[00:00:00.910] - Speaker 1
Voyager Sopers Learning is a specialist in reading, writing, and math intervention. Through a holistic suite of teacher trusted interventions and formative assessments created by the field's most respected minds and renowned curriculum authors, Voyager Soapless Learning helps students of all abilities master the foundational skills for reading, writing, and math succeed with a four decade legacy of results. Voyager Sopress Learning products are classroom tested, backed by rigorous research, and supported by evidence based practices. Voyager Sopress Learning is a part of Lexia Learning, a Cambium learning group company. Visit Voyagersopers.com to learn more.
[00:00:55.830] - Speaker 2
Hello everyone. Welcome to Teaching, Reading and Learning the TRL Podcast. I'm your host, Laura Stewart, and the focus of this podcast is to elevate some important conversations in our community to inspire and celebrate and inform contributions to Teaching, Reading and Learning. And my guest today is Deborah Jacobson, a special education attorney from Berkeley, California, who came to my attention when I read about a lawsuit against Berkeley Unified School District for not serving the needs of students who struggled to learn to read. So today we are going to talk about what led to this legal action, the terms of the settlement, and what this might mean for districts across the country and the future of our children. So I'm thrilled to share all this with you today around Deborah's important work. So as a way to lead into this, let me share her biography. Deborah is an education attorney in the San Francisco Bay Area, currently representing families and students against school districts throughout Northern California. She is extremely passionate about her work and the rights of children with disabilities and children who are disproportionately affected by the failures of public schools. Deborah is an active member of the educational community and works with parents, teachers, administrators, service providers, and local organizations to support the needs of vulnerable youth.
[00:02:18.750] - Speaker 2
Deborah has spent her entire legal career working on behalf of children. As a law student, she worked as a legal intern and special education advocate for disability Rights California and Bay Area Legal Aid, then quickly became the Managing Associate at a special education law firm in the District of Columbia, where she represented low income families in court appointed special education cases. Prior to relocating back to the Bay Area, Deborah cofounded the School Justice Project, a legal services and advocacy organization serving older students with special education needs who are involved in Washington, D. C's. Justice system. In 2013, Debra started her own practice in Berkeley, California. Jacobson Education Law. In addition to her private practice, Deborah has worked as both CoCouncil and Council of Disability for the Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, and she currently serves as Council for the East Bay Community Law Center. In their Education Justice Clinic, Deborah has effectively and compassionately represented hundreds of clients in special education matters. She is a frequent presenter at state and national conferences and provides trainings to local advocacy and parent groups. I know you are really going to enjoy this conversation today with Deborah Jacobson.
[00:03:38.100] - Speaker 2
Welcome to the podcast.
[00:03:39.350] - Speaker 3
Deborah.
[00:03:50.710] - Speaker 2
Deborah, thank you so much for being with us. And welcome to the podcast today.
[00:03:55.390] - Speaker 3
Thank you so much. I'm so happy to be here.
[00:03:57.920] - Speaker 2
Well, let's start out with a question that I ask all of our guests, which is what is the quote you live by and return to the quote.
[00:04:05.450] - Speaker 3
That I live by and return to always is not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced by Mr. James Baldwin.
[00:04:17.530] - Speaker 2
That's wonderful. And that does represent a lot about your work, doesn't it? We kind of have to face this. In your case, we all had to kind of face this, I guess, crisis in Berkeley and then move forward from there.
[00:04:32.530] - Speaker 3
Yeah. It's particularly relevant, I think, to the best case because it's very easy for people who this issue doesn't affect to bury their head in the sand. And so this is something that had to be faced head on. And yeah, it's relevant in all of my work, for sure.
[00:04:52.770] - Speaker 2
Good for you. Well, we'll get more into that. But let's just start by can you tell us about yourself and your background and how you even started on this path to where you are now?
[00:05:02.650] - Speaker 3
Yeah. So I am a special education attorney practicing in Berkeley, California. I have been working on behalf of children with disabilities for my entire legal career. I think another very important core value of mine is anti racism in my work in that realm. And discrimination cases, they kind of coexist within special education and the work that I do.
[00:05:36.430] - Speaker 2
Yeah. How did you get started on working specifically in this arena? Was it some personal background for you, or is this just an area that you just found a particular passion for?
