Irony and Insanity come to Fruition in the Pa Senate

The Senate Education Committee voted to continue down the path of irony and insanity by passing Senate Bill 1.  It is now rapidly careening down the path of self destruction and calling the proposed school voucher bill an “opportunity scholarship”.

The bill, intended to help the state’s poorest children from the lowest-performing schools by providing options of attending other public, private or parochial schools, did not pass the committee without debate.  The troubling issues that many of us have discussed, including constitutionality, religious freedom and the cost to public schools were sticking points for two members of the committee.

The Senate Education Committee is composed of six Republicans and four Democrats. Co-sponsoring the proposed legislation is Democratic Sen. Anthony Williams and Senate Education Committee Chair Jeffrey Piccola (R-Dauphin).  All six Republicans supported the bill, as did two Democrats, Williams and Sen. Andy Dinniman.  Dinniman had some suggested amendments to the bill, including testing and accountability from the non-public schools.  This was a simple request in light of the fact that frequent rhetoric coming from our Legislative leaders on data driven decision making.  They weren’t even considered. Why would the proponents of Vouchers and or Charter Schools continue to hide from research driven analysis of their programs?  Because what little research we do have, like the Milwaukee and Cleveland reports, indicate at best marginal success and at worst, like the Cleveland study for the 2010 student progress, shows that Public Schools outperformed their Voucher student counterparts in every area between the grades 3 to 9! 

Democrats Jim Ferlo and Daylin Leach were the members of the committee opposing school voucher bill.

Leach debated the proposed legislation on the grounds that the bill is not constitutional.  A view that I happen to concur with as do many other legal scholars despite the Supreme Court’s decision in 2002 case Zelman vs. Simmons-Harris.

 Ferlo and Leach are concerned that the voucher system could erode public schools whereas the others feel that the legislation actually offers a lifeline to those children trapped in the low-performing schools. The opposing sides present two distinctly different ways of looking at the same situation.  Piccola suggests that Leach’s argument that the school voucher legislation is unconstitutional is an erroneous interpretation of the Pennsylvania Constitution. The chair of the Senate Education Committee also dismissed the argument that the bill is in conflict with the state constitution in regards to support of religious schools with public money.

With all the questions swirling around this legislation, why did the Senate Education Committee seemingly just push it along through the system?  Usually, I would be complaining about the slowness of government process, but it is amazing the way this school voucher bill is bulldozing its way through Harrisburg.

Aside from the many questions, concerns and debates swirling around this voucher bill, why don’t we hear much about the cost of this ‘opportunity scholarship’? Is it simply that if the proponents told the truth about this approach they would have to acknowledge that much like in the case of Milwaukee, Cleveland and Florida tax payers were required to kick in more money to make up for the reduction in school district subsidies, sub-contracting of services, substantially larger class sizes, elimination of related arts programs such as music and arts, after-school programs and furloughs!

Gov. Corbett swept into the Governor’s office under the umbrella of austerity and budget constraints.  Can someone please explain to me how the estimated $1billion dollars in taxpayer costs by the end of the third-year phase of the voucher program meet that mission?  This 1billion does not take into consideration the dollars the bill will siphon from the public schools. 

Our newly elected Governor will introduce a budget that takes another 1 billion in state aid from PA’s school districts.

 Let me put that into some context for you.

The State’s share of Public education amounts to 5.1 billion dollars; so we are now planning to take one-fifth of the largest share of school district revenues away!

 Recently the Governor put a 364 million dollar freeze on state spending; of that amount 337 million was school funding.

 Why choose school funding for the largest share of this freeze: simple, because it could be made up by federal stimulus dollars.

 School Superintendents were informed of this freeze last Thursday by e-mail.!

The state is using 387 million dollars of unspent Federal jobs monies to help balance this year’s budget.

