Remember the Jetsons? Poor George, a computer engineer, was the foil of his stereotypical tough boss, the bombastic Mr. Spacely, owner of Spacely's Space Sprockets. To be fair, Mr. Spacely, even with his Adolph Hitler mustache wasn't intentionally evil, just meddlesome. He was a business owner trying to compete with his rival, Cogswell. Together Cogswell and Spacely got in a heap of trouble and George always took the heat.
So, it wouldn't surprise me that if Spacely received a delivery of bad parts, he'd send them back and insist on a credit to boot. He knows he has to build a superior product - a Sprocket.
What if Spacely had been a Principal Spacely in a school when he got that same delivery of bad parts - children, who from the moment they were conceived were at-risk. Principal Spacely still has to deliver a solid product - a high achieving school. But, he can't send these bad parts back, can he?
And that's where the business model being inflicted upon the PreK-12 education system becomes a guaranteed failure. Yelling "Jetson" isn't going to fix it. And yet - pro-business reformers, RTTT champions, continue to claim the failures of the education system sit squarely on the shoulders of bad teachers (they would have you believe all teachers are bad teachers) and unions are at fault. It's divide and conquer.
What we as citizens and tax payers need to remember is that public schools were not designed to be profitable, not as entities in and of themselves and not through the various routes that tax dollars drip into our classrooms. This doesn't mean there are not efficiencies that can and should and often times have been made.
In the greater context, education spending pulls in a profit in the number of qualified and competent employees we put forth into society - either as career-ready grads or students who choose to matriculate into higher education. There are millions of graduates of public education gainfully employed, far more than those who are not. In fact, there is a shortage of livable wage-earning positions to accommodate our competent graduates.
No one can ignore those fields that seem to have a shortage of solid candidates, and that truly is a societal failure to acknowledge and deftly adapt education to the changing markets of the world. But, just what kept education leaders from responding in a timely manner? Clearly the prescriptions and manipulations of the funding formulas that control just how public education monies can be spent have historically damned the adoption of supporting technology and new career path development.
Take Bayard Middle School in Wilmington for example. Accidentally named a PZ school by the Department of Education in 2011, several weeks of planning by district personnel furthered to develop an already identified "bold exploration" (see the CSD Strategic Plan) - the develop of a 6-12 STEM academy in Wilmington. The funding injected by the PZ designation would have jump started the conversion of this school. However, the promise of those funds were withdrawn when DOE realized that they failed to calculate Bayard's historical achievement data correctly. The DOE then skipped over two other failing schools serving urban students and sent the money downstate to Laurel, a district that many assert is on the verge of financial collapse due to successive cuts in state funding. This move by DOE has been seen by critics as a conciliatory slide of hand to Laurel.
The Bayard debacle failed to incite the ire of Wilmington's elected paid politicians and quietly slipped away, leaving the school district holding the tab incurred while planning and seriously delayed the implementation of a "turn around" at a school that is destined to find a home on the DOE's under-achieving list. The interventions needed at Bayard will have to come from local funds - at a price tag that would devastate the district's ability to fairly, properly fund it's many other schools in accordance with the funding prescriptions that come from the state and feds. The future turnaround at this school will be slow and right now, is tentative at best. Yes, the PZ funding never belonged to Bayard, but it should have flowed to the next school on the list - and it didn't. I can't think of a finer example of manipulation of funding.
Putting the Pieces Together
What Race to the Top has taught us is that even the federal policymakers recognize that public education needs an infusion of funds, not the systematic reduction that state governments are inflicting. The ARRA stimulus funds of 2009 required states to maintain their funding of public education at the previous year's level. The writing is on the wall. Public education will cost Americans more as we try to move forward into a technology-based market after the fall-out of the Great Recession. Public schools must turn out graduates who are prepared for today's current career opportunities while competing with millions of un-employed and under-employed yet experienced workers during an a job shortage crisis.
We've learned that it doesn't matter how prepared our students are if the jobs are not there. And while federal and state policymakers are focused on college and career ready grads, we need our leaders to ensure those jobs and careers will exist- something that has simply not happened in part due to the constant fighting between political parties. It's rather demoralizing for our rising seniors - the understanding that the pay-off for their commitment to education may not be there when they are ready for it.
The conversion to great schools is costly. We've spent ten years under the confines of No Child Left Behind, a law that punished schools for failure rather than provide these schools with the funds to convert to pertinent and responsive centers of education. As the ESEA is again up for renewal and will be so perennially until our political parties can agree, we must urge them to not loose sight of the children in the classrooms. RTTT funds data coaches. My students need teachers, capable teachers, and more of them - trained in the new market that these students will eventually arrive to - much more than they could ever need a data coach. My students need fidelity to best practices to implement vetted research-affirmed, peer-reviewed programmatic and cultural changes that will support their needs while training them for the future needs of the economy. They need extended learning time that begins at 300 hours a year - the minimum amount determined by research and practice to actually affect achievement. My students need smaller class sizes, especially in their early years to help mitigate the effects of an achievement gap that exists for some children from the moment of conception. And today, we need to turn our attention to our middle and high schools, to cut with precision focus through the funding red tape to ensure that all students rising into this time of economic uncertainty will have the opportunities for career success.