[00:05:49.210] - Speaker 3
This is an area I had a particular passion for. And like I said, I went into law school with this idea of social justice and anti racism in terms of the work that I wanted to do. And I ended up working in a collaborative court that focused on my work, focused on children who had picked up charges, who needed advocacy in schools through the special education process. So like I said, there was such an inner mix there between the social justice work around anti racism and disability. It just led me to this path.
[00:06:34.090] - Speaker 2
And did you find a lot of those students were struggling with reading? Was that one of the big issues?
[00:06:44.930] - Speaker 3
That is a big part of it. Dyslexia does disproportionately affect the IPOC children? And so a lot of those cases were yes, they started off with these issues around reading that often turned into behavioral issues in the classroom or school avoidance. Many of the kids that I worked on behalf of early on in my career in both California and DC were in the criminal justice system and had truancy charges. School avoidance school refusal. And it always led back to literacy issues.
[00:07:24.470] - Speaker 2
If you backtrack from that event or from that trauma or from that behavior so many times, it backtracks to the inability to read or the struggle to read.
[00:07:35.450] - Speaker 3
Yeah, I'm working now. Like I said, I'm a special education attorney. I do have my own practice. I'm currently serving as a Council for East Bay Community Law Center for children who are incarcerated. And it never fails. When I'm looking at the file of a student they represent student and expulsion hearings. Many of them have charges in the criminal justice system. It never fails. That when we look back at the assessments that have been done in a child's life, if they have been found eligible for special education really early on, they have low reading scores. And the percentage of kids that are incarcerated that have reading difficulties is astronomical, astronomical.
[00:08:21.140] - Speaker 2
So there's a direct correlation. Direct connection.
[00:08:25.010] - Speaker 3
Absolutely. Yeah.
[00:08:26.700] - Speaker 2
Tell us what happened in Berkeley. Tell us specifically how you were brought to this lawsuit and what happened from there.
[00:08:35.690] - Speaker 3
Absolutely. So Berkeley in particular, there's a very active parent community. It's a community full of activists here in Berkeley, California. A lot of activists, a lot of parent activists, a lot of really huge, strong parent network. Because I'm in Berkeley, I do get a large amount of clients that call me from Berkeley. Right. If they do a Google search, I'm here in Berkeley. I say that because I always want to emphasize that this is not just a Berkeley problem. And people always say, why did you choose Berkeley? And there is a huge problem here. And there is a huge achievement gap in Berkeley, meaning a difference between Vipoc students and achievement difference between Vipoc students and white students. So that is something, obviously, that played into the lawsuit that we filed. However, really, one of the main reasons I brought it in Berkeley was because I had so many clients and so many connections and knew so many parents who were dealing with this issue. And normally in special education law, we do it case by case. So I represent one family and I bring it to due process or I settle it. And with this issue of dyslexia or reading disabilities, which is a large umbrella term for students who might have a number of different processing deficits that prevent them from being able to make them struggle to learn to read.
[00:10:20.930] - Speaker 3
For a large majority of the families, those who had the means were seeking outside help for their students. And what that looked like was they were paying for educational therapy at a rate of $150 an hour. So up to $300 a week for an entire year or more. Linda Mood Bell during the summer, which could cost $30 to $40,000. So many of those cases where the parents could pay for those things, I was seeking reimbursement from the District. And the problem was I was getting a huge number of families that could not afford that, right? I mean, there's very few I couldn't afford that. There's a lot of people that cannot afford to get those outside services. And the problem there was there was nothing for me to get them within the district. There was no structured literacy support. There were no classes or programs or resource rooms with resource teachers who had training in any sort of research based literacy program that could help these students. So that's how this started.
[00:11:36.260] - Speaker 2
Yeah. Can I ask you a question about that? Just the individual lawsuits that you were winning to get reimbursement from the district for the families. So when this was happening, did the district have any sort of realization that they were complicit in this here they were paying out for these lawsuits for reimbursement, but did they make the connection that the children needed this extra help because of what they weren't getting in the district? Was that connection happening?
[00:12:05.150] - Speaker 3
I always joke with parents that Berkeley is a special kind of beast and that they will never admit wrongdoing. They will always. I could say that the sky is blue today, and it's clearly blue. And Berkeley administration will say it's green. We see this green out here. It's beautiful. It's wonderful. What are you talking about?
[00:12:28.770] - Speaker 2
So they weren't seeing the connection?
