News Updates

Article Tools
  • PrintPrinter-Friendly
  • EmailEmail Article
  • ReprintReprints
  • CommentsComments

The Los Angeles Unified School District board has reached a settlement in the district's school-financing case, but critics are trying to alter the agreement before a judge approves it.

The board expects this week to take formal action on a plan that the board and lawyers in the case fashioned during a closed meeting late last month. If passed by the board, the plan would then have to be approved by a Superior Court judge.

The agreement was drafted in response to a 1986 suit by parents who charged that the district was spending less money to educate minority children in inner-city schools. (See Education Week, Dec. 11, 1991.)

The proposed settlement calls for the district to equalize funding so that schools spend about the same amount on books, supplies, and staffs. Recent revisions in the plan require at least 90 percent of the district's schools to be in compliance.

Critics, some of whom have been allowed to legally intervene in the suit, assert that the proposal would force some districts to cut back on essentials.

A New York state court has dismissed a lawsuit attempting to block New York City's ground-breaking condom-distribution program in public high schools.

The program, which went into effect last November, allows students at certain city schools to receive condoms in school without the consent of their parents. The school system expects to expand the program to all the city's high schools within the year.

The suit, filed in state supreme court in the borough of Staten Island by several parents and a school-board member who voted against the plan, alleged that the program violates state law because it does not require students to obtain the consent of their parents before receiving a condom. (See Education Week, Dec. 11, 1991.)

The judge, however, ruled that, because the condom-availability program does not qualify as a "health service'' under state law, no parental consent is required.

A federal judge has refused to limit New York students' right to receive test questions and answers after they take a graduate admissions test.

U.S. District Judge Neal McCurn denied a request by the firm that publishes the Graduate Management Admissions Test to exempt it from releasing such information as required by law until other cases challenging the law are settled. The judge said the Graduation Management Admissions Council did not prove that it would suffer irreparable harm by releasing the information.

The ruling is the latest involving New York's "truth in testing'' law, which was enacted in 1980. Other cases, including a challenge by the College Entrance Examination Board, which develops the Graduate Record Examination and the Scholastic Aptitude Test, are pending. (See Education Week, April 25, 1990.)

Vol. 11, Issue 33

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Back to Top Back to Top

Most Popular Stories