 The legislature is also using 654 million in federal stimulus monies to bridge the gap this year. Does anyone other than me see the absolute Irony in this approach! These very same Politicos’s constantly lamenting the infringement of the Federal Government in State matters: Yet they have absolutely no problem claiming how they wonderfully balanced our budget without revealing the fact that they used the federal villainous Federal Governments dollars to do it! If that is not the height of hypocrisy then I do not know its real face!

 There is a 1 billion dollar hole that needs to be filled next year!

This budget also sets the state’s expenditure levels for Education back to the 2005-06 levels!

Again who will be affected by this?

 Local School Districts and Boards will be required to raise taxes to make up the difference because legislative mandates will not have been taken off their backs by those in Harrisburg who preach fiscal responsibility.

This is not a new tactic! A previous Governor followed the exact same path in making himself appear to be a fiscal conservative by passing program costs on to County Governments and Local School Boards. Indeed he may have been the one who sent us down the road toward our current Pension Crisis!

Local Districts may be asked to pay more and still have to cut programs so that our Legislative Leaders can again engage in the oldest charade and shell game of all – “shift the blame”.  They tout a new program as if it would not raise state taxes. No tax increase at the state level but for local governments that is another matter.  The money has to come from somewhere!!

 Just one last question; How do our elected officials justify risking 2 to 4 billion dollars of taxpayer monies on programs, that as my last article argues are unproven and at the very best marginally successful on the academic performance side and certainly more costly on the fiscal side?

Vouchers an Exercise in Irony

As I stated in my last article on Pa. Senate Bill 1 which was never published{ So I added it here Irony and Insanity}; Not sure why? But in that article I made several observations about voucher initiatives nationally;1.}the research is at best uncertain and at worst a multi-billion dollar boon-doggly! 2.} there is no proven track record of them working any better than their public school counterparts. 3.} when the advocates for vouchers and choice are faced with the statistical realities they resort to excuses that they use to call scapegoating by the public school community. 4.} Vouchers have no track record of being a financial benefit to the state. 5.} Cleveland results are Even more compelling in terms of public school students out performing voucher programs. 6.} Pa legislature is taking the same approach it took with bi-lingual education ; we try to adopt it after other States like California and Arizona do away with it after an unsuccessful experiment with it for years! We are now trying to do the same thing with vouchers. 7.} I am last person on earth to suggest we in the public school system need to make major improvements in many areas, but lets not destroy the system that has made America the greatest country on earth. Lets not destroy the middle classes opportunity to occur economically by destroying public education. 8.} Make no mistake about it this absolutely not about improving education but rather an all out effort to destroy public education. 9.} I have often said to truly shape significant change i our system of Education , we must take it down to its very foundation and then rebuild it not the stop gap add-on approach we have been utilizing for the last 30 years!. 10.} the last thing we need is anothe rUn proven billion dollar  bureaucracy to truly reform education!

Enjoy the readings the full report which I have attached is well worth your time to read. It gives extra-ordinary insight into the issues especially for those of you who consider yourselves to b e Psycometricians.

P.S. Note the fact that this is the first time in the over 20 year history of the program that voucher students had to take the test! the irony is the legislature who pushed this approach are saying that one standardized test does tell you how successful a school is? Remember when public school advocates use to say that and were told they were obstructionists to reform. Is not IRONY GRAND1 Is not Political hypocrisy's amazing!

Irony and Insanity come to Fruition in the Pa Senate:

 The Senate Education Committee voted to continue down the path of irony and insanity by passing Senate Bill 1.  It is now rapidly careening down the path of self destruction and calling the proposed school voucher bill an “opportunity scholarship”.

The bill, intended to help the state’s poorest children from the lowest-performing schools by providing options of attending other public, private or parochial schools, did not pass the committee without debate.  The troubling issues that many of us have discussed, including constitutionality, religious freedom and the cost to public schools were sticking points for two members of the committee.

