Category Archives: education

by | December 5, 2009 · 7:03 pm

Mark Pocan in the Lions’ Den — Last Monday’s MMSD Board Meeting

State Representative Mark Pocan met with the Madison Metropolitan School District Board of Education on Monday, November 30 to discuss “K-12 Funding in Wisconsin and the Impact of the State Budget on School District Finances.”  (State Senator Mark Miller, who was also expected, was ill, Liz Stevens from his office attended in his stead).  The short version of what transpired is that although Pocan brought Bob Lang and Dave Loppnow from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau as support, they were unable to “shut the lions’ mouths” and the Board got a few nips in.  Beyond that, Pocan explained the intent and context of the budget “fix,” emphasized the importance of addressing revenue issues, gave some thoughts on school finance reform, defended parts of his record and more-or-less split the blame for everything bad between Governor Jim Doyle and the economy.

I have to give Pocan some credit and respect for facing the lions and for being very forthright and forthcoming.  I’ll even go beyond that and say that when he was talking about what can and should be done and why, he showed understanding and that he cared.  It was words, not actions, and I want action from my State Rep.. But at least he didn’t shut the door on action.  Let’s help him open that door (more on that below, but think Penny for Kids).

You’ll have to rely on my memory and notes for the longer version, because as I anticipated, the meeting was not broadcast or recorded (Susan Troller, whose story inspired the meeting, was there for most of it, but I don’t think it is the kind of story that the Cap Times covers these days).  That’s too bad, because some interesting and maybe important things were said.

Pocan began the meeting by asking to speak separately about the recent state budget and school funding in general (or what he refers to as “the formula”).  This division was mostly followed, but the two cannot be absolutely separated.  One big link between them, and an issue that came up again and again, was revenues.  The recently completed state budget was made tough because of a lack of revenues; positive school finance reform requires adequate, sustainable and equitable revenue sources.  Pocan said as much more than once.

The 2009-11 State Budget and the “Fix”

During the discussion of the state budget, most of the talk was about about the “fix” that came after the April revenue numbers called for further cuts.  The fix included $147 million in cuts to school aids. This was dampened partially through an attempt to share the bleeding, by including provisions to limit resulting cuts to 10% for any particular district.  Madison’s overall cuts came in at about 15% and people were not happy.  According to Pocan, the 10% figure only applied to the new cuts caused by the $147 million loss and not the aggregate cuts from the entire state budget.  Fair enough, and yes, some of the displeasure was due to a misunderstanding of this distinction.

But really this was, and is, a distraction.  Most of the displeasure wasn’t about how the last round of cuts were handled.  It really was about how much total money was invested in education; capital provided at levels well below cost-t0-continue; and a cut in state aid, while, at the same time, big property tax increases were passed on to many school districts.

On both the big picture and on the particulars of the “fix,” the issue is revenues.  Pocan talked a lot about revenues, tax fairness and tax reform.  He said good things.  He made the point multiple times that if the discussion of taxation and revenues had been left to the Grover Norquists of the world, then public education, and much of the other good that government does, would continue to die the death of a thousand cuts; the “beast” will be starved.  He’s right.  It is happening everyday.

He also defended his record and the recent state budget by pointing to the tax increase on the highest earner bracket, the closing of the so called Las Vegas loophole, and some improvement on capital gains taxation legislation.  All good and Pocan does deserve credit.  Still, at the end of the day, our state was left with a budget that did not adequately fund education and other essential investments and is not sustainable. The thinness of the hopes Pocan expressed about the prospect of avoiding a budget reconciliation after the April 2010 tax collections — translate as more cuts — is sufficient evidence that he knows this isn’t sustainable.

Doyle No Friend of Education

It was on the topic of revenues that Pocan threw Governor Doyle under the bus, repeatedly.  Most of this happened in the context of the budget “fix.”  Because much of what Pocan described occurred in private conversations and the Caucus meeting where Pocan’s and Doyle’s position may have been discussed with other Democrats, and were closed to the public, we have only Pocan’s word to go on.  Pocan’s version does agree with the public record (as far as that goes) and also explains Doyle’s contemptuous dismissal of calls for a more public budget process.  I believe him, but continue to think that the more that public policy making occurs in public the better.  Voters shouldn’t be left with any doubts about things this important.

