| Life after I-884: Moving beyond the rhetoric (Part I of II) 11/8/04
There’s nothing new in the rhetoric—and that’s the problem. It’s time to consider the fact that we may already be spending enough money on education, we just aren’t spending it effectively. And it’s time to discuss the crucial need for structural reforms in our outdated, monopolistic education delivery system. If you’re one of the many people in our state who believe we aren’t spending enough on public education, ask yourself: How much are we spending right now? Are we spending it wisely? How much would be enough? The most common answer to those questions is a blank stare, which isn’t surprising. Most of us have been the target of a relentless, decades-old campaign by members of the education establishment who have never and will never believe education is “adequately funded.” After all, they want to be in a growth industry just like everyone else. Understanding and acknowledging that fact is not unkind. It just means we should stop blindly basing our opinions and decisions about education policy on false assumptions. What are the facts about education spending in our state? We’re currently spending about $9.2 billion a year for K-12 schools (local, state and federal funds combined). That’s about $9,400 per student per year. K-12 spending increased 31 percent in real dollars between 1993 and 2003. Per-pupil spending during that same time increased 34.8 percent in real dollars (16.5 percent inflation adjusted). The state’s general fund operating budget for public colleges and universities is roughly $2.7 billion every two years—an amount that doesn’t include capital (building) expenses. Higher education spending increased by 45.4 percent (nearly three times the rate of inflation) between 1993 and 2003. Of course it costs money to provide a quality education. But how you spend that money is just as important as how much. Of the $9.2 billion spent on K-12 education in 2002-03, only 42.5 percent was used for “basic instruction” (teacher salaries, curriculum, etc.), which means nearly 60 percent was used for other programs and support services. In our public colleges and universities, millions of dollars are misspent due to low graduation rates (only 60 percent of students graduate after six years); low teacher/student contact time (the average teaching faculty reports twelve hours or less in class or meeting with students each week); and high remediation rates (57 percent of all first-year community college students must take high school level courses). Blindly assuming more money will solve our education problems is bad for taxpayers and students. We’re spending more today than ever before, yet one out of three students fails to graduate from high school, 61 percent of our state’s tenth graders fail state assessments, and 43 percent of our new high school graduates must take remedial courses in reading, writing or math. Why? Because we have a broken, monopolistic education delivery system that isn’t going to be fixed by expansion. Imagine running our grocery stores the way we run our schools. Each of us would be assigned a store based on our zip code and the products in that store would be determined by state-level bureaucrats. If we didn’t like the store we were assigned, we could check with another nearby store and hope they had enough products to allow us to shop there. Outrageous, right? We all know monopolies are bad news for consumers, so why do we imagine they’re good for our kids? Students need highly qualified teachers, clear and rigorous academic standards, strong school leaders, smaller schools, and meaningful parental involvement. We will never achieve these goals until we eliminate most of the 1,300 pages of small-print rules and regulations that stifle local schools; start paying teachers based on how well they do their jobs instead of how long they’ve had them; give principals the authority they need to select and remove staff and direct budgets; make sure more than half of the dollars spent get to the classroom; and reform the unfair laws that allow a monopoly labor union to control school policies that impact students. If we care about the children in our state getting an excellent education, we need to stop protecting and expanding a broken system at their expense. Legislators should move beyond the rhetoric and implement the solutions that work. (Watch for Part II next week: “Life after I-884: Solutions that work.”) Marsha Richards directs the Education Reform Center for the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a policy research organization dedicated to individual liberty, free enterprise and accountable government. Contact: Marsha Richards | Education Reform Center Director | 360-956-3482
Life After I-884: Solutions that work (Part Two)
11/20/04 There are two major sides in the education reform debate: those who believe the answer to almost all deficiencies is “more money,” and those who believe our education delivery system is broken and in need of some serious structural changes. We all know quality education isn’t free and we have repeatedly said “yes” to cries for more money. Unfortunately, while we’re spending more today than ever before (no matter how you slice the pie chart), student achievement over the past couple of decades is represented by flat or falling lines. This stagnation is unacceptable, since crisis lows in achievement prompted the nationwide call for reform in the first place. It’s time to acknowledge the insanity of expecting different results while we continue to do the same thing over and over. Arbitrary infusions of more money won’t fix a broken education delivery system any more than a new paint job will fix a car with engine trouble. We need to adopt a successful model. We can start by renouncing the idea that our current education delivery system is somehow worth protecting for its own sake. Public education isn’t about a system, it’s about students. Few on either side of the education debate will disagree on what students need: Highly qualified teachers; clear and rigorous academic standards; strong school leaders; small, locally controlled schools; and meaningful parental involvement. The debate centers around whether or not we can provide these needs while protecting and expanding our education system in its current form. The answer is “No.” Our education system has devolved into an unwieldy, bureaucratic monopoly. Like any other monopoly, this one breeds expensive mediocrity. Successful reforms will dismantle the monopoly and put control back into the hands of local parents, teachers and administrators. Here’s what we need to do: 1. Put a highly qualified teacher in every classroom. Our current system discourages excellence by paying teachers based not on how well they do their jobs, but how long they’ve had them. We should instead adopt a flexible salary model that removes the arbitrary salary cap, rewards demonstrably excellent teachers, and allows incentives to attract teachers to high-demand subjects. We can objectively evaluate teachers by adopting value-added assessments, which measure individual student academics at the beginning and end of each year to determine the value they received from a year’s instruction by a given teacher or school. We should streamline and enhance the state’s alternative certification programs to allow qualified individuals (those who can demonstrate knowledge and ability) to teach in our classrooms. 2. Ensure academic rigor and financial accountability. We expect more from our public schools and teachers than ever before, but that doesn’t always mean we should. If we want them to deliver quality education, we can’t also demand that they be mom, dad, nurse, therapist and babysitter. No amount of money will make it possible. Schools need well-defined mission statements with a clear academic focus. To ensure that academic missions are achieved, education agencies should be required to submit regular reports to the legislature (in a format and language easily accessible to parents, media and other concerned citizens) showing how each dollar spent adds maximum value to student achievement. The legislature should mandate that a majority percentage of allocated dollars follow students to the school building and classroom where learning takes place (currently less than half of the dollars spent are used for basic instruction). 3. Ensure that schools have strong and accountable leaders. School principals need authority and flexibility to organize and motivate schools to achieve their academic missions. Right now, principals in Washington’s schools have very little authority over hiring, firing or the school budget. This must change. 4. Return control to local parents, teachers and administrators. Washington’s public schools are required to comply with 1,300 pages of small-print rules and regulations handed down by the state and federal government. This stifles creativity and flexibility and soaks up resources that could be spent to benefit students more directly. Legislators should determine which regulations are necessary to ensure basic health, safety, civil rights and academic achievement, and get rid of the rest. Sadly, adopting these common sense reforms will not be easy. Changes in structure mean changes in routine, and routines are comfortable, familiar, easy, and fiercely defended. As we move forward, we need to remember that public education is not about protecting jobs for adults or preserving and expanding one kind of delivery system; it’s about giving students the academic tools they need to pursue and achieve their dreams. With the right focus, we can fix what’s broken. (To read Part I, “Life After I-884: Moving beyond the rhetoric,” visit: http://www.effwa.org/opeds/2004_11_08.php.) Marsha Richards directs the Education Reform Center for the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a policy research organization dedicated to individual liberty, free enterprise and limited, accountable government.
|