Category Archives: Education

A Very Bad Idea

Posted on by
3

As I explored the new General Assembly filed bills index this morning (as discussed previously), I came across one very interesting, very bad bill on education — shockingly, sponsored by the Chairmen of the House and Senate Education Committees.

Sen. Jamie Woodson (SB627) and Rep. Les Winningham (HB694) have moved to abolish the BEP Review Committee by deleting §49-1-302(a)(4)(B) from the Tennessee Code Annotated:

(B) The [State Board of Education] shall establish a review committee for the Tennessee basic education program (BEP). The committee shall include the executive director of the state board of education, the commissioner of education, the commissioner of finance and administration, the comptroller of the treasury, the director of the Tennessee advisory commission on intergovernmental relations, the chairs of the standing committees on education of the senate and house of representatives, and the director of the office of legislative budget analysis, or their designees. The board shall appoint at least one member from each of the following groups: teachers, school boards, directors of schools, county governments, municipal governments that operate LEAs, finance directors of urban school systems, finance directors of suburban school systems, and finance directors of rural school systems. The BEP review committee shall meet at least four times a year and shall regularly review the BEP components, as well as identify needed revisions, additions, or deletions to the formula. The committee shall annually review the BEP instructional positions component, taking into consideration factors including, but not limited to, total instructional salary disparity among LEAs, differences in benefits and other compensation among local education agencies, inflation, and instructional salaries in states in the southeast and other regions. The committee shall prepare an annual report on the BEP and shall provide such report, on or before November 1 of each year, to the governor, the state board of education, and the select oversight committee on education. This report shall include recommendations on needed revisions, additions, and deletions to the formula as well as an analysis of instructional salary disparity among LEAs;

The BEP Review Committee is comprised of a group deliberately specified to ensure that every point of view is represented, and their mission is to provide knowledgeable guidance on keeping the education funding formula current and effective. For example, if the average cost of textbooks doubles, that funding component should double as well.

As chairmen of the education committees, Sen. Woodson and Rep. Winningham both sit on the BEP Review Committee. This year, the committee focused exhaustively on whether to recommend a change in the fiscal capacity formula from the present 95-county model to a system-level model (several were discussed). Sen. Woodson, seeming to represent Knox County more so than her position as chair of the Education Committee, was adamantly in support of the TACIR system-level prototype that greatly benefited the four, large urban systems, but caused 67% of the school systems in the state to lose funding. It would cost Oak Ridge a staggering $2.2M.

At their final meeting on January 25, the committee admitted that they could not reach consensus on a system-level funding model, but issued a resolution urging the General Assembly to consider fiscal capacity as part of a larger discussion on adequacy. If state funding for education were adequate, equity would be a much lesser (and more easily addressable) problem.

Sen. Woodson didn’t like the outcome, so she’s moving to abolish the committee.

Jamie Woodson is a bright, capable, competent woman, but I’m gravely disappointed in her actions with regard to the BEP. As a State Senator, she is elected to represent Knox County and does so very well; as Chair of the Senate Education Committee and the corresponding seat on the BEP Review Committee, however, she is supposed to represent the interests of education in general.

I consider this bill — along with her arguments for a formula that is harmful to more than it helps — an utter failure in that regard.

Competing Interests

Posted on by
19

On Monday, Governor Bredesen proposed a 40-cent per pack increase in the cigarette tax, with the estimated $200 million in new revenues to be directed to improvements in education funding.

Yesterday, he announced his support for a statewide ban on workplace smoking. This would seem to include restaurants, bars, hotels, and such — the few public places where smoking is sometimes (but not always) permitted, at the discretion of the business owner.

Neither concept would seem objectionable to non-smokers, who are decidedly in the majority.  I haven’t heard any objections to the tax, even from smokers.  But the simultaneous ban creates a problem: banning indoor smoking will unquestionably reduce smoking in general, which would lower the revenues from the cigarette tax.

What happens then for the funding promised to education?

Whinefest in Knox

Posted on by
3

The headline reads “Cigarette-tax plan draws fire,” but there’s nothing in the article criticizing the Governor’s proposed 40-cent increase in cigarette taxes.

Maybe it should have said “Ragsdale wants more.”

Knox County would get about $3.3 million of the new money if the tax increase and Bredesen’s spending plans are enacted, according to data provided by the governor’s office Tuesday. That is less than schools in any other major urban area of the state.

The biggest bump in education funding would come from the State’s fully funding the needs of at-risk (economically disadvantaged, poor, whatever label appeals) students.  Just two weeks ago, I met with the Knox County Finance Director, John Werner, to see if we could find any common ground on changes in education funding.  Funding for at-risk and ELL (students who are learning English as a second language), as well as State funding for growth in the student population, were three of the four items of agreement, and all three were included in the Governor’s proposal.