Troubled school left unto themselves with no change in the way funds are delivered will be forever slow and timid in delivering a dynamic education. And while we need to employ best practices in all of our schools, we need to do so in a way that preserves those schools that are already achieving success for their students - that means protecting the funding that already flows into those schools. Because each neighborhood, each town, each city is different, each school is a reflection of a socio-economic class. We cannot divert funding from successful schools to pay for reform in under-achieving schools. We have already stated that efficiencies need to be achieved and frequently have been - yet we need to acknowledge that decreasing the dedication of services in a successful school will negatively impact achievement.
We must begin to look at a public school system specifically as being non-profit-bearing, and for that matter as being a giant financial hole, a tax write-off, an entitlement program. We must move away from the concept of educational institutions as a business. Businesses by design break even or generate profit. Schools do not, can not, will not if their only funding is federal, state, and local taxes. Schools are not permitted to accumulate funding except for local taxes. If you don't use your state and federal funding, it's taken back. This puts districts in a tremendously difficult position of wanting to deploy targeted funds when it would be illegal to do so. Current funding formulas have indeed tied our hands.
What I know for sure is this - Businessman do not belong in the classroom, which is squarely where they have inserted themselves. When a Media Mogul creates an Enterprise to contract with state departments of education to supply the likes of data coaches, I am certain of two things - 1) some of those data coaches received a public education and 2) the media mogul has just received an influx of funds from education that the tax payers intended to send to the classroom. Business is diverting education funding. The resulting failures are being places squarely on the institution providing the education and everything about this scenario is morally and ethically wrong.
Business has a role to play in education - as employers of our qualified graduates. And that is exactly where businessmen belong. At the very end of the chain. And if they so choose to invest philanthropically in our non-profit education centers - schools - great, but those funds should come with only relevant strings attached - in non-profits this is called "restricted giving."
Education is not a land grab and treating it as such is utter chaos.
Jane, Stop this Crazy Thing!
So, it wouldn't surprise me that if Spacely received a delivery of bad parts, he'd send them back and insist on a credit to boot. He knows he has to build a superior product - a Sprocket.
What if Spacely had been a Principal Spacely in a school when he got that same delivery of bad parts - children, who from the moment they were conceived were at-risk. Principal Spacely still has to deliver a solid product - a high achieving school. But, he can't send these bad parts back, can he?
And that's where the business model being inflicted upon the PreK-12 education system becomes a guaranteed failure. Yelling "Jetson" isn't going to fix it. And yet - pro-business reformers, RTTT champions, continue to claim the failures of the education system sit squarely on the shoulders of bad teachers (they would have you believe all teachers are bad teachers) and unions are at fault. It's divide and conquer.
What we as citizens and tax payers need to remember is that public schools were not designed to be profitable, not as entities in and of themselves and not through the various routes that tax dollars drip into our classrooms. This doesn't mean there are not efficiencies that can and should and often times have been made.
In the greater context, education spending pulls in a profit in the number of qualified and competent employees we put forth into society - either as career-ready grads or students who choose to matriculate into higher education. There are millions of graduates of public education gainfully employed, far more than those who are not. In fact, there is a shortage of livable wage-earning positions to accommodate our competent graduates.
No one can ignore those fields that seem to have a shortage of solid candidates, and that truly is a societal failure to acknowledge and deftly adapt education to the changing markets of the world. But, just what kept education leaders from responding in a timely manner? Clearly the prescriptions and manipulations of the funding formulas that control just how public education monies can be spent have historically damned the adoption of supporting technology and new career path development.
Take Bayard Middle School in Wilmington for example. Accidentally named a PZ school by the Department of Education in 2011, several weeks of planning by district personnel furthered to develop an already identified "bold exploration" (see the CSD Strategic Plan) - the develop of a 6-12 STEM academy in Wilmington. The funding injected by the PZ designation would have jump started the conversion of this school. However, the promise of those funds were withdrawn when DOE realized that they failed to calculate Bayard's historical achievement data correctly. The DOE then skipped over two other failing schools serving urban students and sent the money downstate to Laurel, a district that many assert is on the verge of financial collapse due to successive cuts in state funding. This move by DOE has been seen by critics as a conciliatory slide of hand to Laurel.
The Bayard debacle failed to incite the ire of Wilmington's elected paid politicians and quietly slipped away, leaving the school district holding the tab incurred while planning and seriously delayed the implementation of a "turn around" at a school that is destined to find a home on the DOE's under-achieving list. The interventions needed at Bayard will have to come from local funds - at a price tag that would devastate the district's ability to fairly, properly fund it's many other schools in accordance with the funding prescriptions that come from the state and feds. The future turnaround at this school will be slow and right now, is tentative at best. Yes, the PZ funding never belonged to Bayard, but it should have flowed to the next school on the list - and it didn't. I can't think of a finer example of manipulation of funding.
Putting the Pieces Together
What Race to the Top has taught us is that even the federal policymakers recognize that public education needs an infusion of funds, not the systematic reduction that state governments are inflicting. The ARRA stimulus funds of 2009 required states to maintain their funding of public education at the previous year's level. The writing is on the wall. Public education will cost Americans more as we try to move forward into a technology-based market after the fall-out of the Great Recession. Public schools must turn out graduates who are prepared for today's current career opportunities while competing with millions of un-employed and under-employed yet experienced workers during an a job shortage crisis.
