From: John Callahan
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 4:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: PSBA letter on PDE memo on Act 138
March 2, 2017
Mr. Pedro A. Rivera, Secretary of Education
Pennsylvania Department of Education
333 Market Street, 10th Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17126-0333
Dear Secretary Rivera:
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017, the Pennsylvania Department of Education issued a
memo through Penn*Link, providing clarification on Act 138 of 2016 (relating to truancy). The
memo is attached to this letter for informational purposes.
The Pennsylvania School Boards Association has been an active participant in efforts to
amend the truancy laws and applauds the passage of Act 138 of 2016. However, by way of this
letter, PSBA wishes to express concerns about the Department’s recent interpretation of the law
related to the applicability of the new truancy provisions to charter and cyber charter schools.
This interpretation perpetuates a problem this new law was intended to solve --- the manner in
which charter and cyber charter schools enforce Pennsylvania’s truancy laws. See Joint State
Government Commission, Truancy and School Dropout Prevention: Report of the Truancy
Advisory Committee (October 2015).
A bit of background on the definition that is at the center of the Department’s
interpretation, “educational entity.” The definition of “educational entity” included in the final
compromise bill (House Bill 1907), differs from prior versions of the House Bill, which did not
include a definition of “educational entity,” and prior versions of the Senate Bill, which did
include a definition of “educational entity” that incorporated “charter school, regional charter
school, cyber charter school” in the definition. In adding a definition of “educational entity”
without “charter school, regional charter school, cyber charter school” in the final bill, we
believe the legislature did not intend for the new truancy provisions to be inapplicable to charter
schools, but rather, removed them because the applicable statutory provisions were added into
the catch all provisions in the Charter School Law. 24 P.S. §§ 17-1732-A, 17-1749-A (Section 8
of Act 138 of 2016). These catch all provisions list what sections of the Public School Code are
applicable to charter and cyber charter schools. Therefore, the new truancy provisions are
applicable to charter and cyber charter schools, as they are included in that list. Moreover, if the
legislature did not intend for charter and cyber charter schools to enforce their own truancy
violations by the filing of a citation with the appropriate judge, the legislature would have also
removed provisions on the appropriate venue for a charter or cyber charter school to file a
citation. 24 P.S. § 13-1327.2(b) (Section 3 of Act 138 of 2016).
Moreover, the Department’s position that the school district of residence remains
responsible for the enforcement of attendance for students enrolled in charter and cyber charter
schools is not supported by the statutory language. Pursuant to the new provisions, a “school” is
responsible for addressing absences and enforcing the compulsory school attendance
requirements. The term “school,” is defined as “the educational entity in which the child is
enrolled.” As already discussed above, “educational entity” does not expressly include charter
and cyber charter schools, but, the Department’s conclusion that the enforcement provisions
therefore do not apply to charter and cyber charters schools is inconsistent with the Charter
School Law’s catch all provisions and leaves no one responsible for the enforcement of
attendance and the compulsory school requirements for charter and cyber charter school
students.
If, as the Department posits, the school district of residence remains responsible for the
enforcement of attendance (notifying a person in parental relation of unexcused absences;
holding a School Attendance Improvement Conference; and either referring to a school-based or
community-based program or the local children and youth agency, or filing a citation with the
appropriate judge), several issues arise with regard to implementation and truly and effectively
improving school attendance for all students across the Commonwealth.
First, under the new provisions, charter and cyber charter schools must develop
attendance policies that address unexcused absences. A school district does not have the statutory
authority to enforce a policy adopted by a charter or cyber charter school.
Second, if a public school district is responsible for enforcement, then that also means the
school district of residence would be responsible for offering and holding the School Attendance
Improvement Conference and writing a School Attendance Improvement Plan. The purpose of
the School Attendance Improvement Conference is to provide an opportunity for school officials,
the student, and the family to ascertain and address the root causes of the student’s attendance
issues. If the student does not attend school in the school district, a school district is not able to
meaningfully complete this crucial new step.
Unfortunately, this will deprive charter and cyber charter schools of the opportunity to
effectively enforce their school attendance policies and address the needs of their students.
Therefore, we respectfully request that the interpretation appearing in the Penn*Link be
re-examined with a firmer understanding of the overarching goals and intent behind the
legislation.