The Senate Education Committee is composed of six Republicans and four Democrats. Co-sponsoring the proposed legislation is Democratic Sen. Anthony Williams and Senate Education Committee Chair Jeffrey Piccola (R-Dauphin).  All six Republicans supported the bill, as did two Democrats, Williams and Sen. Andy Dinniman.  Dinniman had some suggested amendments to the bill, including testing and accountability from the non-public schools.  This was a simple request in light of the fact that frequent rhetoric coming from our Legislative leaders on data driven decision making.  They weren’t even considered. Why would the proponents of Vouchers and or Charter Schools continue to hide from research driven analysis of their programs?  Because what little research we do have, like the Milwaukee and Cleveland reports, indicate at best marginal success and at worst, like the Cleveland study for the 2010 student progress, shows that Public Schools outperformed their Voucher student counterparts in every area between the grades 3 to 9! 

Democrats Jim Ferlo and Daylin Leach were the members of the committee opposing school voucher bill.

Leach debated the proposed legislation on the grounds that the bill is not constitutional.  A view that I happen to concur with as do many other legal scholars despite the Supreme Court’s decision in 2002 case Zelman vs. Simmons-Harris.

 Ferlo and Leach are concerned that the voucher system could erode public schools whereas the others feel that the legislation actually offers a lifeline to those children trapped in the low-performing schools. The opposing sides present two distinctly different ways of looking at the same situation.  Piccola suggests that Leach’s argument that the school voucher legislation is unconstitutional is an erroneous interpretation of the Pennsylvania Constitution. The chair of the Senate Education Committee also dismissed the argument that the bill is in conflict with the state constitution in regards to support of religious schools with public money.

With all the questions swirling around this legislation, why did the Senate Education Committee seemingly just push it along through the system?  Usually, I would be complaining about the slowness of government process, but it is amazing the way this school voucher bill is bulldozing its way through Harrisburg.

Aside from the many questions, concerns and debates swirling around this voucher bill, why don’t we hear much about the cost of this ‘opportunity scholarship’? Is it simply that if the proponents told the truth about this approach they would have to acknowledge that much like in the case of Milwaukee, Cleveland and Florida tax payers were required to kick in more money to make up for the reduction in school district subsidies, sub-contracting of services, substantially larger class sizes, elimination of related arts programs such as music and arts, after-school programs and furloughs!

Gov. Corbett swept into the Governor’s office under the umbrella of austerity and budget constraints.  Can someone please explain to me how the estimated $1billion dollars in taxpayer costs by the end of the third-year phase of the voucher program meet that mission?  This 1billion does not take into consideration the dollars the bill will siphon from the public schools. 

Our newly elected Governor will introduce a budget that takes another 1 billion in state aid from PA’s school districts.

 Let me put that into some context for you.

The State’s share of Public education amounts to 5.1 billion dollars; so we are now planning to take one-fifth of the largest share of school district revenues away!

 Recently the Governor put a 364 million dollar freeze on state spending; of that amount 337 million was school funding.

 Why choose school funding for the largest share of this freeze: simple, because it could be made up by federal stimulus dollars.

 School Superintendents were informed of this freeze last Thursday by e-mail.!

The state is using 387 million dollars of unspent Federal jobs monies to help balance this year’s budget.

 The legislature is also using 654 million in federal stimulus monies to bridge the gap this year. Does anyone other than me see the absolute Irony in this approach! These very same Politicos’s constantly lamenting the infringement of the Federal Government in State matters: Yet they have absolutely no problem claiming how they wonderfully balanced our budget without revealing the fact that they used the federal villainous Federal Governments dollars to do it! If that is not the height of hypocrisy then I do not know its real face!

 There is a 1 billion dollar hole that needs to be filled next year!

This budget also sets the state’s expenditure levels for Education back to the 2005-06 levels!

Again who will be affected by this?

 Local School Districts and Boards will be required to raise taxes to make up the difference because legislative mandates will not have been taken off their backs by those in Harrisburg who preach fiscal responsibility.