We've learned that it doesn't matter how prepared our students are if the jobs are not there. And while federal and state policymakers are focused on college and career ready grads, we need our leaders to ensure those jobs and careers will exist- something that has simply not happened in part due to the constant fighting between political parties. It's rather demoralizing for our rising seniors - the understanding that the pay-off for their commitment to education may not be there when they are ready for it.
The conversion to great schools is costly. We've spent ten years under the confines of No Child Left Behind, a law that punished schools for failure rather than provide these schools with the funds to convert to pertinent and responsive centers of education. As the ESEA is again up for renewal and will be so perennially until our political parties can agree, we must urge them to not loose sight of the children in the classrooms. RTTT funds data coaches. My students need teachers, capable teachers, and more of them - trained in the new market that these students will eventually arrive to - much more than they could ever need a data coach. My students need fidelity to best practices to implement vetted research-affirmed, peer-reviewed programmatic and cultural changes that will support their needs while training them for the future needs of the economy. They need extended learning time that begins at 300 hours a year - the minimum amount determined by research and practice to actually affect achievement. My students need smaller class sizes, especially in their early years to help mitigate the effects of an achievement gap that exists for some children from the moment of conception. And today, we need to turn our attention to our middle and high schools, to cut with precision focus through the funding red tape to ensure that all students rising into this time of economic uncertainty will have the opportunities for career success.
Troubled school left unto themselves with no change in the way funds are delivered will be forever slow and timid in delivering a dynamic education. And while we need to employ best practices in all of our schools, we need to do so in a way that preserves those schools that are already achieving success for their students - that means protecting the funding that already flows into those schools. Because each neighborhood, each town, each city is different, each school is a reflection of a socio-economic class. We cannot divert funding from successful schools to pay for reform in under-achieving schools. We have already stated that efficiencies need to be achieved and frequently have been - yet we need to acknowledge that decreasing the dedication of services in a successful school will negatively impact achievement.
We must begin to look at a public school system specifically as being non-profit-bearing, and for that matter as being a giant financial hole, a tax write-off, an entitlement program. We must move away from the concept of educational institutions as a business. Businesses by design break even or generate profit. Schools do not, can not, will not if their only funding is federal, state, and local taxes. Schools are not permitted to accumulate funding except for local taxes. If you don't use your state and federal funding, it's taken back. This puts districts in a tremendously difficult position of wanting to deploy targeted funds when it would be illegal to do so. Current funding formulas have indeed tied our hands.
What I know for sure is this - Businessman do not belong in the classroom, which is squarely where they have inserted themselves. When a Media Mogul creates an Enterprise to contract with state departments of education to supply the likes of data coaches, I am certain of two things - 1) some of those data coaches received a public education and 2) the media mogul has just received an influx of funds from education that the tax payers intended to send to the classroom. Business is diverting education funding. The resulting failures are being places squarely on the institution providing the education and everything about this scenario is morally and ethically wrong.
Business has a role to play in education - as employers of our qualified graduates. And that is exactly where businessmen belong. At the very end of the chain. And if they so choose to invest philanthropically in our non-profit education centers - schools - great, but those funds should come with only relevant strings attached - in non-profits this is called "restricted giving."
Education is not a land grab and treating it as such is utter chaos.
Jane, Stop this Crazy Thing!
Category:
RTTT the failure
1 comments
Glasgow Reformed Presbyterian Church in Bear is moving ahead with plans to acquire and institute “sweeping reforms” at the financially troubled Red Lion Christian Academy after church members overwhelmingly endorsed the plan today. ...
If the deal goes through, the private school will see significant changes in leadership, values and financial operations, Betters said in an interview. Christian education and academics will be top priority. Red Lion’s football program will not, Betters said.
The school admitted to violations of state athletic rules last year that included too many football games, excessive practices and improperly managing financial aid.
Also controversial was Red Lion’s push to build a nationally recognized powerhouse team.
“We believe we can still have a powerful football program that reaches out and touches young men who wouldn’t otherwise make it. We believe that’s possible with some changes in priorities and shifting of values as we go forward,” Betters said. “I don’t envision us going all over the nation to play football.”
Category:
0
comments
Markell spokesman Brian Selander expressed dismay at the group’s decision to defy the state, for the second straight day, by choosing not to accept the Brandywine Park permit.
“The state made a very reasonable offer with the use of state managed properties at Brandywine and Fletcher Brown park,” Selander said. “It was an offer that respected constitutional rights to be heard and assemble. They've chosen a different path.”
And I pay for the upkeep of the STATE'S parks. BTW - so do all the protesters.
Thank goodness for the Occupy movement. If these organizers hadn't come along, perhaps all of America would have forgotten how Civil Disobedience works and value of rallying behind a cause.
Category:
0
comments
Published Online: November 4, 2011
Academic Gains Vary Widely for Charter Networks
By Nirvi Shah
A new national study on the effectiveness of networks that operate charter schools finds overall that their middle school students’ test scores in reading, mathematics, science, and social studies aren’t significantly better than those of students in regular public schools.