The story, as Pocan told it, is that when the April, 2009 revenue shortfall happened, Doyle was in public and private talking about 5% or greater cuts in school aids (shared revenues for municipalities were also discussed,  but this is an education blog so I’m leaving that out).  Pocan said they (Miller, and maybe others implied, but Liz Stevens didn’t confirm that) met with Doyle and pushed to have new revenues as part of the fix.  Pocan seemed to favor the expansion of the sales tax to cover services (what I think of as the Erpenbach proposal from a few years ago) and more action on capitol gains, but he may have also had other things in mind.

Shortly thereafter Doyle made a public statement that as far as he was concerned, revenues and tax reform were off the table as part of the solution.  Pocan says that, as Doyle was making the statement, he became so angry that he called the Governors office to cancel their next scheduled meeting.  Good for Pocan — at least in private he showed some backbone.  It would have been nice if he’d showed it in public at the time.

As Pocan described it, the choices were limited.  The possibility of overriding a Gubernatorial veto was nonexistent, so all they could do was negotiate.   Apparently the 10% cut ceiling was part of these negotiations.  The “balance” between state aid and revenue limits was also part of the negotiations.

Later, when asked by Board member Beth Moss about the lowering of the revenue limit increase — from $280 to $200 —  that was also part of the “fix,” Pocan revealed that in exchange for a higher revenue limit, Doyle demanded at least a 4% cut in state aid; the $200 limit increase came with with only a 2.5% cut in state aid.

When Bob Lang joined the conversation to explain that the desire was to limit property taxes, Pocan stepped in to make a point that this was part of the Governor’s agenda, not the Democratic Party, and added, “The problem is when we take the Grover Norquist part of the debate we can’t talk about it …. tax fairness, … we need a civic debate about revenue.”

Pocan ended the exchange saying “Schools did way better than if the Gov had sole control.”  Keep all this in mind next time Doyle prefaces his Race to the Top (RttT) inspired proposals with references to his record as a friend of education.

School Finance and Reform

From there it was on to a more general discussion of school finance.  Pocan hit all the usual notes about the complexity of the system, how tinkering can create unintended consequences, how any change may have winners and losers, and the political difficulties of that, and made generally discouraging noises about the difficulty of real positive change.  There wasn’t much new here, but there were some things I’d like to highlight.

First and foremost is Pocan’s championing of tax reform and the need to talk about revenues.  This is great to hear.  I do think he gets it, and expect to hear more from him on this in the coming months. I have some small hope that the talk will be linked to action.

Pocan spoke from the heart about the needs of students in poverty as well as the diverse needs of other students and displayed his understanding that any positive reforms must address these needs, either via categorical aid or a foundation plan.  The positive duty to address the needs of these students highlighted in the Vincent v. Voight decision also makes this is a Constitutional matter.  It is also the wise and right thing to do and it was good to be reminded that Representative Pocan knows that.   This of course requires investments and revenues.

His repeated references to Andy Reschovsky were also heartening.  I like Andy and think he is one of the best experts on taxation and school finance that Wisconsin has.

Pocan also expressed the view, held by many, that school finance reform needs to be done as a stand alone, not as part of the biennial budget process.  That means that now is the time to get moving.

In response to Lucy Mathiak’s query about just that point — why isn’t there movement, if now is the time? — Pocan said that “The executive [Governor Doyle] has things stalled around the MPS restructuring.”  I tell you, Doyle’s RttT lottery ticket purchase proposal is the gift that just keeps on giving.

School Board Members React

At this point Superintendent Dan Nerad and the Board asked questions and made comments and engaged in some back-and-forth with the guests.  Before covering a little more of what was revealed, I’d like to offer some words from the Board to give the tone of their reactions.

Beth Moss  — “This is difficult to swallow and really quite ridiculous.”

Lucy Mathiak — “I didn’t ask about the Executive level, I asked about you…somebody has to start.”

Marj Passman — “Show courage.”

Maya Cole — “What kind of economy are we growing…we have to invest in the future.”

Johnny Winston Jr. — “I’m disappointed, a couple of years ago when we were talking about closing schools, you sent us a letter and told us not to, that if the Democrats were to gain control you’d fix this … Madison is changing, has changed, and if we can’t afford to maintain schools and education it will keep changing till it is like Milwaukee … what do you tell a middle class family thinking about moving here when they ask about cuts to education?”

As I said at the top, they got some nips in and maybe broke some skin.  Good for them.

