Advocates for Education Publications

Questions for NC Superintendent for Public Instruction Candidates – June 30 Forum (PDF / 338 KB)
“Charlotte’s Education System: Measuring Up?” – Ventures Charlotte, The Charlotte Chamber
Comments to CMS Board of Education – March 2004 (PDF / 11KB)
-Executive Summary: Committee for Economic Development
-Full Report: Committee for Economic Development
Principal Leadership Study (PDF /28KB)
Principal Leadership Study – Executive Summary (PDF / 30KB)
Make Your Mark Guide (PDF / 750 KB)
Characteristics of Effective School Board Members (PDF / 21 KB)
“Fund School Adequately” [Article in The Charlotte Observer 6-4-2003] (PDF / 14 KB)
Advocates for Education Support CMS 2003-04 Operating Budget Request (PDF / 11KB)
2003-2004 CMS Operating Budget Resolution (PDF / 18KB)
North Carolina Lottery for Education: What are the Odds Our Schools Would Win? – Position and Rationale (PDF 47KB)
North Carolina Lottery for Education: What are the Odds Our Schools Would Win? – Executive Summary (PDF / 115KB)
North Carolina Lottery for Education: What are the Odds Our Schools Would Win? – The Lottery Paper (PDF / 190KB)
Community Guide to Understanding the School Budget (PDF /
410 KB)

2003 Harris Teacher of the of Year – Rebecca Felder (PDF / 14KB)
2003 “Teachers of the Year Day” (PDF / 11KB)
North Carolina Reading Policy: Problems, Processes, and Participants (PDF / 252 KB) – Released by:
Reading Policy Project
School of Education
The University of Michigan
610 E. Unversity Ave.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1259
These findings are based primarily on interviews with individuals who have been active in state reading policy. The overall purposes of the research were to identify key organizations and individuals involved in shaping state reading policy; track recent policy activities and developments related to reading; consider beliefs about reading achievement, pedagogy, standards, and assessment; and measure the perceived influence of applying various models of policymaking to describe and explain the reading policy processes that we observed within and across the states. Other states examined in this study are: Alabama, California, Connecticut, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Texas and Utah.

For more information please contact Cecil Miskel.
2002 Bond Position Paper (PDF / 13 KB)
2002 Community Assessment (PDF / 185KB)
2002 Community Assessment Presentation (PDF / 199KB)
CMEF Position Paper -2002-2003 CMS Operating Budget (PDF / 17KB)
2002 SOPER – Destination Excellence (PDF / 548KB)
2001 Annual Report (PDF / 2.99MB)
2000 Annual Report (PDF / 1.7MB)
CMEF Newsletter -Engage- Sept. 2001 (PDF / 83KB)
2001 Community Assessment Executive Summary (PDF / 22KB)
2001 Community Assessment Report (PDF / 213KB)
2001 Community Assessment Appendices (PDF / 14KB)
2001 Community Assessment Survey (PDF / 42KB)
White Paper Vol. II and No. I – School Accountability Standards (PDF / 30KB)
CMEF Newsletter -Engage- May 2001 (PDF / 85KB)
SOPER Executive Summary (PDF / 30KB)
State of Public Education Report (SOPER) (PDF / 154KB)
CMEF Newsletter -Engage- November 2000 (PDF / 235KB)
White Paper Vol. I No. I – School Choice (PDF / 35KB)
CMEF Newsletter -Engage- September 2000 (PDF / 273KB)
CMEF Newsletter -Engage- July 2000 (PDF / 55KB)
2000 Community Assessment (PDF / 157KB)
CMEF 1999 Annual Report (PDF / 4MB)
Community Visioning Initiative Workbook (PDF / 310KB)
CMEF Newsletter -Engage – May 2000 (PDF / 82KB)
These documents can be read or downloaded in their entirety by using Adobe Acrobat Reader. Acrobat Reader can be downloaded for free by clicking here.