The fourth was to return to having the State pay 75% of their version of teacher salaries, reduced to 65% about five years ago.  That’s going to cost more, and would likely have to be phased in.

I’ll accept Bredesen’s proposal for increasing funding in these three areas with gratitude, even though Oak Ridge won’t benefit nearly as much as Knox County.  The important point is, no one is harmed by this proposal — every school system will receive these funding improvements commensurate with the burdens borne in each of the three areas.

It’s not enough to bring Tennessee from the depths of our standing nationally, but it’s moving in the right direction.  Simply tinkering with the distribution formula isn’t going to improve education statewide — only rearrange the problems.

In Tennessee, education funding is a responsibility shared by State and local governments.  The amount contributed by the State depends on the ability of the local government to generate revenue for schools, according to the fiscal capacity formula (taking into account the sales and property tax base, average income, etc.).  Local governments are required to contribute a specified amount, but nearly all contribute more than the required minimum.

Local governments set priorities, then raise the necessary revenue (through taxes) to fund them.  Oak Ridge has historically established education as one of it’s highest priorities; Knox County unquestionably has the tax base to do so, but to date, has not.

To insist on stepping upon someone else to raise your own standing is a bully tactic.  Let’s not go there, Mayor Ragsdale.

State of the State

Posted on by
2

I listened to Gov. Bredesen’s State of the State address tonight, then downloaded the print version so that I can better absorb the details.

Education consumed the majority of the content, and I have to say that I’m fairly pleased with what I heard. He does plan to ask for a 40-cents per pack increase in the cigarette tax, and that’s where most of the new education money will come from.

The quandary: to continue my habit and support adequate education funding (thereby preserving my sanity and that of everyone around me), or to quit (thus avoiding a $146/year tax increase)? NOTE: my question is purely rhetorical. Leave me alone.

Another of the Governor’s ambitious goals is for every 8th grader and every 10th grader to take the ACT. He wants to add a fourth year of math to the high school graduation requirement, but did not specify a particular course.

I’ll undoubtedly write more about his plans once I’ve slept, and again when his budget is introduced in a couple of weeks.

Monday’s Meetings

Posted on by
1

City Council Work Session

The Oak Ridge City Council held a work session at 5:30 with a formal presentation on the proposed SuperTarget shopping center atop Pine Ridge. Steve Jenkins’ powerpoint presentation is up on the City’s website, with a lot of really useful information about the expected impact, best and worst case scenarios, etc.

The President of GBT was on hand, saying that he doesn’t “go looking for mountaintops to build on,” and that the number of times they’ve asked for City assistance is very few — four, to be exact.

City Manager Jim O’Connor spoke at the beginning, noting that the City has already received some feedback. He reminded everyone that the City does not own the mall, and that the Wal-Mart covenants (along with those held by Sears, JCPenney, Belk, and Goody’s) are fairly restrictive, and wouldn’t allow for a Target in the mall area that most of us know as “Downtown.” That makes me think that most of the comments so far have been along the lines of “yes, we want a Target and associated shops, but we want it in the middle of town.”

Me too. But it doesn’t work that way.

Willie Golden raised a valid question: when Clinton was recruiting Aisan Automotive (what he referred to as “Asian,” but others pronounce as “I-san”), we, along with Anderson County, stepped up on short notice to help with incentives… even though the benefit to Oak Ridge was sort of minimal. It doesn’t seem unreasonable that Clinton and Anderson County — both of whom benefit financially, the County most of all — might step in and help with the $10M for this project.

An informal public information session has been scheduled for Monday, February 5, 5-7 p.m., in the multipurpose room of the Central Services Complex. Read through the presentation, and show up with any questions you may have.

* * *

School Board

At last night’s School Board meeting, the new attendance policy (the 8th revision, I think, and at least the third to come to the Board) was approved on second reading, contingent upon revisions to the accompanying administrative bulletin.  My concerns with the original proposal were addressed to a great extent, although I will be paying attention to the implementation to make sure that we have not created inadvertent consequences. It’s part of the art of compromise.

The other item of significance was that we approved a calendar change for Oak Ridge High School, so that students will finish one week earlier (May 18 for seniors; May 25 for 9th-11th grades). THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO ELEMENTARY OR MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS — only the high school, for construction purposes… so if you have younger kids, don’t plan a vacation before June 1 (except for Spring Break, of course).

We’ll still be in compliance with State regulations regarding the number of days and hours of school, but if we should have more than two snow days, we could have a problem.

