Sheff v. O’Neill 2013

Posted on

On April 20, 2013, the defendants and plaintiffs of the Sheff v. O’Neill met to discuss a year extension to the previous goals created because the goals of the Phase II Stipulation were not met this year by the defendant. Since both the defendants and plaintiffs have an interest in “reducing racial, ethnic, and economic isolation in Hartford Public Schools”, there can be a one-year extension to achieve “either 81% demand benchmark or 41% integration standard by June 2014” (1). Although there is an extension to aid in the efforts to reduce racial, ethnic, and economic isolation, both the plaintiffs and defendants are aware that this effort is going to go beyond June 2014 to rectify it.

Because of the failure to meet the goals previously set in the Sheff v. O’Neill case 2008, there was changes made to Section I of the Phase II Stipulation. In order to meet the new goals created by both parties, school districts outside of the “Sheff-region” are to participate in Scheff-related school choice programs and the students who attend or take part in the programs will be included in the data collected for the Phase II Stipulation. Moreover, existing magnet schools are not inter-district magnet schools for the 2013-2014 school year (2).  In order to meet the new goals set forth from the Phase II Stipulation, the defendants have to come up with the right resources to plan, reorganize, restructure, develop, and operate schools so that they can meet the requirements set forth, “80% or the overall of Hartford resident minorities in reduced isolation settings”(2-6). Throughout pages 2-6, the document goes over the plans for specific areas (New/Expansion of Magnet Schools, Designation of Magnet Status to Already Existing Schools, Extending Capacity of Existing Magnet Schools, Extending Capacity of Technical Schools, Charter Schools, Enrollment Management Plans, Modifications to Open Choice, and Interdistrict Cooperative Grants) that will help in accomplishing the goal for the Phase II Stipulation.

In moving forward, both parties had to come to an agreement with creating a plan for a Phase III Stipulation by May 8, 2013. The documents largely discusses the SDE and its plans to implement the Phase II Stipulation and making the data of the progress being made available to those who want to use the information through a marketing campaign with Hartford Public Schools and CREC. The SDE then would have to provide reports on the performance of both Hartford Public School Students and non-Hartford Public School students participating in Sheff related school choice programs or in the “Sheff-region”.

Discussion Questions:

1.  Do you believe that the plan set forth will be able to accomplish the goals in the year extension given? Why or why not?

2. Is there anything else in the reports for the plaintiffs made by the SDE that should be included to ensure that the Phase II Stipulation is met?

3. Are there any other changes or goals that should be added to the Phase II Stipulation that would aid in raising student academic performance?

Published by

Veronica Armendariz

Currently a student at Trinity College with a strong interest in teaching mathematics, volunteering, and tutoring.