This is not a new tactic! A previous Governor followed the exact same path in making himself appear to be a fiscal conservative by passing program costs on to County Governments and Local School Boards. Indeed he may have been the one who sent us down the road toward our current Pension Crisis!

Local Districts may be asked to pay more and still have to cut programs so that our Legislative Leaders can again engage in the oldest charade and shell game of all – “shift the blame”.  They tout a new program as if it would not raise state taxes. No tax increase at the state level but for local governments that is another matter.  The money has to come from somewhere!!

 Just one last question; How do our elected officials justify risking 2 to 4 billion dollars of taxpayer monies on programs, that as my last article states are unproven and at the very best marginally successful on the academic performance side and certainly more costly on the fiscal side?

Senate Bill 1: A classic illustration of the definition of Insanity

On March 1st of 2011 the Pennsylvania Legislature and its Senate Education Committee will demonstrate its inability to avoid following failed or unproven programs and initiatives.

The vote on Senate Bill 1 is a vote which could potentially remove 1 billion dollars from already cash strapped school districts in our state.

 Local school districts must pay for each student who uses a voucher out of its funds.  The cost is often more than the real dollars allotted for each public school student.  Therefore, the local district ends up spending much more of its monies on students going to other schools than it does on its own students.

The following Tuesday our new governor will introduce his first fiscal budget, by all accounts that budget will reduce spending on public education by another 1 billion dollars! A situation he did not create but has inherited do to the kick the can approach of many Governors and Legislatures before him.

So in a matter of two weeks public schools in our state could get hit with a loss of 2 billion dollars in revenue that will be added to the current 4 billion dollar state-wide budget shortfall.

For what?  So that a number of centrally located school districts can provide vouchers to some of their students! Senate Bill 1 would institute state sanctioned and funded vouchers.  Who will make up this budget shortfall in areas like ours where the districts will receive little to nothing in real or perceived assistance from this initiative?

The history of the state funded for-profit vouchers and their related success is at best unclear and at worst another mythical success akin to the great for- profit Charter School experiment. The limited research we do have tells us that vouchers are directly linked to for-profit Charters or Catholic schools in that there is where most students wind up going.

The history of State funded vouchers really begins with the Milwaukee Experiment in the 1990; therefore it has been the most studied. What does the research tell us about the success of that great experiment? In truth not very much because after 1995 the State of Wisconsin ironically embargoed and or suspended progress reports on students’ performance due to fears of religious entanglements.  From the outset Catholic Schools declined to share their students’ progress. Voucher student reports only ever included about 8% of the public school students eligible and well below the 15% cap permitted in the legislation. Therefore, we have little to no specific data as to its effectiveness. Research on student achievement can best be characterized by stating that it is inconclusive: The Witte study found no significant improvement in math while Rouse and Greene found improvement. Green found significant improvement in reading while Rouse and Witte did not.  

The next grand experiment occurred in Cleveland in 1995.
The Cleveland experiment at one point included about 7% of the eligible public school students. This current year’s data clearly demonstrates that Cleveland’s public school student’s do as well as or better than their publicly funded voucher program students. A similar set of data results as found in the Stanford University study of Charter Schools. In grades 3 to 8 Cleveland’s public school students had on average 56% of its students perform at the proficient level while their counterparts in voucher programs had 49% score in the proficient range. The data is even more compelling in math with public school students having 42% on average proficient while their counterparts in voucher programs had 27% proficiency average.

Ohio hired Indiana University researchers to sample and analyzes Cleveland voucher students' academic data from 1998 through 2004. The work evaluated the performance of 4,000 students in 100 schools.
The study, which followed individual students over time, found that when researchers controlled factors such as minority status and prior academic records, there was no significant variation in achievement.