Let’s hope that both work out as planned.

Lottery Scholarships: an odd view

Posted on by
6

Eligibility for the Tennessee Lottery Scholarship is very simple: a 3.0 grade point average upon graduation from high school, or a 21 on the ACT (required for admission to all Tennessee public universities).

Either / Or.

It allows for both kinds of students to succeed: those who have learned the material and can adequately perform on a test, as well as those who have learned the material and demonstrated as much in classroom performance, regardless of test-taking ability.

It is rather generous in terms of the preparation needed to succeed in a 4-year college or university, allowing also those who will seek an associate’s degree, technical school, or who will attend community college first.

Yet, Sen. Thelma Harper blasts the lottery scholarship program in today’s Chattanooga Times:

State Sen. Thelma Harper, D-Nashville, today criticized the Tennessee Education Lottery scholarship program for shortchanging black and low-income students, calling it a “disgrace.”

“I want you to tell me what’s wrong that black people can’t get scholarships,” she told members of the Tennessee Higher Education Commission’s regular quarterly meeting. “It sends a horrible message, and someone needs to re-evaluate how those lottery scholarships are being made.”

It’s a deeper question, Sen. Harper. The problem is not with the lottery scholarship; it’s with educating poor and black students to the same levels as everyone else. Any student who cannot attain either a 3.0 GPA or a 21 on the ACT doesn’t need to be in college — they cannot and will not succeed.

The problem is, to a large degree, cultural. It is one of role models, and of “fitting in” with the various groups of other students that inevitably form in school. It is a problem to some degree of parental involvement, expectations, and discipline.

Playing the race card in this way insultingly implies that poor and black students are unable to attain these minimum standards for college readiness — and it just isn’t true. They ARE able.

The real question is, how do we make them want to attain a higher educational standard?

Thinking Differently About Graduation

Posted on by
5

The State Board of Education defines what is required for high school graduation, with input from the State Legislature. Generally speaking, this amounts to a year of kindergarten, plus twelve years, with requirements of a number of hours passed in specified courses.

What if we thought about it differently, and assessed mastery of subject matter rather than the completion of hours and years? What if grade (or coursework) progression were based on subject mastery, rather than age?

Might more students graduate? Might some learn much more, given the incentive of making progress rather than serving time?

Metro Nashville Public Schools’ Board Member Kay Brooks had a thought-provoking post in December that prompted this train of thought:

Attendance does not equal education. As I’ve said many times before–these pre-K children have time yet but there are thousands of near adults leaving the system frustrated and lacking basic skills every year and for too many that directly leads to criminal behavior that endangers us all. THAT’s where the focus needs to be. We can’t just consider them lost causes and turn our backs on them in favor of toddlers. The mantra ‘for the children’ usually conjures up images of those cuddly small ones but those high school drop outs are still children too.

I disagree with Kay on the Pre-K issue; I think Pre-K is the answer to closing the achievement gap that shows up most starkly in later grades. But the question of how to address the “near adults leaving the system frustrated” spurred what follows.

What if we allowed students to “test out” of certain courses, as is commonplace in colleges and universities, and allowed them to progress more quickly — whether to graduation, or to higher coursework? What if we allowed students the option of passing the GED test (perhaps along with the required Algebra, Biology, English, and History Gateway exams) and graduating early?

The hard, cold reality is that the traditional school environment is not enjoyable — and doesn’t work well for — all kids. Not all who fail to meet the NCLB graduation rate standard (graduating precisely four years from enrollment in high school) are in any way intellectually inferior. In fact, some are very advanced in their subject mastery, but simply resist going through the motions out of boredom, personality conflicts, or other non-curricular issues.

Another harsh reality is that half of the population, by definition, has a below-average IQ. This does not mean that these people are of no value to society; it means that not everyone is destined for the same outcome. From the WSJ’s follow-up piece:

A reality about the job market must eventually begin to affect the valuation of a college education: The spread of wealth at the top of American society has created an explosive increase in the demand for craftsmen. Finding a good lawyer or physician is easy. Finding a good carpenter, painter, electrician, plumber, glazier, mason–the list goes on and on–is difficult, and it is a seller’s market. Journeymen craftsmen routinely make incomes in the top half of the income distribution while master craftsmen can make six figures. They have work even in a soft economy. Their jobs cannot be outsourced to India. And the craftsman’s job provides wonderful intrinsic rewards that come from mastery of a challenging skill that produces tangible results. How many white-collar jobs provide nearly as much satisfaction?

