Contact: Martin Ackley, Director of Communications (517) 241-4395
Agency: Education

August 16, 2010 Ninety-two schools identified by state law as the Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools will be required to develop Redesign Plans approved by the newly-formed State School Reform/Redesign Office in the Michigan Department of Education, or risk being placed in a statewide School Reform District.

Dave Murray | The Grand Rapids Press Dave Murray

School consolidation often raises eyebrows. But being true to our schools comes with a price, and it runs in the millions of dollars.

Michigan has 550 public districts — and about 550 superintendents, business managers and transportation directors. Trim that management layer, erase district boundaries and recast administration around county lines, and state taxpayers save $612 million a year after three years — all without closing a school or losing one high school mascot.

That sounds pretty good in tough economic times.

F.M.A.P. APPROVAL MAY TEMPORARILY EASES BUDGET WOES – With President Obama contending the measure would avoid lay-offs among police, firefighters, teachers, nurses and first responders, the U.S.

According to the Department of Education, 95 percent of all public school districts in the state achieved federal adequate yearly progress (AYP) targets while some 86 percent of the state’s K-12 public school buildings reached their goals as well. With State Superintendent of Public Instruction Mike Flanagan saying the annual report shows progress is being made—while insisting “we can’t rest until all Michigan children are equipped with the skills they need to compete in a global economy”—the state released the Education YES!

Finding the Lansing Schools Education Association has legal standing in its suit against the Lansing Board of Education regarding alleged physical abuse by students, the High Court used another 4-3 vote to remove barriers for plaintiffs filing suits. The new ruling overturned the decision rendered in Lee v. Macomb County Board of Commissioners which set standards for a plaintiff’s ability to sue by requiring an invasion of a legally protected interest, a causal connection between the injury and the conduct being complained about and the likelihood the injury will be redressed by the court.