 “The study found no significant differences in achievement between the two groups at the end of the first year. By the end of the second year, the study found positive effects in language and science for voucher students on average. But according to this study, voucher students in new private schools performed significantly less well by the end of the second year than either the public school group or voucher students in pre-existing private schools. Students who left the voucher program after a year also performed less well than those who stayed.”

 The program in Florida was the first state-wide initiative. The Florida program requires students receiving vouchers to take state assessments but the rest of the population of the schools they attend are not required to do so. As was the situation in Cleveland; Florida had its Voucher Program declared unconstitutional in 2000! Florida has commissioned The Universities of Florida and Princeton, as well as the Urban Institute to complete research on student achievement. The research data is best characterized in the report done by the Center for Educational Policy when it states:

Publicly funded voucher programs in the U.S. have been subject to surprisingly little research compared with the attention they have attracted.

Much has been made about the relatively few studies of publicly funded programs. A lack of cooperation among people on different sides of the issue has probably inhibited researchers from undertaking other studies. There is a need for additional high-quality research.

 What do we know for certain about publicly funded voucher programs?

Data supports improvement in student performance in Public Voucher Programs when it is directly linked to small class size and major parent participation and involvement in their child’s education. How ironic, when public school teachers speak of these two issues it is perceived as them scape-goating or justifying their own poor performance.

 In order to account for improvement in performance, voucher programs permit statistical considerations for minority status and socio-economic background as well as prior academic performance {something public schools are never permitted to do. we count them all}.

Parents who choose publicly funded voucher alternatives do so for reasons of safety and security. Ironic, did public school teachers and administrators make the laws that make it so difficult to discipline unruly students? No! Was it they who allowed private schools to dismiss unruly students much more readily. No!

 Research reports on Student performance success indicators have centered almost exclusively in large urban centers.

Audits of publicly funded voucher programs have shown record keeping, compliance, overpayments, and reporting problems.

Attrition rates range from 44% to 23% depending on the years enrolled in the program. Ironic again in that how will Public, non-Public and Private schools be able to efficiently plan for budget, programming, curricular ,transportation and staffing needs with this kind of fluctuating enrollments! How is this increased efficiency?

Consistent and accurate data collection and reporting has been a major problem.

Another unanswered question is how publicly funded voucher programs impact racial segregation and social stratification.

Publicly funded voucher programs do not and are not designed to save taxpayer monies. In Milwaukee there was not significant change in educational dollars. It was directly related to a significant tax increase passed on to all taxpayers prior to the voucher programs implementation. Thus taxpayers paid more. In some cases local districts paid an additional 0.06 % of their tax base to funding public voucher programs!

I cannot honestly be opposed to vouchers, charter schools and or any other such type of reforms and still be true to myself. I am simply saying that before we head into another piecemeal fix to our Educational System let us get the real performance data before we spend billions of taxpayer dollars!

I am in favor of taking the public school system down to its boot straps and rebuilding it anew without creating another bureaucratic program.

Why not allow public schools to opt out of the numerous ineffective mandates and laws that are strangling them in their efforts to reform! Strip the old model down to its bare bones and rebuild it from the wheels up and not just another paint job on an old and outdated structure! This public education system has been the very foundation of this great Democracy and Nation! It simply needs to be completely overhauled so the new and great ideas and changes don’t disappear and become invisible!

If you think I am blaming one party over the other you are sadly mistaken.  They are equally responsible and we allow it! Democracy, by definition, only works when those governed are active, knowledgeable participants in the process of governance. That does not mean watching or listening to the current diatribes of the figure head networks or cable news programs mouth pieces! They are about entertainment and generating market share and nothing more!

In the interest of full disclosure; I myself am a product of a Catholic school education. I recently discussed these topics with one of my sisters who currently has five grandchildren attending Catholic schools. She asked me what I thought of vouchers for Catholic school students. She was herself not sure if this was appropriate.  I do not believe that my family’s decision to send me to Catholic school should come at the expense of the State. In my limited knowledge of the law I see it as a clear violation of the “Separate of Church and State Clause of our Constitution” despite the Supreme Court’s 5-4 2002 ruling in Zelman vs. Simmons-Harris. I know the argument that Catholic families give.  I pay taxes toward the funding of public education and receive no tangible direct benefit for my monies. Acknowledged!