Equalization, Equity and Tertiary/Negative Aid

There was a strange set of exchanges inspired by Ed Hughes’ complaint about tertiary/negative aid (whereby Madison and other high spending districts lose progressively more state aid the higher they spend).  What was strange to me was that everyone seemed hostile or confused about the basic concept that this is a way to equalize educational opportunity across the state, that it is important that kid’s futures are not determined (or less prescribed) by where they live.  I think how Wisconsin implements this policy could be improved, however, I retain my belief in the goals and ideals of this policy.  There have been complaints about this for years; the complaints may be louder this year because the cuts in state aids have further exacerbated this and other flaws in our school finance system.

Of course, as Dave Loppnow pointed out, negative aid is also intended as a disincentive to raise property taxes. However, in practice, I’m not sure it works that way, because when a district like Madison goes to referendum, it includes these costs into their calculations and in fact asks for a higher amount, i.e. higher property taxes.  This makes it harder to pass referenda, but they do pass and at higher amounts.

Loppnow also conjectured that because revenue caps already limit property taxes, this disincentive was not necessary.  That may be true. But it is also true that the combined disincentives have not equalized spending and opportunities around the State.  Something has to be in place to make sure the opportunities for kids in Whitefish Bay and Rhinelander are at least in the same ball park.  That means either much more state aid via a foundation guarantee or some form of negative equalization.

Ed Hughes asserted that there was “no necessary connection between property value and willingness to spend.” I’m not sure this is true and intend to run some numbers — when I find the time —  the Lake Districts and some others obviously support this idea, but in the aggregate it might not be the case.

Either Lang or Loppnow responded, in part, by saying that attempts had been made to use income instead of property wealth in equalization and that “it didn’t work.”

I’ve heard this from others, but have to ask: What we are doing now doesn’t “work” either, so what do you mean when you say it doesn’t work?  Is this timidity and inertia or a real analysis?

This and That

A few more observations:

A Penny for Kids — Prospects and Action

Despite the relative silence on the topic, I left the meeting feeling a little better about the prospects of the Penny for Kids campaign (although not any better about the prospects of full comprehensive school funding reform in the near future).

I heard one of the legislative leaders say repeatedly that revenue options need to be on the table and advocated for. Penny for Kids is a viable revenue option, it is gaining support and nobody else is talking revenues.  If Pocan was sincere, he has to give the proposal serious consideration and should give it his support.

I heard one of the legislative leaders speaking about the need to fund the education of children in poverty.  Part of the Penny for Kids proposal creates and funds a categorical aid for low income students.  The proposal also increases aid to other high needs students.  If Pocan was sincere he should embrace these positive steps toward comprehensive reform.

Mostly I heard a legislative leader who was frustrated and looking for a way to help the schools, to do something he believes in (he was a bit defensive at times as well).  Penny for Kids is a way to meet the crisis in education funding and move toward an equitable and sustainable educational investments.  If Mark Pocan is looking, I think Penny for Kids is the best thing he is going to find, at least in the short term.

It isn’t easy to move elected officials from words to action.  One thing that helps is a show of public support.  You can do this in two ways (do both):  First go to the Penny for Kids website and sign the petition; second, send Mark Pocan a quick email saying you support Penny for Kids and he should too.  You don’t even have to explain why — he gets it.

Thomas J. Mertz

2 Comments

Filed under "education finance", Best Practices, Budget, education, finance, Local News, Pennies for Kids, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | December 5, 2009 · 2:10 pm

Mayoral Control Links and Thoughts

I haven’t had much time to blog lately and the items are piling up, so it is time to catch up a little.  Here are some links to and comments on some relatively recent items on Mayoral control.

From the Chicago Tribune, “Chicago school board begins 2nd internal investigation.”

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley’s handpicked Board President has committed suicide, his handpicked Board is under investigation for misuse of funds for the second time and has refused to release documents requested by the media.  That’s good management and open governance Chicago style.  That’s the model that Arne Duncan and Jim Doyle want to bring to Wisconsin.

Advocates for Mayoral control keep telling us that the change increases accountability by giving ultimate responsibility to a single elected individual –  the Mayor.  I have yet to hear of an instance or see a poll that indicates any Mayor in a Mayoral control district’s election has been decided by their management of the schools; I know that Mayor Daley will continue to be re-elected no matter what happens with the schools.   That’s not accountability.