Sincerely,
John M. Callahan
Assistant Executive Director
cc:
Senator Eichelberger, Education Chair
Senator Schwank
Senator Greenleaf
Senator Dinniman. Education Chair
Representative Hickernell, Education Chair
Representative Benninghoff, House Republican Policy Committee Chair
Nichole Duffy, Senior Education Advisor
Karen Seivard, Senior Counsel
Jonathan Berger, Executive Director
Lee Derr, Executive Director
Lisa Felix, Executive Director
Christopher Wakeley, Executive Director
Elizabeth Maguschak, General Counsel PDE
Denise Smyler, PA Office of General Counsel
From: Carretti, Catherine [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 12:33 PM
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>
Subject: Act 138: School Truancy
Penn*Link
To:
ALL LEAS (Superintendents, Building Principals, IU Executive Directors, and PIMS
Coordinators)
From: Michael J. Kozup, Director, Safe Schools Office
Brian W. Campbell, Director, Bureau of Curriculum, Assessment, and Instruction
Date: February 15, 2017
Re:
Act 138: School Truancy
Dear Partner in Education:
On November 3, 2016, Act 138 of 2016 (Act 138), relating to truancy and habitual truancy, was
signed into law. Inquires received by the Department of Education (PDE) demonstrate the need
for PDE to provide immediate clarification concerning some specific requirements of Act 138.
Accordingly, this Penn*Link addresses (1) the start of the applicability of Act 138, (2) the
application of Act 138 to charter schools, cyber charter schools and regional charter schools, and
(3) the prohibition on schools from utilizing exclusionary tactics in response to truant behavior.
Start of applicability of Act 138
Act 138 provides that the “act shall apply to the 2017-2018 school year and each school year
thereafter,” but also provides that the “act shall take effect immediately.” This language has
caused many inquiries to be made of PDE as to the actual effective date of Act 138.
Act 138 was “effective immediately” in that it immediately set forth the standards for the 20172018 school year. School districts, charter schools, cyber charter schools and other affected
individuals should immediately begin preparations of policies and procedures to ensure
compliance with Act 138 beginning with the 2017-18 school year. The operative provisions of
Act 138 should be applied beginning with the start of the 2017-18 school year, but they are not
applicable during the remainder of the 2016-2017 school year.
Application of Act 138 to charter schools and cyber charter schools
Act 138 contains language explicitly related to charter schools and cyber charter schools.
Specifically, Act 138 requires charter schools and cyber charter schools to maintain attendance
policies designed to accurately determine when a child enrolled in the charter school or cyber
charter school has an unexcused absence. Additionally, charter schools and cyber charter
schools must report unexcused absences directly to PDE through PIMS.
However, several significant provisions of the School Code added or amended by Act 138
specifically reference the authorities and obligations of a “school” or “schools.” “School” is
defined as “the educational entity in which the child is enrolled.” An “educational entity,” in
turn, is defined as “a public-school district, nonpublic school or area vocational-technical
school.” Thus, charter schools and cyber charter schools are not included in the definition of
“educational entity;” therefore, the term “school” does not apply to charter schools or cyber
charter schools, and the authority or responsibilities of “schools” are not applicable to charter or
cyber charter schools.
For a student enrolled in a charter school or cyber charter school, the student’s school district of
residence remains responsible for complying with the authorities and obligations related to
“schools,” and charter schools and cyber charter schools must continue to report absences to
resident school districts throughout the school year to allow districts to properly enforce the
attendance and truancy requirements.
Prohibition on schools from utilizing exclusionary tactics in response to truant behavior
Act 138 differs from the current truancy and habitual truancy laws, in one respect, in that Act
138 specifically prohibits schools from expelling or imposing an out-of-school suspension, a
disciplinary reassignment, or a transfer for truant behavior. Additionally, habitual truancy has
been eliminated as a basis upon which students may be placed into an alternative education for
disruptive youth (AEDY) program.
PDE will supplement this Penn*Link with a more detailed explanation of Act 138 through a
revised Basic Education Circular. A copy of Act 138 can be found here and questions related to
Act 138 can be addressed to Michael Kozup at [email protected].