[00:12:31.470] - Speaker 3
Well, I think they were. I was banging the connection over their heads. I think that it wasn't that they weren't seeing the connection. It was a general stance that they were doing a great job and that these cases were outliers.
[00:12:46.710] - Speaker 2
So go ahead. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to bird walk off of that, but I just was curious. Okay, so then how did this lead to the lawsuit against the district?
[00:12:54.910] - Speaker 3
Yeah. So with the individual cases, you can only address it case by case. And like I said, at that point in my career, 70% of my cases were cases for students whose parents did not have money to seek outside services. And so I knew that there needed to be a bigger solution. There was nothing I could do for these families. And like I said, these are the families that need it most. It was disproportionately affecting them. I was getting so many calls, and I reached out to Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, which is a local nonprofit in the area, and they have a team of advocates. They were seeing the same thing. I connected with one of the attorneys, and we all agreed that we needed to do something bigger than the one off cases.
[00:13:54.390] - Speaker 2
So then in conjunction with the Disability Rights Education Defense Fund, is that how the lawsuit came to be?
[00:14:02.430] - Speaker 3
Yeah, that's how the lawsuit came to be. We started building the case. We met with the district over the course of a year and a half, dozens of times, corresponded with them. We filed a state complaint, which is a smaller version of a class action. The state can come in and investigate and see if there's what's called a systemic issue, which means that it affects many children. And at the end of the day, I don't know that the district necessarily disagreed with us, but I've learned throughout these years that literacy and literacy instruction and curriculum is a political beast as well as a children's issue. And there are so many factors that go into it. And this was really the only way that we could make change was to file a federal class action lawsuit.
[00:14:57.450] - Speaker 2
Can you tell us a little bit about the politics that you've noticed in literacy?
[00:15:03.090] - Speaker 3
Yeah. I think this was a huge realization for me when we started the case. I'm a special education lawyer, so we were looking at special education interventions, which means we were looking at interventions for students who either needed an IEP or who already had an IEP for their difficulties in reading. Throughout the litigation, I was very lucky to work with nationally recognized experts, one of whom is Louisa Moats, another Mark Shin, another Jack Fletcher. I like to say that they turned me into an expert in my own right, whether I liked it or not. I learned all there is to know about how to teach kids how to read. I always say one of the biggest sacrifices I made was for this case. I spent four days in Oklahoma City at a big conference with a lot of educators in Oklahoma, and I learned so much. And Jack Fletcher and Mark Finn, they put that conference on. I say this because I learned throughout this process that this is not just a special education issue. This is a general education issue. It's almost more of a general education issue. And that is this issue around language based literacy, balanced literacy versus structured literacy.
[00:16:39.850] - Speaker 3
And I learned that Berkeley, along with many school districts in California and throughout the country, shifted from structured literacy and the explicit teaching of Sonics and phonemic awareness to this idea that children can learn to read through language based programs. And I give this example on every single talk that I do and every interview that I've done to explain because I could never understand what language based literacy meant and why that was affecting children who had learning disabilities, but also children who don't come from language rich environments. Which brings us back to the issue of the achievement gap and languagebased literacy is this idea that children can associate letters and sounds with pictures and what the pictures indicate the language. So this is the example I give over and over again. I had the weird experience of my daughter being in kindergarten in a Berkeley Unified School District while I was litigating against Berkeley Unified School District, and I was volunteering in her classroom. And I got to see what this looked like and the language based literacy program that they use. And it's level books. And my daughter was sitting next to this little girl, and my daughter saw she was looking at a book and it was a horse jumping over a barrel.
[00:18:30.940] - Speaker 3
And my daughter looks at the picture and she says, the horse jumps over the barrel. And she's looking at the words that says the horse jumps over the barrel. And she really could associate that ha with horse and see the word and remember the word and associate that H sound with that letter, the visual letter. And she read that. And then the next week, the little girl next to her looked at the picture and said, the horse jumps over the big can. And I say this because my daughter comes from a very language rich environment. Her single mom is a lawyer that never stops talking. I also happen to be from Colorado, and she is very lucky to go to Colorado every summer and see horses jumping over barrels and go to rodeos. And she sees all this stuff. She comes from a very language rich environment. She also, turns out, does not have any processing deficits or learning issues, which is shocking just because of what I do. I was convinced that my daughter was going to have struggles with reading. She didn't. But that little girl and I say this because I noticed it right away.