Academic Gains Vary Widely for Charter Networks
By Nirvi Shah
A new national study on the effectiveness of networks that operate charter schools finds overall that their middle school students’ test scores in reading, mathematics, science, and social studies aren’t significantly better than those of students in regular public schools.
Category:
0
comments
From
Early 2013 budget numbers being shared with Educators.
Posted on October 27, 2011 by Wolfe Gary Thanks to Gary for his great post!
By January 2012, the 2013 budgets for Delaware’s schools will begin to take shape, and it has already been rumored that our Leadership in Dover is looking to make even deeper cuts to Education. Already we have one district, Laurel, that is floundering on the edge of not being able to meet its finances after April 2012. Many administrators, school boards, and teachers associations have sat down and looked at where we are today compared to where we were just a few years earlier. Since FY2008, State funding has been completely eliminated for the following programs:
* Reading Resource Teachers $9,431,500
* Math Specialists $3,071,700
* Limited English Proficiency Grant $1,625,000
* Technology Block Grant $1,354,000
* School-Based Discipline Program $8,213,900
* Tax Relief Allocation $17,549,500
* Academic Excellence Allotment $4,595,600
* Extra Time Programs $10,428,000
* Tuition Reimbursement $1,100,000
* Teacher Cadre & Mentoring $1,128,400
TOTAL STATE PROGRAM ELIMINATIONS: $58,497,600
In addition to these program eliminations, many districts have also experienced several reductions in base funding levels:
Division II AOC(funding for classroom, and other day to day supplies)Unit Value $3,274,020 (FY08 $3,279 to FY12 $2,955 at 10,105 Dlv II units)
Division II Energy Unit Value $2,455,515 (FY08 $2,678 to FY 12 $2,435 at 10,105 Div II units)
Professional Development Funding $1,300,000 (FY08 $2,866,500 to FY 12 $1,566,500)
Beyond these program eliminations and base funding reductions, increasing demands are being placed on
local funds (Shift of 10% Transportation Costs $7,133,800) at a time when local assessed values are essentially flat, and other local revenues such as interest, indirect cost and cost recovery collections are in decline. For those wondering what losses looked like around the state:
FY 2012 Loss Based On 2008 Amount Per Unit
Appoquinimink ($3,216,675)
Brandywine ($6,967,025)
Christina ($10,594,538)
Colonial ($4,208,339)
NCCVT ($3,839,781 )
Red Clay ($9,297,025)
Caesar Rodney ($2,374,300)
Capital ($3,244,120)
Lake Forest ($1,591,437)
Milford ($2,757,148)
Poly tech ($554,096)
Smyrna ($2,906,050)
Cape Henlopen ($2,506,117)
Delmar ($814,812)
Indian River ($2,334,774)
Laurel ($1,803,148)
Seaford ($1,787,634)
SVT ($862,796)
Woodbridge ($1,357,726)
Total all Districts: ($63,017,540)
So bottom line is that the cost of educating the next generation is going up in a time when every taxpayer is doing more with less, and raising local taxes is not an option for schools. So what can all those who have a stake in Education do to prevent our students from being cheated out of an education? Here are a few ideas we are discussing in Milford on November 8th with the community at a district wide meeting at the Milford High School Auditorium:
~ Begin lobbying efforts now, prior to the Governor’s Recommended Budget
~ Focus attention on the cumulative state funding reductions that have occurred since FY2008.
~ E.mphasize that federal stimulus funding (State Fiscal Stabilization Funds and EdJobs Funding) were intended to ‘stabilize’ state and local agencies that were experiencing revenue reductions. As revenues increase, these funds should therefore be utilized to restore previous funding reductions.
~ Target restoration funding as follows: 1) restoration of EdJobs funding; 2) restoration of State Fiscal Stabilization funding.
~ Recognize the need for efficiencies and budget reductions, but public education has been disproportionally impacted in recent years.
~ Restoring the public education budget back to its FY2010 percentage of the total budget (33.33%) would add $59,650,400 to the public education budget.
~ Collaborate with DSEA to lobby for funding restoration.
~ Establish consistent individual district meetings with local legislators.
~ Provide legislators with specific legislation to support.
~ Provide flexibility to districts in severe fiscal hardship by allowing districts to ‘cash in’ as many units as necessary to maintain solvency, and to not forfeit Division IIIunit funding for cashed in units.
~ Target the message that the “Foundation is Crumbling”. While we have the benefit of many short-term funding initiatives (i.e. Race to the Top) the core K-12 public education finance structure is not sufficient to maintain current service and performance levels.
Education and Community News from Home Town Delaware
Early 2013 budget numbers being shared with Educators.
Posted on October 27, 2011 by Wolfe Gary Thanks to Gary for his great post!