 However, I know many people who rent and pay little to nothing toward the cost of their children’s public education.  I also know many people who have paid into the un-employment trust fund and have never received any funds from that program. Our system of Social Security is built on the same principles and would be just fine if our elected officials had not robbed the trust in order to pay for their respective pet projects and then announce to us all that they provided those initiatives without raising taxes!  What a distortion! I also know many folks who buy lottery tickets in the hopes of striking it rich despite the ridiculous odds against winning so that the state and local government can provide services to our elderly!

The point simply is that our nation has been governed by the principle that we all kick in to benefit those amongst us who are less fortunate!

Real Education Funding in Pa. 1790 to 2010

My Good night piece of trivia for you all to digest: For all those who want to suggest and believe, how much we are currently over paying for Public Education. State Funding began in 1790 and it covered 20% of the costs.in 1940 it reached about 30%. In the 50's when we were scared straight when the Russians launched Sputnik and we had to turn to Public Schools to save our bacon which they  quickly did,  with the help of Dr. Werner Von Braun funding was increased rapidly to 40%.In 1972-73 then things were aslo bleak, we kicked it up to 51% and since that time it has been a steady decline to were it is now 32%. During that decline every Politician{Especially one party in particular} alive kept complaining about how much they were funding Public Ed. So let me get this right with all the unfunded mandates and the States virtual abdication of its responsibilities ; We became the greatest country on the planet at funding levels slightly higher than those of 1790! What am I missing??

Money, Mandates and Education Reform: PA’s Pension Crisis

The pension and retirement law change in 2001 is a classic illustration of what we have all so willing allowed our elected officials to perpetrate upon us and thus we face another fiscal crisis.  A Crisis which is still being ignored by our Legislature in order that they might win favors from their respective Party Leadership.

 Why did the change of 2001 occur?

Primarily the belief that by incentivizing older teachers to retire they could then be replaced with younger, less costly staff. The approach had a twofold problem associated with. It did not fully take into account the substantial increases in salaries those younger teachers would gain over time and it didn’t appreciate how difficult it would be to replace key staff such as science, math and administrative personnel.  Therefore, Districts found themselves in a position of paying top dollar for those key staff in order to attract them.

 Another key factor in this pension crisis is that it was based again on the faulty projection of a never ending investment boom.  We all know how that worked out because we relied on the unfettered free market system and our own collective ambitions.

 Let me be perfectly clear, the Pension Crisis is currently the single most significant issue our legislators face today. They cannot continue to do what they have been doing since the mid 90’s, which is to kick the can down the road to the next group of legislatures, because failure to act now will lead to a major financial disaster in this area and state-wide by 2014!

 In this area alone I would predict that a good number of school districts could find themselves distressed by 2014 without huge tax increases which in themselves may not be able to generate the necessary revenues given the Act 1 limitations and caps.

 We are talking about a statewide calamity because when the state reduced its own required contribution levels, as well as those of school districts contribution levels, at various times by as much as 50-60% below the required amount necessary for the full funding of the Pension System, districts utilized those savings to offset present level expenditures instead of setting the funds aside for the rainy day they knew was coming.  Thus everyone avoided the necessary and dreaded tax increases.

Everyone from the, Governor, Legislature, to the local School Boards at that particular moment in time were roundly applauded for not raising taxes. Well, as we all know now and should have realized then, at some point someone has to pay and now that day that rainy day is here!

The parallels are striking with what is transpiring on the national stage now relative to tax cuts and hopefully we will not allow ourselves to be sold another panacea this time! The Federal tax cuts of the 90’s did not do what they were purported to accomplish in then and there is no assurance that they will now!