[00:19:44.710] - Speaker 3
I noticed it. This was probably in November of that kindergarten year. And things got worse and worse for her as the semester, as the year went on to the point where during a parent teacher conference for my own child, I talked about that little girl the whole time. So this became really apparent to me that students who had, you know, that student came from a monolingual Spanish speaking family. But also, it turned out a year and a half later, I worked with her family and she did have a reading disorder. So she was getting a double whammy there with language based literacy. The school district did fight that all along. And she didn't end up getting an IEP until the end of second grade. And she still struggles because of that. It could have been fixed a lot earlier on. It could have been helped a lot earlier. Right. So going back to your question as to why it's political and how it's political, there are many assets. There are many parts of that question that I could go into wormholes and I'll try not to. But one of them is this idea that Mark Shane calls play based learning.
[00:21:10.150] - Speaker 3
Right. And in Liberal communities like Berkeley, there is this idea that structured literacy is militant and it doesn't allow for children to enjoy reading and explore all of that. And those are all ideals that we do have. We don't want our children being in militant classrooms. And this idea of how I learned when I was little, this rope memorization, I think some teachers refer to it as drill and kill. It's hard to teach and students don't necessarily like it is the other side of this. And I say it's political because of that, in most red States, they are still using structured literacy approach. In many Liberal communities and blue States, they've switched over to language based literacy. And here I am right in one of the most Liberal places in the world. And theoretically that matches who I am and my core values. But this particular aspect of it makes no sense. And Louisa Moz brilliantly said when she came here and saw all the signs in the yards that say we believe in science, black lives matter. And she said for a community that says they believe in science, they sure don't believe in science.
[00:22:38.370] - Speaker 3
And that's what this comes down to, is there is science behind how we need to teach children how to read and that science is ignored in so many places. And this lawsuit was all about, please look at the science. We have 30 years worth of research. We have all of this science. Why are you ignoring it?
[00:22:59.550] - Speaker 2
I see that, too, Deborah. I see this kind of sociopolitical surrounding of the issue of teaching reading. And I'm really glad you were able to name that this idea that kids can kind of construct all this learning for their own, that that's nurturing and that's developmental and that matches with more of a Liberal point of view, as opposed to a teacher teaching explicitly, and that must somehow be drill and kill. But I love how you've talked about this. But really, this structured literacy equalizes the playing field because it becomes that runway to reading and it becomes that equalizing force that allows all of our children to have access to a learned skill. This is not an intuitive skill. It's not like when we speak, when children learn to speak, we model for them. They're immersed in it. They explore language. Reading is a learned skill, and the teaching of that requires a very explicit approach, I have to say, too, you had Louise Emotes, Mark Shin, Jack Fletcher, you had some heavy hitters helping you through this whole process.
[00:24:15.150] - Speaker 3
They get so much credit. I always say. I say in individual cases about Dyslexia and in this class action case about Dyslexia, it's usually not hard to bring claims against a district in these cases. And that's sad, but it's true. So many of these kids are not being served. The really difficult part of these cases is figuring out what's going to help each kid. And there is no cookie cutter approach. There is no one reading program. And I think we get stuck on these buzzwords of programs like Wilson and all of these great structured literacy programs, but one single program does not work for every kid. And so that is something I learned in this lawsuit. We can't just say we want all the special Ed teachers to know how to use Wilson. This is really about going back to the general education classroom and making sure general education teachers understand the science of reading and making sure all the general education teachers have word walls in their room and understand the need for explicit phonics instruction. And this case, like I said, really became it was such an eye opener in terms of where the beginning is, it's not in special education.
[00:25:42.070] - Speaker 3
And this is about all students who struggle to read. In special education law, there's a case, a Supreme Court case that has been modified by a subsequent Supreme Court case. But we were always trained that the law says that students are entitled to the basement floor of educational opportunity. Right. School districts are not required to maximize a student's potential, and courts still follow that to an extent. That said, I have always said that this is the basement level of educational opportunity. Reading is the basement level. There is nothing if a student can't learn to read. In Berkeley, I represented multiple high school students that were functionally illiterate, bright, amazing students that had perfect attendance, that could not read. And what does that mean for them? What does that look like for them? The humiliation, the devastation? It's devastating. And this is something that it's not hard to fix. That's what's frustrating so. Right.