By January 2012, the 2013 budgets for Delaware’s schools will begin to take shape, and it has already been rumored that our Leadership in Dover is looking to make even deeper cuts to Education. Already we have one district, Laurel, that is floundering on the edge of not being able to meet its finances after April 2012. Many administrators, school boards, and teachers associations have sat down and looked at where we are today compared to where we were just a few years earlier. Since FY2008, State funding has been completely eliminated for the following programs:
* Reading Resource Teachers $9,431,500
* Math Specialists $3,071,700
* Limited English Proficiency Grant $1,625,000
* Technology Block Grant $1,354,000
* School-Based Discipline Program $8,213,900
* Tax Relief Allocation $17,549,500
* Academic Excellence Allotment $4,595,600
* Extra Time Programs $10,428,000
* Tuition Reimbursement $1,100,000
* Teacher Cadre & Mentoring $1,128,400
TOTAL STATE PROGRAM ELIMINATIONS: $58,497,600
In addition to these program eliminations, many districts have also experienced several reductions in base funding levels:
Division II AOC(funding for classroom, and other day to day supplies)Unit Value $3,274,020 (FY08 $3,279 to FY12 $2,955 at 10,105 Dlv II units)
Division II Energy Unit Value $2,455,515 (FY08 $2,678 to FY 12 $2,435 at 10,105 Div II units)
Professional Development Funding $1,300,000 (FY08 $2,866,500 to FY 12 $1,566,500)
Beyond these program eliminations and base funding reductions, increasing demands are being placed on
local funds (Shift of 10% Transportation Costs $7,133,800) at a time when local assessed values are essentially flat, and other local revenues such as interest, indirect cost and cost recovery collections are in decline. For those wondering what losses looked like around the state:
FY 2012 Loss Based On 2008 Amount Per Unit
Appoquinimink ($3,216,675)
Brandywine ($6,967,025)
Christina ($10,594,538)
Colonial ($4,208,339)
NCCVT ($3,839,781 )
Red Clay ($9,297,025)
Caesar Rodney ($2,374,300)
Capital ($3,244,120)
Lake Forest ($1,591,437)
Milford ($2,757,148)
Poly tech ($554,096)
Smyrna ($2,906,050)
Cape Henlopen ($2,506,117)
Delmar ($814,812)
Indian River ($2,334,774)
Laurel ($1,803,148)
Seaford ($1,787,634)
SVT ($862,796)
Woodbridge ($1,357,726)
Total all Districts: ($63,017,540)
So bottom line is that the cost of educating the next generation is going up in a time when every taxpayer is doing more with less, and raising local taxes is not an option for schools. So what can all those who have a stake in Education do to prevent our students from being cheated out of an education? Here are a few ideas we are discussing in Milford on November 8th with the community at a district wide meeting at the Milford High School Auditorium:
~ Begin lobbying efforts now, prior to the Governor’s Recommended Budget
~ Focus attention on the cumulative state funding reductions that have occurred since FY2008.
~ E.mphasize that federal stimulus funding (State Fiscal Stabilization Funds and EdJobs Funding) were intended to ‘stabilize’ state and local agencies that were experiencing revenue reductions. As revenues increase, these funds should therefore be utilized to restore previous funding reductions.
~ Target restoration funding as follows: 1) restoration of EdJobs funding; 2) restoration of State Fiscal Stabilization funding.
~ Recognize the need for efficiencies and budget reductions, but public education has been disproportionally impacted in recent years.
~ Restoring the public education budget back to its FY2010 percentage of the total budget (33.33%) would add $59,650,400 to the public education budget.
~ Collaborate with DSEA to lobby for funding restoration.
~ Establish consistent individual district meetings with local legislators.
~ Provide legislators with specific legislation to support.
~ Provide flexibility to districts in severe fiscal hardship by allowing districts to ‘cash in’ as many units as necessary to maintain solvency, and to not forfeit Division IIIunit funding for cashed in units.
~ Target the message that the “Foundation is Crumbling”. While we have the benefit of many short-term funding initiatives (i.e. Race to the Top) the core K-12 public education finance structure is not sufficient to maintain current service and performance levels.
Category:
1 comments
From the News Journal: HERE Delaware's Charter Schools have a right to funding equity
By: Gregory Meece, director of the Newark Charter School and president of the Delaware Charter Schools Network, and a member of The News Journal's Community View Board.
By: Gregory Meece, director of the Newark Charter School and president of the Delaware Charter Schools Network, and a member of The News Journal's Community View Board.
In 1995, before the ink was dry on the governor's signature on the charter schools law, I signed on to help create Delaware's first charter school. At that time, we didn't expect charter schools to be "the answer" to all of our challenges in public education, but we did see the promise of charter schools as one of the best opportunities to make a dramatic improvement in Delaware's public education landscape.
The results of the charter school movement in Delaware are significant. Charters rank at the top academically at all grade levels. They have been the first to tackle new frontiers in curriculum, teacher incentive pay, site-based management, extended school years, facilities construction, financial autonomy, parent engagement, student uniforms and much more.
There are thousands of students on charter school waiting lists. Almost 80 percent of Delawareans favor charter schools (according to a University of Delaware poll) even though only 9 percent of the student population attends them. Yet progress hasn't been easy, due to an uneven playing field when it comes to the way public charter schools are funded.
The Delaware Charter School Network stands for excellence. But there are times when meeting the high standards we've set for ourselves can be difficult, due to the financial challenges that charters face compared to our district counterparts.
A recent News Journal article rightly highlighted the financial pressures constricting Delaware school districts in the wake of multimillion-dollar state cuts for education. Absent, however, was any mention of the even more acute financial woes of Delaware's 22 public charter schools. We support our public school districts and believe funding adequacy is an issue that must be addressed for all of our schools. But we are one system of public schools, not two. For charter schools, the issue of funding equity is just as important.