A lot is happening with the resistance to mayoral control in Milwaukee.  Here’s a video on some of it:

Henry Hamilton of the NAACP Executive Committee and Christine Neumann-Ortiz — executive director of Voces de la Frontera — had a good recent column in the Journal-Sentinel: “In takeover, your vote silenced.”

Friend of AMPS and former candidate for State Superintendent Todd Allan Price has a long piece at CounterPunch that is worth the time: “Milwaukeeans vs. the Privatization Pandemic: Milwaukee League Comes to the Defense of Public Schools.”

Todd and I also co-wrote a Jerry Bracey inspired piece for FightingBob that includes some things on Mayoral control: “Bracey’s last stand”

Dominique Paul Noth’s lengthy “Barrett’s ‘cynical’ decision puts city Dems in bind” at the Milwaukee Area Labor Council is also worth the time spent.

Meanwhile the education DINO elite insider organization Democrats for Education Reform (DEF) has opened a Wisconsin office staffed by political lifer, convicted thief (see the Wisconsin State Journal, August 20, 2002), former strip club and school voucher PR flack Katy Venskus.

Alan J. Borsuk has a post up contrasting a recent DER event with the unanimous testimony against mayoral control at a recent public hearing.

Borsuk also covered Mayoral control researcher turned advocate Kenneth K. Wong’s recent visit to the state.  At the event and in the interview on WPT’s “Here and Now” below Wong offers a lot of double talk about elections and accountability, simplistically equating higher turnout at Mayoral elections with greater accountability on education matters.  This is only true if education is a decisive issue, otherwise it is nonsense.

Vodpod videos no longer available.
I think this quote from the Borsuck piece is revealing on how much Wong cares about keeping the public in public education:

It is best to have public support for mayoral control, he said, but it can still work even if it’s passed over major opposition.

“Nothing is easy,” he said. As for Milwaukee, he said, “It has to happen fast. . . . They should make it effective January 1.”

This crisis mentality is dangerous, especially when we are talking about a reform that by Wong’s own calculations will have a minimal impact on education in Milwaukee.  In his book The Education Mayor the achievement gap between Milwaukee and the rest of the state is pegged at 2.4 standard deviations; his research shows that “strong” mayoral control has produced gains of .2 to .33 standard deviations.  Accepting his data and the causality, that means that the best case Mayoral control scenario leaves Milwaukee students over 2 standard deviations behind the state.  As Wong himself states, “This is not a silver bullet.” So why the hurry?

In a not unrelated matter, people concerned about accountability should be talking about DINO Reform poster girl and DC Superintendent Michelle Rhee’s effort to intervene in an Inspector General’s investigation of her fiance, the charter school operator and now Mayor of Sacramento, Kevin Johnson.  The IG was subsequently fired by the accountability loving Obama administration.  Links here and here.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under Accountability, Arne Duncan, education, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, National News, Uncategorized

by | December 2, 2009 · 8:57 am

WAES School Funding Reform Update, Week of 11/30/2009

From the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools.  Table of contents below — related items on AMPS linked –, full update here.

If you haven’t gone to the Penny for Kids site and signed the petition yet, take a minute and do it!

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Local News, Pennies for Kids, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | November 27, 2009 · 3:07 pm

Equity Report — Tired of Waiting

Salvador Dali, "The disintegration of the persistence of memory" (click for more information)

The Kinks, “Tired of Waiting for You” (click to listen or download).

It has been almost 18 months since the Madison Metropolitan School District Board of Education enacted a new Equity Policy (policy here, minutes here, video here).  The policy included the requirement that:

Administration will report on an annual basis to the Board of Education the extent of progress on specific measures in eliminating gaps in access, opportunities and achievement.

Administration will develop an annual report that will provide data on the distribution of staff, financial, and programmatic resources across all schools.

19 months.  No report.  I’m tired of waiting.

In the Strategic Plan and the Talented and Gifted Plan, much has been made of the reporting requirements.  Some good things were included in these requirements.  I hope they decide to follow their own rules on these, unlike they have on the Equity Policy.