[00:26:53.150] - Speaker 2
And I think one thing you're bringing to light here is that we have to take a prevention oriented approach, as opposed to an intervention oriented approach. Like, what do we do in general Ed to prepare all of our teachers to teach reading most effectively in a tier one setting to prevent these instructional casualties, and then we have to try to remediate that. Right. So was the lawsuit aimed? Well, just tell us about the terms of the lawsuit and then what the settlement, the eventual settlement means for the children of Berkeley.
[00:27:31.870] - Speaker 3
Yeah. So like I said, as special education lawyers, and we had a number of big firms that came in and helped us with this case. Not on the legal issue side of things, but class action lawsuits are incredibly expensive and require an incredible amount of manpower and time. And I am a solo practitioner. Dredif is a very small nonprofit organization. So we enlisted the help of some really big law firms to help us through this. I say that just because this wasn't just me doing it, but we started out with this complaint and me as the special Ed attorney in this really focusing only on special education claims. That is what I know. And that is what I saw. The problem was with these kids that I was seeing that weren't getting the special education support that they needed. And we knew the claims. We felt we had very strong claims. And then we got to that process of what's the relief? How do we fix this? And we started looking at, are there any districts that do this well, and we couldn't find any in California. We did a very comprehensive search with our experts, and we couldn't find a single school district that was doing it well.
[00:28:55.630] - Speaker 3
I say that because a good two years of this case was developing the relief a literacy plan that we wanted to go to the court and say, this is what needs to happen. And this wasn't three bullet points. This was a comprehensive, multi page plan as to that started out in general education and moved through tiers. Right. And Mark Shannon was our lead in developing a multi tiered system of supports to propose to the district as a way to remedy this case. And at the end of the day, that is what we got. We proposed a plan. The plan went through multiple rounds of negotiation. And at the end of the day, we settled this case. After years of litigation, we settled for what we were very happy about. And so the result of the settlement is this multi tiered plan in which things change in the general education setting. A huge part of that is teacher training on the science of reading. Right. And that goes back to what I had said. This has to start in the general education setting. And that is something that special education costs so much money, and it's this constant.
[00:30:22.030] - Speaker 3
We don't want more kids to get identified. Special education costs so much. They're pumping so much into these programs. And this was something that we kept saying, if we can fix this in the general education setting, if we have these tiers, this will prevent students from meeting an IEP. This will prevent students from meeting that need that intensive support. If you help this early on, the level of support will be less intensive need. There are those students on both sides of the spectrum. I've worked with students that have very severe cases of dyslexia, no matter what they did in the general education setting, in addition to intensive support, they still struggle. So of course, there are still those students, but a huge percentage of them. I started questioning, you know, how many of these students actually would have needed special education, how many of these students would have need to be referred for assessment had they just been taught explicit phonics in kindergarten and first grade? So that was a big thing. We worked really hard. We didn't have claims that would allow us to change the general education literacy programming because your claims were all in the special Ed.
[00:31:44.710] - Speaker 3
Yeah. And so that became throughout that we were trying to decide, should we modify the complaint to include more discrimination, civil rights aspect of this, to include all of those students that I talked about that might not come from a language rich environment but also may not have a processing disorder? Should we expand this? How do we address this? We have to address this issue. This tier, one issue of general education. And at the end of the day, Berkeley was willing to work with us on that through a settlement. And the literacy plan includes changes in the general education setting to include a phonics based program and a complete review of Tcrwp, which is the languagebased literacy program that Berkeley uses and many school districts use. My nemesis.
[00:32:45.850] - Speaker 2
Let me just to clarify for our listeners that's a teacher's College reading and writing project.
[00:32:51.190] - Speaker 3
That's correct. Yeah. And fonts and panel level literacy books that go along with PCR. So the district really agreed to take a very hard look at that and to start collecting data related to students abilities early on. And those are through research based data collection programs. They're not objective. They're not subjective. Like, level literacy assessments tend to be where it's just a teacher listening to a student learn, read a book. And like I said, going back to that, children can guess at that picture and guess what those words are. So that is part of tier one, tier two. We negotiated more teacher training and different programs that are research based. Tier three was really related to the development of IEPs and goals and duration of services in terms of how much support students get once they get to that level three. And really a comprehensive plan that moves through tiers one, two and three to address the needs of all the students in the district that struggle to learn to read, including students in middle school, including students in high school, when they stop teaching literacy. And it really does become a special education issue and a need for intensive remediation.