In the 2009 report, A New Model Law for Supporting the Growth of High-Quality Public Charter Schools, equitable operational funding and access to capital funding are cited as two "Essential Components of a Strong Public Charter School Law."
And according to Delaware Department of Education data, public charter schools receive nearly 23 percent less per student than traditional district schools, even after excluding the 10 district-operated schools throughout the state that primarily serve resource-intensive, high-needs students.
Several factors can explain this disparity, but the result of this gap is an unfair penalty on charter school students and educators. For example, while Stubbs Elementary, in the Christina School District, might receive $11,437 for Lisa, Prestige Academy -- a mere 10 blocks away -- receives $9,331 for her brother. That translates to less funding available for teacher salaries and much-needed instructional resources.
One of the main reasons for this gap is that charters have neither the ability to raise revenue through referendums nor state funding for major capital costs, such as building upgrades. Public charter schools are forced to pay from 7 to 20 percent of their operating budgets for facilities. Imagine the compounded impact recent state budget cuts have on schools with fewer available dollars to begin with.
Another concern is the formula that districts use to transfer local property tax revenue to charter schools. The guiding principle is "the money follows the child." But districts are permitted to exclude certain categories of local funds before the transfers are made. These deductions are not transparent and often fluctuate dramatically, thereby complicating charter schools budget planning. For example, my charter school budgeted an increase in local funds because our largest feeder district passed a multimillion-dollar operating referendum the previous year. We were shocked to learn that our share of that district's local funds actually decreased substantially.
Further complicating the matter is that the formula for transferring these funds is based not on actual revenues but on district expenditures from the previous year. There is no way for charter schools to "catch up."
Last spring, passage of House Bill 205 represented an important first step toward growing and sustaining high-quality charter schools in the state. We also have resources to draw from to make even more progress. For example, The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools has a menu of best practices for supporting public charter schools' facility needs.
It is my hope that Delaware's General Assembly takes the next big steps in charter legislation: changing policy conditions to give all public school students an equal chance at success regardless of where they go to school. Such policies will encourage high-performing charters to expand, and they will encourage great charters to come into the state.
Sixteen years ago, policy decisions were made as safeguards in the event that charters didn't pan out. Well, we did pan out. Charter schools are here to stay.
Category:
0
comments
Thank you for sharing:
Will the state fund those students elsewhere?
Moyer- If the state or K12 shutter the school this school year - After the critical Sept. 30 count - will the funding follow the students to their new school, assuming the families choose either charter or district options in lieu of private school? Update: DOE Representative says that there will be no funding this year for a private school student entering the public school system post Sept. 30. That's not entirely surprising - Delaware lives and dies by the Sept. 30 count. But, it does raise an ethics question - if a private school fails mid-year, is there an obligation to fund the public education of their students? Most presume that if a private school fails, those parents have the personal resources to send their child to another private school. However, private schools have many children on financial needs scholarships, full or partial. So, if a private school fails, is there a moral obligation to fund the public education of those students who are needs-based scholarships? And if the answer is "yes" then does that same obligation extend to all students? And that's our walk through morals and ethics of education funding for the evening...
Red Lion - If the private christian school with more than 700 students closes due to financial hardship, a closing that seems almost probably, and parents opt for public options - again either district or charter - will the state infuse receiving schools with funding? This one's a bit trickier to predict as Red Lion students don't generate state funding b/c of their private school status.
Esther said...
My friends who work at Red Lion tell me that the reports of their financial problems are greatly exaggerated, and they do not anticipate having to close or to be sold.
October 23, 2011 9:35 PM
Will the state fund those students elsewhere?
Moyer- If the state or K12 shutter the school this school year - After the critical Sept. 30 count - will the funding follow the students to their new school, assuming the families choose either charter or district options in lieu of private school? Update: DOE Representative says that there will be no funding this year for a private school student entering the public school system post Sept. 30. That's not entirely surprising - Delaware lives and dies by the Sept. 30 count. But, it does raise an ethics question - if a private school fails mid-year, is there an obligation to fund the public education of their students? Most presume that if a private school fails, those parents have the personal resources to send their child to another private school. However, private schools have many children on financial needs scholarships, full or partial. So, if a private school fails, is there a moral obligation to fund the public education of those students who are needs-based scholarships? And if the answer is "yes" then does that same obligation extend to all students? And that's our walk through morals and ethics of education funding for the evening...
Red Lion - If the private christian school with more than 700 students closes due to financial hardship, a closing that seems almost probably, and parents opt for public options - again either district or charter - will the state infuse receiving schools with funding? This one's a bit trickier to predict as Red Lion students don't generate state funding b/c of their private school status.
Category:
Delaware needs to step up and ensure any students who transfer out of these schools due to closing are fully funded in their receiving public schools.
2
comments
Low enrollment, a new computer-based school model and low test scores are concerns for Wilmington City Councilman Mike Brown, who said Gov. Jack Markell's administration made a mistake when it picked K12 Inc., a Virginia-based for-profit education company, to run the school after the state Board of Education voted to revoke a local group's control.
