduct involving students. K-NBC LA

• Graham wants $10 Million From District: In addition to suing former superintendent Ramon Cortines for sexual harassment, LAUSD employee Scot Graham also wants $10 million from the school district for outing him, defaming him and placing him in a false light. Graham and LAUSD were on the verge of a settlement which would have given him $200,000 and lifetime benefits, but the deal fell apart when the district, according to Graham, prematurely announced it and the identity of Graham. Daily News

• AIG Will Pay LAUSD $79 Million In Settlement: AIG had refused to pay out insurance claims on LAUSD-owned properties with costly environmental hazards. LA Unified bought the insurance in 1999, as it was beginning a $20 billion constructions spree. LA Times

More reads after the jump.

• Lawsuit, Bill Aim to Keep K-12 Education Free in California: The ACLU suit is hitting out against fees for things like sports, field trips and textbooks, even the the California constitution guarantees every kid a free education. Some of these fees are legal, some aren’t, but many districts don’t seem to care. A bill in Sacramento, AB 1575, would create a formal complaint process for the illegal fees. LA Times

• Plan to Split Carson High Into Three Schools Riles Parents, Teachers: Many in the community are worried that the split will segregate the high achievers from the low ones. There is also a “general wariness, a concern that the Los Angeles Unified School District is tinkering with a local institution from afar.” The 2,800 will stay on the same campus, but 1,000 kids will join one of two pilots: the Academy of Medical Arts or the Academies of Education and Empowerment. Long Beach Press-Telegram

• Some Schools Adopting Longer Years to Improve Learning:  Increasing time in school is one of the best ways to narrow the achievement gap between rich and poor students, education advocates say. NYT