[00:34:31.960] - Speaker 2
So how many years were you in process with Berkeley?
[00:34:37.870] - Speaker 3
We are in year four now, and I would say heavy litigation. The settlement was just approved by the court about a month ago.
[00:34:54.820] - Speaker 2
That's after four years.
[00:34:57.150] - Speaker 3
Yes.
[00:34:57.600] - Speaker 2
Wow. Congratulations.
[00:35:00.270] - Speaker 3
Thank you.
[00:35:01.370] - Speaker 2
So the settlement was a comprehensive K twelve, I guess, services settlement that looked at teacher training, phonics based tier one, collection of data, student identification using research based program, the intensity of tier three support. All those pieces were included in this settlement.
[00:35:24.570] - Speaker 3
Yeah. And I should say one of the most important pieces of this settlement is that Berkeley Unified School District has to retain a nationally recognized expert as a consultant to guide them through this each tier and build out this program and build out the professional development programming. And we also have a case court monitor who also has to be a nationally recognized expert in the science of reading. So this isn't here you go, Berkeley. Go do your thing. Yeah. We're washing our hands of this. This is another three years of work for plaintiff's team and a lot of involvement in that with the experts with the monitor. And we are really hopeful. I think it's going to be a hard few years and a difficult road to get down. But I guess after all of this work, all I can do is be hopeful that it is going to result in something great for all these kids.
[00:36:41.090] - Speaker 2
This is amazing work, Deborah. So not only do you have the settlement, this comprehensive settlement, but you have this term that they need to have a nationally recognized expert to shepherd them through all these changes, and then also a monitor for accountability, essentially. Wow. So I can see why you're hopeful with that. And what do you see as a ripple effect of this for other districts around the country?
[00:37:09.260] - Speaker 3
Yeah, we are already seeing a ripple effect here in California. And I have to say, when the news went out about the settlement and I received so many calls from attorneys across the country, from parents, how do we do this in our district? And that's why I always like to take people say, can you come do this in our district? And I want to fall down from exhaustion just thinking about another one of these cases. It really did take over my life.
[00:37:42.430] - Speaker 2
Sure.
[00:37:44.230] - Speaker 3
Not in a bad way, but in a hard way. These are very difficult cases to litigate on many levels. So when people say, why did you do this in Berkeley? It's way worse in this area and this area, it's true. It's awful everywhere. I say that because there can be copycat suits. Now is one way that this can ripple. Right. We have done a lot of that work, and the complaints are public, and people are already saying, we're going to use this, we're going to do what you did. That's one way. More importantly, this was a federal class action lawsuit. A lot of eyes were on this case because it would set precedent not only in California, but people could use this depending on how the court came out on this issue. And the case did not get a decision from the court. And we settled. That means that there is no legal precedent in terms of a judge deciding on something. But we got what we wanted. And in fact, we got more than I feel we could have from a judge making an order from this in the sense that we got to work collaboratively with the district to make this comprehensive plan that also included supports in the general education setting.
[00:39:12.560] - Speaker 3
And I'm seeing it. I'm seeing districts all over. All of a sudden people saying to me, wow, because of this lawsuit, our district is saying now that they're going to bring in this phonics program in my kids classroom. Thank you so much. Our school has just did all of these trainings and structured literacy. And all the teachers are saying that because of the Berkeley lawsuit, the district is now going to be switching over to this and that and the assessment model that they're using, they're no longer going to use the severe discrepancy model, which we don't need to get into right now. But that was a big issue in identifying students with learning disabilities. That was a hard fought battle. So we are seeing the ripple effect. And what that means and why we're seeing the ripple effect is because this lawsuit can be brought again. And there's many attorneys that are ready and willing to do it. There's so many parent advocates that are willing to push for this. And because this was a federal case, all eyes were on it, and they see the results of it. And they also see that this was years of litigation and an incredible amount of money that could have been used to put these programs in place a long time ago.
[00:40:27.610] - Speaker 2
So your lawsuit becomes a template for some copycat suits and it can set precedent. But in the meantime, it's having a ripple effect because some of the districts are already making changes kind of as a well, I guess kind of a prophylactic measure against getting sued themselves. Does that characterize it?