"That's the one the governor swore to God he was going to change things around," Brown said. "That's the one where they rode in there on their white horse and said everything was going to be all right -- we got it under control, we got handpicked people, we got people who are HQT, highly qualified teachers. We got this, we got that, we got a whole lot. So, I'm still waiting on it."
That's City Councilman Mike Brown on K12's failure to attract enough students to meet the enrollment target at Moyer. Gov. Markell and DOE brought in K12 to manage the school in 2010. It was rated commendable at the time. K12 has also failed to post the mandated financials on the school website despite two state laws that demand such transparency.
From today's News Journal, a story about the ACLU, free speech, internet usage, and school districts:
I'm going to risk being the lone wolf... I was taught that the first amendment rights are guaranteed rights in so long as they are not used to compromise or infringe upon the rights of others.
Free speech or freedom of expression is the right to speak freely without censorship. However, in practice, this right is not absolute, it's commonly subject to limitations such as libel, slander, obscenity and incitement to commit a crime.
In the context of our global community, there's another document that defines human rights - the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The Universal Declarion is recognized in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and as such the freedom of expression is recognized as Internation Law - one ratified by the United States.
However, Article 19 of the ICCPR stipulates that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".[1][2] Various subsequent governing documents indicate that "limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction or social disapprobation, or both."
Which brings us back to the ACLU and the Capital School District's policies - It's one thing for a citizen to take to the internet to criticize a public figure - an elected official or a department of government. Laws governing slander and libel protect the individual but do not shelter the public persona - the actions of a public person or agency. But, that same right of criticism is NOT afforded to the PRIVATE individual - a student or co-worker - or the PRIVATE life of a public figure.
Unless the NJ left out some brazen language in their story, Captial's policies do not seem to violate the right to freedom of expression in any form. The policies themselves are social disapprobation - an expression of strong disapproval and a pronouncement of what is ethically culpable and that falls right in line with the international interpretation of this human right.
Furthermore, Capital's policies are aligned to legally protected characteristics - race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc. When a person, citing free speech, attacks these characteristics they are essential committing a hate crime. And such behavior from a student would most certainly fall within the social definition of bullying, if not the legal definition. And when these violations occur they erode the fundamental human right to safety.
The question posed to you today: Should the freedom of expression be absolute? even if that means violating the rights of others to safety and/or protection? Should the law protect the reputation of a private individual? Does International law trump National law? And should we be permitted to say what we will even if that means hurting innocent children? Or is the ACLU over-reacting?
In a letter sent to the district last week, Delaware ACLU legal director Richard Morse said the district's (Capital) student social media policy, still in draft form, and a separate employee policy, adopted in August, are both clear violations of First Amendment rights...
The student policy, drafted in August and listed on the Capital board's agenda for Wednesday night, contains a "Prohibited Activities" list that bars students from posting negative comments about individuals or groups based on legally protected characteristics such as race or religion...
Capital's policy governing the online conduct of staff contains the same prohibitions as the student policy, and also bars employees from posting disparaging comments about co-workers, bosses or the public, even while off the clock...
I'm going to risk being the lone wolf... I was taught that the first amendment rights are guaranteed rights in so long as they are not used to compromise or infringe upon the rights of others.
Free speech or freedom of expression is the right to speak freely without censorship. However, in practice, this right is not absolute, it's commonly subject to limitations such as libel, slander, obscenity and incitement to commit a crime.
In the context of our global community, there's another document that defines human rights - the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The Universal Declarion is recognized in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and as such the freedom of expression is recognized as Internation Law - one ratified by the United States.
However, Article 19 of the ICCPR stipulates that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".[1][2] Various subsequent governing documents indicate that "limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction or social disapprobation, or both."
Which brings us back to the ACLU and the Capital School District's policies - It's one thing for a citizen to take to the internet to criticize a public figure - an elected official or a department of government. Laws governing slander and libel protect the individual but do not shelter the public persona - the actions of a public person or agency. But, that same right of criticism is NOT afforded to the PRIVATE individual - a student or co-worker - or the PRIVATE life of a public figure.
Unless the NJ left out some brazen language in their story, Captial's policies do not seem to violate the right to freedom of expression in any form. The policies themselves are social disapprobation - an expression of strong disapproval and a pronouncement of what is ethically culpable and that falls right in line with the international interpretation of this human right.
Furthermore, Capital's policies are aligned to legally protected characteristics - race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc. When a person, citing free speech, attacks these characteristics they are essential committing a hate crime. And such behavior from a student would most certainly fall within the social definition of bullying, if not the legal definition. And when these violations occur they erode the fundamental human right to safety.
The question posed to you today: Should the freedom of expression be absolute? even if that means violating the rights of others to safety and/or protection? Should the law protect the reputation of a private individual? Does International law trump National law? And should we be permitted to say what we will even if that means hurting innocent children? Or is the ACLU over-reacting?
