children out of school in america - University of Tennessee Digital ...

as polite transitIOns out of the school system for
problem children. Some programs are not accredited
and most are not respected by other school officials.
Therefore, work a student does while enrolled in
these alternative programs is sometimes not accepted.
Many cannot get a high school diploma or
transfer back to regular classes. The Director of
PREP, the alternative program in Portland, Maine,
estimates that only 4 or 5 of the 200 students who
have come through his program in the six years it
has been in existence have finished high school. 16
Similar reports came from the Street Academy in
Holyoke, Massachusetts,17 and the Drop-In Center 18
in Davenport, Iowa.
Transportation
Thirteen states exempt children who live far from
school bus access routes, or who must travel long
distances to school. But perhaps the most striking
example of a state's omission of children from
school because of transportation problems is the
Native American population in Alaska.
The Alaska constitution and statutes command
that the state provide ". . . public schools open to
all children of the state ..."19 "in the school district
in which he [the child] is a resident."20 However,
the state legislature amended its compulsory attendance
laws so that they do not apply if a child
"resides more than two miles from either a public
school or a route on which transportation is provided
by the school authorities. "21
On its face, these provisions may appear reasonable.
But in the geography of Alaska, they have the
effect of discriminatorily denying education to
Alaskan Natives. Many of them live in a district
called the Alaska State Operated School System
(ASOSS), and there are schools in that district.
The state maintains that its responsibility is therefore
fulfilled. But the district is huge - over 400,000
square miles in Alaska's icy interior. Although
many children are far away from a school or a
viable access route, the state contends it has no
further responsibility to them.
On August 10, 1972, Native Alaskan children and
their parents filed suit 'contending they were being
denied equal educational opportunity.22 They listed
148 predominantly Native villages where no high
school was provided. They claimed that the lack of
high schools near home forced children to discontinue
their education, and that this exclusion was
visited almost exclusively on Natives.
It should be noted that the state does provide
other educational options for Native children who
live far from school. They can go to a BIA boarding
school, a regional dormitory, a boarding home (a
foster family living near a high school), private
boarding schools, or take correspondence courses.
None of these options, however, are satisfactory for
Native Alaskans. The cultural dislocation and
psychological stress of boarding schools and foster
homes undermine whatever educational advantages
are gained by them. Correspondence courses are a
poor equivalent, at best.
The statutory exemption of these children from
transportation to school is used to justify the state's
effective deprivation of their education. When the
Superintendent of ASOSS was questioned about the
extent of nonattendance in his district, he replied:
. . . there are several categories of children who
reside in the ASOSS school district who do not
receive primary or secondary education in schools
operated by the ASOSS.... The ASOSS does not
possess a figure indicating the total number of
students involved in [other programs] nor is it
aware of the age, grade, and race of each of these
children. 23
The outcome of the lawsuit is still in the courts.
Whatever the judicial decision, legislators, school
officials and parents ought to examine this and similar
statutory exemptions and see whether these
omissions serve their children's interests and, in the
long run, the interests of the state.
19 Article VIl, Section I. Alaska Constitution.
20 Section 14.03.080 [aj Alaska Statutes.
21 Section 14.30.010 [bj 7, Alaska Statutes.
22 Molly Hootch et 01. v. A laska State Operated School System
et 01.• No. 72-2450 (Sup. Ct. Ala., 3d Jud. Disl. 1972).
As research has progressed and defendants have filed replies,
some of the figures originally alleged have been altered
slightly.
23 Reply to Interrogatory No.4, by Defendant Stanley
Friese, Molly Hootch et 01. v. Alaska State Operated
School System et 01., supra.
61