[00:40:47.550] - Speaker 3
Yeah, I would say yes. And like I said, every district in the state had their eyes on this case. What's going to happen with this case? How is this going to turn out? And staring down the barrel of hundreds of thousands of dollars to litigate a case like this? I would hope that they're starting to say we need to make changes.
[00:41:11.950] - Speaker 2
Do you think the people that you worked with in Berkeley are making changes simply because they have to, because of the terms of the settlement, or do you think there have been changes of hearts, changes of minds? Have there been people turning toward the science and away from a language based.
[00:41:30.240] - Speaker 3
Approach that goes back to the question of politics? I think that educators in general, we do what's comfortable to us, and we do what we know, and we get stuck in these ruts and not just teachers, all of us. This is how I do this. This is how I've been doing it, and this has worked for all these kids, and I'm an amazing teacher, and we're amazing. Everybody will tell you that. I say that because I don't think that there has been a general change of heart, and I don't think that that is the educator's fault. I think that they're not just in Berkeley, but that really equates to a lack of leadership and this general idea that goes back to the quota. We can't change things we don't face. And if you're not willing to face a problem because of your own issues, it will never change. And I think that a lot of educators take this personally. Are you saying I'm doing a bad job? This is what I've been doing for the past 15 years. Are you saying I'm doing a bad job? Are you saying I haven't taught students to read?
[00:42:43.550] - Speaker 3
Are you saying I'm racist because I don't want to learn how to do the drill and kill? I don't know that there has been a general change of heart for everyone. I think slowly it's starting to happen. And I think that as people are educated and as even teachers kind of understand the devastating effects of this, teachers get into this job because of their love for children. And so having a better understanding of what that means to actually help these children and to give them an equal footing and to give them a chance, I think once that information becomes clear, I do think there will be a general change of heart. I think as of right now, administrators are getting it, and that might be because of the bottom line. That might be because of their involvement in all of these cases that cost a lot of money that they have to justify in some way. I think it will take more time to get everybody on board.
[00:43:49.830] - Speaker 2
And I think that this litigation is one lever, and there are other levers that I think have to be pulled. I think it does come down to what you started this whole podcast with is facing this. I listened to a very wise and humble Superintendent not long ago who said that he had a reckoning when he saw the posters all over their district saying, we believe all children can learn and we educate all. And he said, you know, I kind of had this stark realization all means all. And we weren't doing right by all of our kids. And he said, and the buck stops with me. And he said, I realized, how can I sleep at night until I start to reckon with this? And so I think that's a perfect example of what you started with your quote, facing this and then taking whatever steps. And if a settlement of this scope can help us have that reckoning, than so be it.
[00:44:58.030] - Speaker 3
Right.
[00:44:58.620] - Speaker 2
And thank you.
[00:45:00.190] - Speaker 3
Accountability is a learned skill, and it is hard. It is hard for every human being to be accountable for these types of things and to really look at our own accountability. And that's my hope for administrators is to be accountable, be accountable for these kids and be accountable for what you're doing in your school district, be accountable for making sure that you are doing everything you can to make sure that every student can learn to read.
[00:45:31.610] - Speaker 2
Deborah, I can't help but think about I mean, I believe that we're put in certain places at certain times to provide certain service. And I think about the intersection of all of these factors that came into your life, being in Berkeley and having these small lawsuits, working with families individually and then seeing this gap between those that can afford it, those that can, and the need for these kids to have these services. And then your intersections with Louisa and Mark and Jack and learning about this process, I can't help but think that you are the conduit for this work that you've done and how grateful I am to hear your story and how grateful I am to share your story with others in hopes that it will provide them with some ideas, answers, and ultimately some hope that we can make these changes. Well, thank you so much. This is a great story. And what are you working on now, or you probably can't tell us, but is it similar to continuing this work?
[00:46:38.150] - Speaker 3
Yeah. No, I can absolutely tell you. I still do all of these individual cases. Like I said, I say this semester because East Bay Community Law Center works in conjunction, UC Berkeley. So I got to mentor law students this semester and mentor and attorney and actually start working more in delinquency cases and students that are incarcerated. So I kind of went back full circle this year and went back to my hard work. And that's always important for me. And we'll see. I'm still doing this work and we'll continue to do this work.