Category:
how about the right to an education umuddled by the political aspirations of the "grown-ups"
0
comments
Check out this Job Posted on TopSchoolJobs.org: Job currently posted on TopSchoolJobs.org
Deputy Director, Recruitment and Selection – The Broad Superintendents Academy
The Broad Center for the Management of School Systems
Los Angeles CA 90024 USA
Full Time - 12 Month
Deputy Director, Recruitment and Selection – The Broad Superintendents Academy
The Broad Center for the Management of School Systems
Los Angeles CA 90024 USA
Full Time - 12 Month
Category:
A goodie but broadie
0
comments
I lost a student a couple years ago. The reality of it touched me more deeply than any other loss I've ever felt. "Fireflies" was one of his favorite songs. As death comes to us when least we expect it, as friends, acquaintances, and family have greeted death and left indelible touches upon our hearts , this is the song I remember, this is the song I think of in those time, for comfort. Thank you to my student for the impression he left upon my life.
This week a long ago friend lost her husband. This song is for her now, too.
This week a long ago friend lost her husband. This song is for her now, too.
Category:
rest sweetly
0
comments
It's official according to Politics K-12 at Edweekcom:
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2011/10/yesterday_was_the_deadline_for.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1
Delaware has filed a Notice of Intent that signifies the state's desire to apply for the NCLB waiver. Yesterday was the deadline for applicants to file a courtesy notification with US DOE.
Delaware joins 38 other applicants in providing notification. Of note - our state indicates that it intends to file for the waiver in mid-February. It should be noted that a state can change it's mind and decide not to apply for the waiver. It should also be noted that Delaware could have opted to apply for the Waiver this coming November, but for whatever reason, opted to wait until February 2012.
However, this is the burning question - If the time is now, if the time was yesterday, if we are Racing to the Top, and seeking Innovation that must be immediate - if our PZ schools have only TWO YEARS to turnaround their achievement and find proficiency - WHY IN A MILLION YEARS WOULD DEDOE APPLY FOR THIS WAIVER?
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2011/10/yesterday_was_the_deadline_for.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1
Delaware has filed a Notice of Intent that signifies the state's desire to apply for the NCLB waiver. Yesterday was the deadline for applicants to file a courtesy notification with US DOE.
Delaware joins 38 other applicants in providing notification. Of note - our state indicates that it intends to file for the waiver in mid-February. It should be noted that a state can change it's mind and decide not to apply for the waiver. It should also be noted that Delaware could have opted to apply for the Waiver this coming November, but for whatever reason, opted to wait until February 2012.
However, this is the burning question - If the time is now, if the time was yesterday, if we are Racing to the Top, and seeking Innovation that must be immediate - if our PZ schools have only TWO YEARS to turnaround their achievement and find proficiency - WHY IN A MILLION YEARS WOULD DEDOE APPLY FOR THIS WAIVER?
Category:
No faith
0
comments
Last night, late in the evening, at our regularly scheduled board meeting, the Christina Board of Education voted 7-0 to establish Delaware's FIRST Public-Montessori program! Chrsitina now heads into a year of planning and preparation that culminate with Montessori classrooms in both the urban portion of our district and the suburban.
The Montessori model comes with substantial historical data validating it's methodologies which include smaller class sizes. For those in Christina who have lobbied for true education reform that directly affects the classroom, we will now embark on a three year pilot during which time we can collect and validate our own Christina-generated data!
Our Montessori model will bring new choice options to Christina students while positioning the district to offer even greater diversification in learning environments. This partnership is a win for Christina's children! I couldn't be prouder than I am today that our Board has taken the steps to invest in proven best-practices in a reknowned model.
Maria Montessori
(1870-1952), Italian educator and doctor, born in Chiaravalle, and educated at the University of Rome. She is best known for the Montessori method of teaching young children, introduced to Rome in 1907. Her method, which has since spread throughout the world, stresses the development of initiative and self-reliance by permitting children to do by themselves the things that interest them, but within strictly disciplined limits. A wide variety of special equipment of increasing complexity is used to help direct the interests of the child and hasten development.
When a child is ready to learn new and more difficult tasks, the teacher guides the child's first endeavours in order to avoid wasted effort and the learning of wrong habits; otherwise the child learns alone. It has been reported that the Montessori method has enabled children to learn to read and write much more quickly and with greater facility than has otherwise been possible. Her writings include The Montessori Method (1912) and Advanced Montessori Method (1917).There is no better investment in education than investing in our classrooms and our students. Warm Gratitidue is due to the Elementary Workshop in Wilmington for engaging Christina in several months of collaboration. Today, it's Children First!
The Montessori model comes with substantial historical data validating it's methodologies which include smaller class sizes. For those in Christina who have lobbied for true education reform that directly affects the classroom, we will now embark on a three year pilot during which time we can collect and validate our own Christina-generated data!
Our Montessori model will bring new choice options to Christina students while positioning the district to offer even greater diversification in learning environments. This partnership is a win for Christina's children! I couldn't be prouder than I am today that our Board has taken the steps to invest in proven best-practices in a reknowned model.
Maria Montessori
When a child is ready to learn new and more difficult tasks, the teacher guides the child's first endeavours in order to avoid wasted effort and the learning of wrong habits; otherwise the child learns alone. It has been reported that the Montessori method has enabled children to learn to read and write much more quickly and with greater facility than has otherwise been possible. Her writings include The Montessori Method (1912) and Advanced Montessori Method (1917).There is no better investment in education than investing in our classrooms and our students. Warm Gratitidue is due to the Elementary Workshop in Wilmington for engaging Christina in several months of collaboration. Today, it's Children First!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