Much more on what I think the Equity reporting should include here.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under Accountability, Best Practices, education, Equity, Local News, Uncategorized

by | November 25, 2009 · 1:06 pm

Pocan and Miller at the MMSD Board Meeting

The agenda for the Monday November 30th Madison Metropolitan School District Board of Education meeting lists a “Discussion with State Joint Finance Committee Co-Chairs regarding K-12 Funding in Wisconsin and the Impact of the State Budget on School District Finances.”   So State Representative Mark Pocan and State Senator Mark Miller will be talking money with the Board.  They were two of the most powerful individuals in the passage of the recent state budget that hit the schools in Madison and around the state so hard.  It will be interesting to hear what they have to say.

I do hope they are more forthright and and forthcoming than they have been previously on this topic.  Pocan’s column in the Tenney-Lapham Neighborhood Association Newsletter (page 16) was particularly bad in this regard.

The meeting is at 5:00 PM in room 103 of the Doyle Building.  There is no public testimony, but if you are interested I’d plan on showing up because the last time the Board met with legislators is the only meeting in recent memory that was not broadcast or recorded.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Gimme Some Truth, Local News, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | November 13, 2009 · 9:55 am

Johnny Winston Jr. Not Seeking Re-Election; Thanks for the Service

10126_153650965844_594950844_3930753_8149935_nMadison Board of Education Member Johnny Winston Jr. has announced that he is not seeking re-election (the announcement is below).

Johnny is a friend and has been a friend of public education.  We haven’t always agreed but he has stood up for things that matter,  on many occasions when it wasn’t popular.

At one point I did an analysis of Board and Committee votes over a ten month period.  In that time there 10 votes that weren’t unanimous.   Johnny was on the losing side of 7 of these votes; in my opinion he was on the correct side of all these.

My point is among the many ways he will be missed is as an occasional voice of dissent on the Board.

On behalf of myself, Progressive Dane (who proudly supported Johnny in each of his elections) and many others who care about inequities in our schools, thanks for serving Johnny.

Dear Friends:

This message is to inform you that I will not be seeking re-election for a third term on the Madison School Board, Seat #4.

For six years, it has been my honor to serve our community as an elected member of the Madison Board of Education. Thank you for your confidence in electing me in 2004 and 2007.

During my tenure on the board, I had the pleasure of serving as the President, Vice President, Treasurer and Clerk. I also served on many committees including Long Range Planning, Partnerships, Finance and Operations and currently Student Achievement and Performance Monitoring. Serving in these roles and on these committees gave me a well rounded outlook on the district and helped shape a collective vision that assisted me in my decision making.

In addition to serving within the capacities of the school board, I was able to reach out to our community and listen to their views. With your help, we were able to build a new school to alleviate overcrowding, develop strong partnerships and complete many district maintenance projects. Lastly, being elected to the school board afforded me the opportunity to listen to parents, students and community members and assist them in identifying an appropriate district staff member or service that would help meet their needs.

Despite less than desirable financial constraints, I believe the MMSD’s future is brighter because of the development of a 4 year old kindergarten program, implementation of the district’s new strategic plan and school board members that work in collaboration with each other, the superintendent, the district staff, and its stakeholders. I thank all of my school board colleagues both current and former, for their knowledge, skills and their service.

Although, I leave the Madison School Board, I will continue to be actively involved in our community as a member of organizations such as the 100 Black Men of Madison’s Backpacks for Success event, Sable Flames, Inc. Scholarship Committee and other community groups that help make Madison a better place to live for everyone. I am also the proud parent of a current kindergartener so I will continue to be a proud supporter of the Madison Metropolitan School District and public education for many years to come.

Again, thank you for giving me the honor of serving our community.

Johnny Winston, Jr.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under education, Elections, Local News

by | November 4, 2009 · 5:03 pm

Obama at JC Wright, Quick Take

c1e82cf6-c97e-11de-a2ef-001cc4c03286.image

I spent the early part of the day at the Books not Bombs action with about 250 others and then went home to watch President Obama’s  speech at James C. Wright Middle School in Madison on television (transcript, here).  Here are some reactions.

The inspirational message, especially the words directed at students and parents was very good.   He was utterly right about the need to seize opportunities, value and support leaning and the importance teachers and parents working to have children internalize pride in academic achievement.  One of the best teachers my children have had  moved our son from racing to get his work done as fast as possible to completing assignments in a way that he could be proud of. Thanks Mr. Waters and thanks President Obama for this message.

He was also very good about the need to make education central to our national agenda.  A little too much about the economic aspects and too little about building an engaged citizenry for my taste, but good to hear.