[00:47:21.250] - Speaker 2
Wonderful. Yeah. That hard work that you're doing at East Bay Community Law Center. Thank you for that. That's so important. And you're also doing some speaking engagements and sharing your story to help others navigate this system. Am I right about that, too?
[00:47:38.420] - Speaker 3
Yes, you are right about that. I'm doing speaking work. I'm doing as much training as I can. I'm talking to as many teachers as I can. I am going to be leading an alternative dispute resolution program in Oakland starting next semester to really kind of get more involved with families that can't afford representation and to help on that level and to really start helping bridge this huge gap between families and administrators. And that is my goal moving forward is to really work collaboratively with families and districts and try to make change in that way.
[00:48:21.240] - Speaker 2
Wonderful. Well, best wishes for your continued work, Deborah, and thank you for the work that you're doing. I just so appreciate this, and I appreciate being able to share your story, but I can't let you go without our closing questions that I ask all of our guests. So just maybe rapid fire questions, we call them. Who was your favorite teacher, Deborah, growing up and why?
[00:48:46.490] - Speaker 3
This is a hard one, but I'm going to one of my high school teachers named Mr. Heman. He was my English teacher. I had a hard time in high school. I was very bored by high school. I wanted to drop out of high school, believe it or not. And he pushed me to apply for this program where I got to go to College early. And I always feel like he saved me from leaving education. So he's my favorite teacher.
[00:49:15.080] - Speaker 2
Wonderful. Well, we thank Mr. Heman for all of his efforts there. What is your favorite book? What is a favorite book, either as a child or as an adult?
[00:49:27.150] - Speaker 3
This is a really hard one for me. And I guess it's because I have a short memory in terms of I read constantly. So I recently read the Alchemist. So I'm going to go with that because it was just such a beautiful story and a beautiful book. And I don't know if it's a favorite long term, but it's a good one.
[00:49:48.880] - Speaker 2
Oh, that's nice. That's very nice. It's an impactful little book, isn't it? And what are you reading right now?
[00:49:56.850] - Speaker 3
I'm reading rising strong by Brene Brown. I tend to reread a lot of Renee Brown books. I'm constantly working on being brave and putting myself out there and being vulnerable in this work, which means really doing a lot of risks. So I tend to reread Brune Brown, but somehow I hadn't read this book yet, so that is what I'm fantastic.
[00:50:26.770] - Speaker 2
Do you listen to her podcast?
[00:50:28.530] - Speaker 3
I do, yes.
[00:50:30.330] - Speaker 2
Well, you seem like a very courageous person to me. Deborah, what do you have on your desk that symbolizes you or is dear to you?
[00:50:39.450] - Speaker 3
You know this question? I don't have anything on my desk. I have a bit of a list with my desk completely clear. I will say that, as you can see, I have lots of plants in my house. We are on Zoom so you can see it. So I'll go with that plants and kind of meeting greenery. And I have a tropical plant here because it makes me feel like I'm in somewhere beautiful and tropical, and that's meaningful to me.
[00:51:09.020] - Speaker 2
That's very nice. Wonderful. And I guess last question, which I think you may have already answered, but just kind of bring it to close your force. What are your greatest hopes for today's children?
[00:51:18.930] - Speaker 3
Yeah, my greatest hopes for today's children. I really have I feel like answered that in the sense of an opportunity and hope for all kids, not just those that tend to have opportunity and hope built into their being. Opportunity and hope is what I want for the kids.
[00:51:43.810] - Speaker 2
Thank you so much again for the work that you're doing and thank you for your time today to share your story with us. I know it will be very inspiring for our listeners, so my best to you.
[00:51:54.180] - Speaker 3
Deborah, thank you so much. I'm so honored to be here and I really appreciate you and your work. Thank you.
[00:52:00.500] - Speaker 2
Thank you. Take care. We talk often in this podcast about the different levels of change that might make a difference for our children. And Deborah's story about the settlement at Berkeley represents one of those levers. I hope you enjoyed this podcast. I think this really represents great hope for the children of Berkeley and hopefully the ripple effect that this might have in other parts of the state and of the country. So thank you for joining us. I hope you enjoyed the podcast. If so, please rate us. Also, please provide us with your feedback so that we can meet your needs in future podcasts. Again, thanks for joining us, and we'll see you next time.