Here are some interesting links. Thoughts?
Parents United 15Apr11
MinnPost Budget Forum
Star Tribune Charters Hit by Funding Hit
PB Parents Aware ratings
Star Tribune State Ignores Violations
Star Tribune Students Deserve Licensed Teachers
Star Tribune White Guilt
Star Tribune White Guilt Counterpoint
Star Tribune Racial Disparities
JvonKorff on Education (New to G2A Links)
Piece of the Truth by Laurie (New to G2A Links)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I clicked over to the Parents United link for a legislative update and learned the E-12 omnibus bills are now in conference committee. From there I followed a link to a star trib story that explained "Sophie's choice" under additional school funding cuts and no new taxes:
The Senate bill reduces education funding overall by $30 million over the next two years -- achieved through a combined $30 million in cuts to Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth.
"The House bill reduces funding overall by $14 million over the next biennium, with cuts to our three districts totaling $57 million, while the rest of the state receives an increase of $43 million."
As a parent of suburban kids and a teacher of low income urban kids where do I think the cuts should come from? After reading letters from the superintendents explaining what would have to be cut with the loss of integration funds, I will go with part of the house bill, with the lesser total cuts of $14 million, but I would spread that evenly across all districts, rather than target only the urban ones while giving a slight increase to the others..
This is an unlikely outcome as both senate and house bills target the 3 big cities (and there are no urban representaive in the 10 members that make up the conference committee) The unknown is whether Dayton will go along with this plan.
J... I assume you wanted this here... (ie most current ed update)
The quality of education is completely unrelated to the amount of money we spend on it, at least in comparing all schools in Minnesota. So saying that we are "cutting funding" says absolutely nothing about the future quality of education, for anybody. It all depends on HOW the money gets spent, and on what. If we want to improve educational outcomes, we need to demand that schools improve educational outcomes, period. We can then either financially reward schools that do, take away money from schools that don't, or establish some sort of contest fund where the schools with the best ideas for improving get the extra dollars (subject to actual results obtained). I wish we had a system where a school could go and say "we need $3 million to give every kid an IPAD, and we will raise scores 10% over two years, averaged across all students." They would get the money, but if they didn't deliver, they would get a cut the following year.
J. Ewing
Now J, you consistently say that money does not matter and that you have the graph to prove it. Now put your graph where your mouth is... Schools, Student demographics, costs and results.
By the way, we already have an excellent method of removing funds from poor performing schools. See whenever Parents get dissatisfied with their community / neighbors, and local public schools. They move to a less disadvantged community or open enroll into a Status quo or Charter Public school with "better" demographics.
Thereby degrading the student demographics of the school they left. Thus further raising the cost per student in that school. Ironic that first we reward the districts with easier demographics by allowing kids to open enroll, now we will give them some of the money from the school districts with challenging demographics.
I think there is a saying about the rich get richer and the poor get poorer...
Yawn....where is the reform agenda? How about we.....
1) Get rid of the January 15 so the unions can't hold districts hostage.
2) Cut down on the number of school districts, do we really "need" 360 of them?
3) Remove some mandates (especially the 2% staff development one) and allow districts to do things themselves.
4) Where are other things like pension reform, tenure reform, K-12 formula reform or merit pay? Anyone? Anyone?
Raising taxes in one of the highest taxed states and throwing money at it is the worst solution possible.
Also remember what a "cut" is. A "cut" is SPENDING LESS, not spending less versus inflation no matter what Mindy Greiling says. If we increase spending 2% one year then 1% the next that is not a 1% cut!
Rikta11,
So if you don't get a raise at work this year or next, it is not a cut? And you could maintain the same lifestyle and do the same things?
I mean technically you are correct, however if the CPI is 3% and gas, energy and healthcare are going up faster... I think you will be hard pressed to explain that it is not a cut.
And I realize the reforms are not as all encompassing as you would like. I guess I am interested in hearing what you like about the changes that are being made? Thus being thankful for a direction shift.