As many speakers at the Books not Bombs made clear, this is not happening and as I observed in an earlier post the desperation of states for Race to the Top funds is ample evidence that we are not investing in education as we should.

This raises a basic contradiction between the rhetoric in the policies:  If education is as essential to our nation’s present strength and future well being as President Obama says it is, why must states compete for one-time grants to fund only a portion of the needed investments?  What about the states that don’t get grants, are their futures less crucial, are their children less deserving of educational opportunities.?

If we can spend $4 billion a week to keep the military in distant countries we should be able to fully fund the education of every child in every state.  When we spend billions on bombs, we shouldn’t have to ask for Pennies for Kids.

There were also some contradictions within the four core ideas behind Race to the Top that the President delineated.  Again, he was absolutely correct about the need for better assessments (I have doubts about the role of national standards in this process, but that is another issue), however Race to the Top is built expanded use of the inadequate assessments we have now.  Linking teacher pay to flawed tests doesn’t make sense.  Let’s work to create real, balanced and useful assessments first and then discuss what we should do with them.  Prioritizing data collection has similar problems.  We can have the best system for collecting and analyzing data, but if the data is bad to begin with, what is the point?  The old computer programmer phrase comes to mind: Garbage In, Garbage Out.  Obama is right that our current state assessments are near garbage; I just don’t understand how he can know that and still want to expand their use as the basis for decision-making.

It also bothered me that the President seemed to paint a picture of teacher’s currently making no use of assessments or feedback in shaping their teaching.  Every teacher uses many forms of feedback everyday; they see the looks on children’s faces and change their mode of explanation or offer words of encouragement; they grade homework and know what they did well and what they need to do differently; they evaluate exams and decide how to move forward.  This is basic to teaching and happened long before there was any talk of standardized tests and longitudinal data systems and will continue to happen whether the Race to the Top agenda is enacted or not.

President Obama is also correct about the need to attract to and keep the best in our classrooms.  My opinion is that the way to do this is to respect them as professionals, listen to them and not dictate reforms from above.  Recognize that perhaps the teacher who spends hours with students every day might have a better grasp of what is needed and a deeper understanding student progress than anything that will show up in a Value Added Analysis.   It isn’t that I think the data and analysis is useless, it is that I fear that by elevating data above humans we will shut our ears to those whose voices need to be heard and we will make teaching a less attractive vocation.  I’m looking for a better balance.

In his confident words about expanding the use of data and other things, I believe that President Obama grossly overstated and in places mis-stated what the research indicates.  A good example of this is the idea of school turnarounds.  In Chicago, now Secretary of Education Arne Duncan pursued an aggressive school shutdown and turnaround policy.  Through Race to the Top he is trying to nationalize it.  Well, the first research is in and it doesn’t look good.  Here is what the New York Times said:

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan presided over the closing of dozens of failing schools when he was chief executive of the Chicago public schools from 2001 until last December. In his new post, he has drawn on those experiences, putting school turnaround efforts at the center of the nation’s education reform agenda.

Now a study by researchers at the University of Chicago concludes that most students in schools that closed in the first five years of Mr. Duncan’s tenure in Chicago saw little benefit.

“Most students who transferred out of closing schools re-enrolled in schools that were academically weak,” says the report, which was done by the university’s Consortium on Chicago School Research.

Furthermore, the disruptions of routines in schools scheduled to be closed appeared to hurt student learning in the months after the closing was announced, the researchers found.

There is much more of interest on “turnarounds” in this week’s National Journal experts blog.

On this and many other aspects of Race to the Top,  from linking teacher pay to test scores to charter school expansion, solid research often contradicts the claims of this administration.  At best the jury is still out on the reforms they are pushing; at worst the evidence is that enacting much of their program will make things worse.

I share the President’s desire for every child to have access to full and rich educational opportunities, to move the United States toward a culture that values teaching and learning.  I worry his plan for making this happen will move us  further from realizing these ideals.

Time to go help our younger son with his homework.

Thomas J. Mertz

2 Comments

Filed under "education finance", Accountability, Arne Duncan, Best Practices, Budget, education, Local News, National News, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | November 4, 2009 · 9:31 am

The Losing Hand — Madison Schools and the State Budget

how-to-play-omaha-poker-1Susan Troller has a story — “Madison schools — the biggest loser” — on state and local school finance in today’s Capital Times.  I’m off to the “Books not Bombs” action being held in conjunction with President Obama’s visit this morning, so no time for extensive commentary.  Just some lengthy excerpts and a quick observation that although I miss the days when there were two daily newspapers and two reporters on the schools beat, I am glad to see the Cap Times doing some longer and bigger picture stories.  Read the whole thing.

