Is More Money The Answer To The Public Education Crisis?

One of the dirty little secrets in public education is that spending more money on public education will not significantly improve school performance as measured by state assessments. The Annual Performance Index (API) is based on district test scores and other academic measures.   For example, Palo Alto Unified spends $13,376 per student compared to only $8,200 per student in San Carlos.  Even though Palo Alto Unified spends 63% more per student compared to San Carlos, there is only a 2% difference in district API scores.   Portola Valley, at nearly $17,000 per student, spends more than twice as much compared to San Carlos.  Portola Valley’s API score is only 4% higher than San Carlos. 

 Perhaps even more striking is how little impact spending actually has on the academic performance of our Hispanic learners.  Palo Alto’s district score for all learners is 926 but only 760 for its Hispanic population.  Portola Valley’s API score is 941 for all learners but only 797 for its Hispanic population.  San Carlos’ commitment to equity in education appears to be having some success as the gap in performance between all learners and its Hispanic population is the smallest; only 8% compared to an 18% gap for Palo Alto Unified, a 15% gap for Portola Valley’s Hispanic population, and an 11% achievement gap in Belmont for its Hispanic learners.  It is worth noting that San Carlos has narrowed the achivement gap for its Hispanic learners by almost 50% over the last five years.

Over the last twenty years, spending on public education has more than doubled.  Yet, there has been no appreciable improvement in student achievement in the areas of Reading and Math.  Graduation rates remain flat.  And, 75% of all college bound high school graduates still need to take at least one remedial course in college to help improve their basic skills.

Perhaps the real issue is not how much more money school districts should get from the state, but how school district choose to spend the funding school districts currently receive.  It will require a significant change to the financial obligations imposed upon school districts.  Some things that I would recommend school districts to reconsider:

1) Stop paying educators stipends for advanced degrees unless it is directly relevant to their current position. 

2) Stop paying educators for seniority.  Earning guaranteed raises for positions where 97% of the employees across the state earn satisfactory marks is an unacceptable practice.  If teachers and school leaders cannot come together to create an effective evaluation tool for its employees, then this is just a de facto raise with no accountability.  And, the same goes for administrators as well.

3) All administrators’ raises should be performance based and standards should be high with both qualitative and quantitative measures. 

4) Major pension reform.  Currently, school districts pay more than half of all pension costs for its employees.  It is simply unsustainable. 

In addition to these suggested changes to the current funding structure, we need to rethink how we spend our money to generate a greater impact for our learners that will be the most cost effective.  To be innovative and creative, it requires really thinking outside the box.  Please take these suggestions in the spirit of offering a different perspective. These are my ideas and the suggestions are entirely my own

1) Encourage more choice for families.  Charter school options, magnet school options, and voucher options should be more available. 

2) Merge school districts so that leadership skills can be shared.  Woodside with Redwood City or San Carlos with Belmont just to name two examples.  As state financing gets tighter, Sacramento should strongly encourage such action. 

3) Special Education reform.   This will be the next big battle in public education.  The total cost of Special Education at most school districts total between 25%-30% in order to educate 10%-15% of the school’s population. Kids with specialized learning needs certainly should be supported.  The great challenge for all communities around the state is that the costs are just spiraling out of control:  special education services, personnel, private placements and costs of potential litigation is crippling school districts.  School districts that get a reputation of having a strong program become a magnet for families looking for high quality services.  In the Bay Area, specialized private schools will often recommend high quality special education programs of specific school districts for families.  This creates a disproportionate burden.  Perhaps place a hard spending cap for special education on each school district.  Or, create a state funding pool that all school districts can tap with a hard cap on local costs.  Reform is sorely needed.

4) Expand and proliferate online school options at each school district.  Relax Teacher union supported laws that limit class sizes of “online classes”.  Such laws serve only to protect jobs and to stifle innovation. 

5) Employ remote classrooms for middle and high school students and contract out specific classes to professional online/remote access educational programs. 

6) Eliminate Class Size Reduction monies and direct the funds elsewhere to support K-12 education.  It is an obsolete program at this point. 

7) Consider larger class sizes at middle and high school with a Master Teacher / Apprentice model.  Encourage flexibility with credential process to encourage college graduates to join.  

8) Eliminate all computer labs. Computers should be in the classrooms with the kids.  Turn those labs into either classrooms or breakout meeting rooms.

9) Jettison the annual statewide testing system and move quickly to Common Core Standards.  Exempt school districts that score above a specific level to allow them the opportunity to innovate in other areas.  Perhaps have those schools districts get tested every two or three years.

10) Decentralize school IT departments.  It is a money pit.  Decentralize servers and take advantage of cloud technology.  

Given the increasing stress on the public education system in California, at some point, there will be a breaking point.  California often leads the way for the rest of the country in most areas.  Budget busting deficits is the latest trend California started.  Washington DC, Texas, New York, and other states are now struggling with the same issues and pressures that Sacramento has been dealing with for the last six years.  Will the collapse of public education be the next big trend that starts in California and replicates across the country?