 Let me make clear up another myth now: Teachers have always and still do pay their share into the system.  It is the State and Local School Districts that have NOT.   Teachers, on the other hand, never received exemptions.

 I like many others of my former Teacher and Administrator colleagues went into the profession because we loved what we did.  It certainly was not for the pay which at the outset of my career was $3,800.00 annually.  However, with the promise of a guaranteed retirement I could feel somewhat assured in the end. When I entered the profession no one really cared about my retirement plan. The $3,800 annual salary made the vast majority of full-time working teachers and administrators eligible for food stamps although very few ever took advantage of the program. My retirement was seen as an incentive to attract people into a poor paying profession at that time! In fact, some in our society considered it a joke to be a teacher because of the poor financial benefits.

    Personally, I was in favor of many of Legislative acts and changes previously referred to in this and other writings and have contributed greatly to the increase in overall costs because we as a society could not continue to ignore those amongst who were less fortunate and thus not being served.

 I am simply saying that I like many others were constantly permitting ourselves into being hood winked by “The Heartless Lions we elected to office” because we so desperately want to believe that there exists a free ride.  As a nation or state just tell us the facts and the cost of a program you want to implement! Better yet, how about in this information technology and internet age, survey every registered taxpayer on that particular issue by asking the same two questions.

1. Do you really want or need this?

 2. Do you want or need it bad enough to be willing to pay for it?

 Unfortunately most Elected Officials and Pollsters today simply ask the first question and not the second. You get an entirely different set of responses when you ask both questions.

So again, who has to picks up the cost? Local taxpayers who were never really fully informed of the potential costs! Then those State-level elected officials go to Washington and repeat their voodoo programs at that level.

How much has the cost of Public Education gone up?

 Well, it depends on how you look at the numbers! If you look at the cost of Regular Education alone the Sandia Labs study indicates the cost has risen pretty much in line with COLA rates. If, however, you look at the cost of Public Education from the perspective of mandated special programs the increase reaches over 330%.

Please understand clearly that I am not saying we should not be offering these types of programs. I am, however, saying we need to better understand, what the costs are up front and why the costs may greatly increase over time! As some districts have found, the per pupil expenditure cost of just one student with special needs can exceed millions of dollars. 

I do, however, also believe that we must re-construct and pay entirely and pay for those programs : such as Vocational Education, Special Education, Bi-lingual Education, Transportation, Compulsory Education/ Attendance, Discipline and Alternative Education , Merit Pay, School Choice , Professional Development , School Calendar/Day and perhaps most importantly the tremendous cost burden litigation places on Schools today. We must simply keep in mind our responsibility: caveat emptor!

Money, Mandates, and Reform in Education: The Current McCarthyism

In last week’s article we said we would separate the facts from the myths as they pertain to public schools in our state and nation. We propose to break those realities into three perspectives on current Education reform; Financial, Assessment / International Comparisons and School choice or Charter schools initiatives. In this article, we center on the real financial costs of Public Education because one of the most frequently expressed concerns by taxpayers is the cost. Is it expensive? Absolutely!  If it’s the priority that everyone in this country says it is, perhaps that is as it should be.

 Let’s examine the real dollars and cents of this issue from a very local perspective.

If you took the average per pupil expenditure for a student in one of Somerset Counties’ School Districts your average cost would be roughly $12,500 per student. If that family had 3 children the mean cost to that district would be $37,500 to educate, transport and provide co-curricular programs for those three children.  Assume now that family pays roughly $2,000 in school district property taxes and if they rent they pay nothing. They are essentially receiving $37,500 in education while paying $2,000 dollars or nothing in out of pocket expenses. Obviously they may also be paying state and federal taxes; some of which are returned to each school district in programs and services.