Although there might be some slight cost savings to high schools in not having to run every child through a requisite number of hours, the real gain would be in allowing those ready to move on, to move on sooner (whether beyond high school, or simply to more advanced coursework) and maintain their interests. It would also allow those who can’t go much further, to move on to a more productive phase.

In no way do I suggest moving any student out of high school early without their, and their parents’, express desire to do so. But, might we better serve many students by basing progression upon achievement rather than age and seat time?

Level of Effort

Posted on by
2

Today’s Oak Ridge CAFE article puts the City’s “share alike” plan into perspective, with a very easy to follow analogy… but it’s just part of the picture.

In the FY07 budget, municipal expenditures (police, fire, public works, community development, recreation & parks, library, general government and administrative services) increased by the same percentage (4.25%) as the allocation to the schools, but they didn’t increase equally: the City’s share went up by $664,419, while the school system saw an increase in City funding of only $492,068.

Oak Ridge Schools represents 42.55% of City government expense (excluding special funds like solid waste, golf course fund, etc.).

Maryville devotes 68% of the local budget to schools, and they, like us, are a full-service city with police, fire, libraries, parks, etc.

Alcoa spends 56% of its city budget on schools — and that’s before debt service, which would raise the percentage.

* * *

“Share and share alike” isn’t really the case within the City departments, either; several departments saw increases of greater than 4.25%; General Government, Police, Fire, Community Development, and Recreation and Parks all got bigger increases, with Community Development leading the pack at a 7.8% increase. Those larger increases were offset by decreasing percentages for Administrative Services and Public Works.

The schools’ budget, or any budget for that matter, would be really easy to develop if one simply applied a percentage increase to each item, and left it at that. To do so would be grossly irresponsible though; each year, we assess our needs, priorities, and external costs (things we don’t have any choice about paying for)and budget accordingly.

If the school systems was truly considered on equal footing with City departments in allocation of funding, shouldn’t the allocation be based upon justified need (as is the case with other departments), rather than a fixed percentage?

I hope this year will be different.

Cities and the BEP

Posted on by
Reply

I attended an interesting meeting last night in Maryville; it seems that the cities who support municipal school systems have (finally, in some cases) taken notice of the grave threat to school funding posed by a concerted effort to change the fiscal capacity formula, which drives the local funding requirement portion of the BEP.

Folks traveled a goodly distance — some from Athens, and a group from Kingsport — to hear the presentation and to meet other local officials similarly situated.  Without question, we carry more clout if we’re all speaking from the same page when we go to Nashville.

While there, I also heard a rumor — but just a rumor — that Sen. Rusty Crowe may be named Chair of the Senate Education Committee.  It was, in fact, Sen. Crowe who invited me to address the Senate Education Committee last year when the TACIR System-Level Prototype was presented to them, after I explained the preceding evening how many millions the school systems in his district would lose under that plan.

We should know by the end of this week who’s chairing what.  And yes, Daco, today is Wednesday.  All day long.

Your School Board

Posted on by
2

For three years, I’ve made an issue of getting more schools’ information online — information for parents, such as grade and attendance matters now available through K-12 Planet, as well as information for the community, such as our full budget.

K-12 Planet is now fully deployed in the middle schools, and is in a transition phase at the high school (some teachers participating, others not, but it’s my understanding that it will be mandatory next year).

The full Oak Ridge Schools budget is also online. I’m not sure exactly when it went up, but it’s there. It’s a large file, so be patient… but it’s the up-to-date version that was passed on May 30.

ATTENDANCE AND TRANSPORTATION

Tomorrow evening (Wed., January 17, 6-8 p.m.) the Board of Education will hold a work session with two items on the agenda: a new proposed attendance policy, and transportation issues.

The proposed attendance policy is in its third revision (the first version was discussed here on Oct. 31). The original draft was based upon the wishes of the Juvenile Court and District Attorney’s office to have the same policy in place in all three school systems in Anderson County, but I had some problems with it and voted against it on first reading. It passed, but subsequent revisions in the drafts have incorporated my concerns. There has not yet been a second reading, so it’s not finalized at this point.

I recognize and respect Judge Meldrum’s desire for fairness by having the same policy in place across all three school systems, but I also believe that there needs to be some provision for the application of common sense. In short, there must be some allowance for the principals’ judgment in excusing absences that do not fall within the narrowly-defined criteria.

At the same time, I have pointed out that the Judge is elected to represent the interests of all of Anderson County, while I am elected to represent Oak Ridge specifically — including a small portion of Roane County. The needs of the three school systems in Anderson County may often coincide, but not always.

Policy should be somewhat broad, and the accompanying administrative bulletin clarifies how the policy is to be implemented and carried out.

The work session will be held in the teacher center conference room, and is open to the public.