When property tax bills go out in December, taxpayers will be hit with a $92 increase in property taxes on a $250,000 home, far higher than the modest $2.50 increase the board had predicted in May. Next year looks even worse, with a budget gap now predicted to be somewhere between $23 million and $25 million for the Madison school district, said Erik Kass, the assistant superintendent for business services. With the prospect of steep cuts in education as well as the potential for a new round of tax increases, the road ahead looks rocky.

What happened? How did a formula designed to “equalize” resources among disparate school districts in Wisconsin create some of the unkindest cuts for Madison, the state’s second-largest urban school district, with nearly half of its students qualifying for free or reduced lunch? And where was the help from powerful Democrats in state government who had championed school funding reform when they were the minority party in the Legislature?

The swift turnabout in Madison has left Madison School Board members bitter and exasperated. They’re deeply frustrated with the arcane shared-revenue formula that hits Madison especially hard and with 15 years of revenue caps that have forced school districts to pass budgets that couldn’t keep up with the rising costs.

As Arlene Silveira, Madison School Board president, puts it: “We’ve been talking for years about how this system is horribly broken, yet no one seems able to really step forward to change it.”

Madison, with 24,496 students, 47 percent of whom qualify for free or reduced lunch, will this year get just over $51.5 million in general state aid. The district got hit especially hard this time around because, unlike much of the rest of the state, its property values remained relatively stable despite the slump in the housing market. It did have some company in this regard. The Middleton-Cross Plains School District in Dane County, property-rich districts around northern Wisconsin lakes, and suburban areas in the greater Milwaukee area were also socked with the maximum 15 percent reduction in state aid because of their high property values.

But unlike many suburban districts with high property values, Madison has other challenges, including a significant population of low-income students, English language learners and children with disabilities. The cost to educate these children is high, partly because of state and federal mandates that describe in detail what’s required to provide an adequate education.

Unfortunately for Madison, the state general aid formula doesn’t account for these high-needs students when calculating who gets what. Meanwhile, the percentage of funding available from government through “categorical” aids targeted at these students has been steadily dropping for more than a decade.

Madison School Board members are feeling particularly stung by this year’s budget cuts because, the economy notwithstanding, they thought this year might be different. After years of Republican control of the Statehouse, not only were Democrats in control of the Legislature and governor’s office, but Madison-area lawmakers were in charge of the budget process. As co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee, the Legislature’s powerful budget-writing panel, Sen. Mark Miller and Rep. Mark Pocan were arguably in the most powerful positions to influence the process.

But board members say they got little help from Democratic leaders, both on the specific problems surrounding the 2009-2010 budget and on broader questions about fixing the state’s long-term school funding.

“I understand that the economy is terrible, but for years we heard that the reason we had this school funding mess was because we had Republicans in charge who were basically content with the status quo,” says board member Marj Passman. “I had expected so much change and leadership on school funding issues with a Democratic governor and a Democratic Legislature. Honestly, we’ve got Rep. Pocan and Sen. Miller as co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee and Democratic majorities in both houses! Frankly, it’s been a huge disappointment. I’d love to see that little beer tax raised and have it go to education.”

Adds Silveira: “There’s been a great deal of talk about the importance of education and improving the system but very little real action that really helps us do a better job of meeting both student needs and taxpayer needs.”

She says all local municipal officials bear a particularly heavy burden, forced to cut budgets and services and go back on their promises to hold the line on property taxes.

“By the time we found out about what a huge hit we were taking in aid from the state, we were already close to the end of our fiscal year and were locked into most contracts and programs for the school year. Basically, our hands were tied,” Silveira says. “The trouble with the politicians is that they tell us that they won’t raise taxes, but that we can. It puts us in a horrible position with our own community, which has been so supportive of our schools. It doesn’t seem fair.”

Although Pocan is sympathetic to the frustrations of Madison School Board members, he says he and other legislators must balance the needs of the entire state. He agrees with Silveira and others that the funding system needs a “complete overhaul” but says that kind of change would likely come with a huge price tag, which some school funding experts suggest could reach a billion dollars.