That, however, creates another issue; funding inequity. Several districts in the county appear to be wealthy because of valuable real estate held by large corporate entities in their respective boundaries. However, when you look at those districts in terms of their residents’ ability to pay property taxes, their income levels indicate some of the lowest per capita incomes in this state!  The State’s response to those districts is either you increase local taxes to higher levels or your funding formula from us will still be kept to minimal levels. Well, as you imagine, those districts are faced with the reality of raising taxes on individual property owners who rank amongst some of the poorest in the state based on per capita income data. If they raise taxes on those corporate entities and businesses they run the risk of losing either some jobs or, in other cases, the entire business itself.

The Somerset County district which had the highest per pupil expenditure in 2008-2009 was the Shanksville – Stonycreek School System which had a reported per pupil cost of $14,113 and an MP/PI aid ratio of 0.24 {most Local districts contribute 76% of every dollar spent} and an average teacher salary of $45,167. The three districts with lowest local taxing efforts are Shade:  0.74, average salary $48,557, Windber: 0.70, average salary $56,585 and Meyersdale: at 0.68, average salary $58,195. Two of those districts {Meyersdale-$58, 195 and Windber-$56,585} have average teacher salaries above the state average which is $56,091.

The problem here is districts such as Meyersdale and Windber with some of the lowest local taxing capability and effort can afford to spend more on salaries and student programs because they stand to receive .70 cents or.68 cents return for every dollar they spend. Districts like Shanksville 0.24, Rockwood 0.36 {average salary $51,732}, and Somerset 0.46 {average salary$54,663} are required to support their cost for education to a large extent from local taxes, while others can rely on State funds to a greater extent.

 This situation is compounded in the districts with the higher local taxing effort in that when it comes to competitive grant programs those districts which have high local effort are usually ruled out totally or partially because they are perceived to be wealthy.

We must all understand this is in no way anyone in particulars fault, but rather a systemic problem due to the archaic funding system our state Legislature and both political parties choose to utilize and lack the courage to alter!

 My purpose in this report has nothing to do with finding fault with the 501 school districts in this state, but rather to acquaint the public with the real problem and that is the archaic system they are forced to operate in! Hopefully the public will stay informed and district leaders will more systematically educate and inform their respective communities, not just during periods of labor strife or turmoil.

 District leaders in this information age should better utilize their information technology tools to more frequently survey their communities and inform them of the thankless struggles they face daily. If a student can text a survey or inform a group of students about the comings and goings of their social group; how difficult can it be for a school district with all its technological resources to conduct serious civic engagement questionnaires in order to achieve real community feedback on the issues rather than accepting simplistic statements like, “My Constituents want.” when deciding a course of action for their respective communities. It can and must be done in this day and age when we are allegedly basing our decision making on another of our educational clichés, “Data Driven Decision Making”.

The cost of Public Education is high but compared to what? Research has shown us that Public Schools overall are a bargain when compared to private schools and certainly less than charter schools, in particular Cyber Charter Schools when you factor out the cost of mandates and bricks and mortars issues faced by Public Schools.

 In later articles we address the assessment data question.  We can and will demonstrate clearly that there are many misconceptions about Public, Charter, and Cyber-Charter School performance.

After all many of the same people complaining about the cost of educating a child think nothing of spending hundreds, even thousands of dollars on sporting events or paying professional athletes millions of dollars in salaries to entertain themselves. Is it any coincidence that teams with the highest payrolls like the Yankees, Red Sox, Lakers, and Celtics consistently win championships while teams with the lowest payrolls like the Pirates, Brewers, Bucks, and Clippers regularly finish at the bottom?

Is it just about more money?  Absolutely not!   As I have often stated unequivocally.  Can it assist in the furtherance of great ideas? A resounding YES! Our problem in Education has been we have been doing the reverse; putting more money first and then hope we come up with a great idea! 

My point here is very simply this.  No matter what our political parties’ leaders attempt to convince us of on a regular basis?  Quality Education in an extremely divergent society with increasingly dysfunctional families is EXPENSIVE!!