Tuesday, November 9, 2010

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!!

No comments:

Post a Comment