Enough Liberals think it is extreme, so something must be changing... (so much for being "Progressives", maybe they are actual the "Status Quos"...hahaha)
"Now J, you consistently say that money does not matter and that you have the graph to prove it. Now put your graph where your mouth is... Schools, Student demographics, costs and results." -- John
Ah, the old "demography is destiny" argument, eh? You know that I cannot oblige you on that, but I don't need to. My chart shows that, for all 360 school districts in Minnesota, the more money spent per pupil, the WORSE the student achievement is. There is, of course, a very wide spread in the data, such that at the state average of spending, there is almost a 2 to 1 difference in student achievement. One could argue that both the vast spread of the data and the negative trend are purely a result of demographics, but then you have to explain why the state aid formula, which FULLY COMPENSATES for demographic factors (supposedly), doesn't eliminate these vast differences in academic achievement. All we seem to accomplish by spending more money is the spending of more money. I suppose that is to be expected given the old adage "you get what you measure," but I wish that we would start measuring and demanding academic excellence from every school and every classroom, and THEN pay teachers what they're worth. Some of them would be due a raise immediately, and most of them would probably get one as soon as those who were overpaid already had left the "profession."
J. Ewing
You must have been listening to some different folk than I have.
"explain why the state aid formula, which FULLY COMPENSATES for demographic factors (supposedly), doesn't eliminate these vast differences in academic achievement."
Most of the Liberals would say the higher funding level is no where near what is needed to compensate for the demographic factors. Especially the absence of parent education and early childhood education funding.
It is hard to run anything successfully through a Pipeline when the first section of pipe is missing... HCZ Link
J,
It sounds like you would be in favor of this part of the Dayton educ. budget:
"The Governor's Excellence in Education Award would spend nearly $12 million over two years to recognize schools where students make exceptional academic strides in reading and math. Half the grant money flowing to each school would be spent on teaching the best practices to other schools"
I also like the $33 million he proposed for providing all-day kindergarten, and $2 million for expanding statewide a rating system for early childhood programs.
I have heard about schools closing the gap and getting good results in schools with mostly at risk students. More $ can always help a little, but I agree that schools need to do better with the $ they have.
John, there is little doubt that I listen to "different folks" than you do, but I also ask questions like, "if the state aid formula does not fully compensate for demographic factors then why does it not, in its infinite complexity, do so? You folks have had 30 years to perfect this thing and haven't changed it in the last 20. You're just now noticing that it doesn't work?"
Laurie, I would agree with the first proposal with one small change. I would say that the awards should go to the schools that "MADE" progress rather than "make" progress. Of coursethe first question I would then ask of our legislators is, "how is this possible, that education can vastly improve without more money?" The devil is in the details, of course, for example in the definition of what improvement is significant, whether schools other than public schools are eligible, which other schools would be "taught," etc. Frankly, in this proposal the details lie with a devil named Mark Dayton. Not sure I trust him, even with a good idea.
I especially like the part about spending half the money to spread the "secrets" to other schools. It is supposed to be what the state Department of Education is already doing, so we might even be able to get the whole $12 million out of the budget of what appears to be a useless bureaucracy. And frankly, $12 million is a paltry price to pay to achieve significant improvement in educational outcomes. I would hold off on giving any more money to the educational "establishment" until they start producing results with the money they already get. See? I told you that if we discussed long enough we would agree! :-)
J,
I knew we could agree on something!
About Dayton's Excellence in Education Award, I believe it would got to public schools, those in reg. districts or charters, that make the largest gains in test scores with at risk students. Schools with better demographics that have good scores already would probably not get the big gains.
I think most teachers would be honored to be recognized for their outstanding performance in improving student achievement and be very willing to train other school staff in curriculum, instructional strategies, creative scheduling etc.
I am looking to purchase some new curriculum after reading this NYT story yesterday A Better Way to Teach Math It's kind of a long stroy but it includes a couple of graphs showing very impressive achievemnt gains. It looks especially good for my special ed students. If I have to I'll buy a small part of it myself to give it a try.
You are no doubt correct. The best teachers, other than their ability, are characterized by a fervent desire to actually help the kids they teach (and all kids, really). The problem would come when some tenured, 40-ish, waste-of-time "teacher" is told that this 20-something blonde wunderkind has ANYTHING to teach HIM about teaching. And the attitude goes all the way to the top of many districts and certainly to the top of union hierarchies, which do not even recognize the thing called "merit."
So long as the awards go to individual teachers for meritorious teaching, I'm all for it, but then merit pay should work for EVERY teacher, but the unions would never accept it.
Post a Comment