“Given the current economy, that’s not feasible,” he says. “I’d love to do something that helps Madison, but the system is so complex with 20 or 30 threads all together that if you just pull one, something else unravels.”

But when it comes to changing the law, little of substance has happened, reflecting the political difficulties of bridging deep divisions between what various school districts and communities want, as well as between various school stakeholders, from the teachers union to school board members to taxpayer groups.

Pope-Roberts has been involved with education issues, including funding reform, since she was elected to the Assembly in 2002.

She says Wisconsin’s current dismal economy constrains even those who are most committed to education and most dedicated to exploring a range of ideas.

“It’s very bad out there in the state. I think there may actually be some school districts that simply won’t have enough money to operate after this year.”

But Pocan and Pope-Roberts say they see glimmers of hope in some new, broad-based coalitions that are coming together to work on school funding reform.

For example, the School Finance Network includes representatives from the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators, the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the Wisconsin Parent Teacher Association and the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, among others.

Despite political differences that often put them at fierce odds in the past, as a group they agree that the current funding system is divisive, unsustainable and the reason many school districts lurch from budget to budget, with expenses rising faster than allowable tax increases.

In its literature, the network notes that education has a profound long-term impact on Wisconsin’s economy and, that, if current conditions continue, it won’t be long before a number of school districts will be insolvent.

Thomas Mertz, spokesman for the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools, says the state funding system also has the unintended consequence of dividing communities instead of bringing them together through their schools. “Under the current system, the state shifts much of the tax burden and the blame to the local level,” he says. “Yeah, it’s difficult for anyone to raise taxes in this economy but the current system is broken.”

Mertz, who teaches at Edgewood College and is a Madison district parent and longtime observer of public school issues, says his group of parents and concerned citizens is advocating for a sales tax increase – a program it describes as Pennies for Kids. While the proposal is not in a final form, he says he is hopeful the state Legislature will consider a 1 percent hike in the state sales tax.

“A penny boost in the sales tax would bring us in line with surrounding states and would provide $830 million a year in aid for education,” Mertz says.

The extra pennies would surely be welcomed in the coming years. With approval of the 2009-2010 budget under its belt, the Madison School Board is already beginning to focus on ways to address the larger shortfalls predicted for the following year.

And so are other districts around the state. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently reported that some suburban districts in the Milwaukee area are already hearing from residents unhappy about double-digit increases in local tax levies, and are considering potential program changes like combining athletic teams.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Budget, education, finance, Local News, Pennies for Kids, Pope-Roberts/Breske Resolution, School Finance, Uncategorized

by | November 2, 2009 · 6:20 pm

President Obama at James C. Wright Middle School — What Will He Say?

Obama QI don’t have any inside information about what President Obama will say when he visits James C. Wright Middle School in Madison on Wednesday, November 4, but I do have some thoughts about what he shouldn’t say, what I would like to hear him say  and some other things concerning his visit.

All indications are that Obama and Secretary  of Education are here to push Governor Jim Doyle’s Race to the Top (RttT) lottery ticket purchase plan.  This is wrong.  If  that’s what is going on then Obama and Duncan should be speaking to the legislature and not using the students and staff at Wright as props to lobby for their misguided reform incentive package.

I’d like to see the President come to Madison and announce a redirection of national priorities centered on full funding of education.  I’d like to see this President reallocate from militarism and Wall Street bailouts to investing directly in preparing the our children to build a better future.

If you’d like this too, I hope you can join us in a “Books not Bombs” action to be held outside the school at the intersection of Fish Hatchery and Wingra during the President’s visit, 10:00 AM to 12:00 Noon.  Details here.

The whole RttT lottery is evidence of how far we are from full funding and making education the priority it should be.

The history of underfunded Federal mandates in Special Education, Title I poverty programs and programs for English Language Learners is well known.  As Robert Godfrey recently noted on this site, the stimulus package required state funding be only at 2006 levels, resulting in flat or shrinking general education funding levels made up in part by one-time federal dollars and in many places steep property tax hikes.   The state stabilization funding was accompanied by welcome  new Title I and IDEA money, but this too is a one-time deal and the regular funding levels remain woefully inadequate.

States are struggling to limit cuts to levels that won’t be disastrous and have all but lost sight of sustainable full funding.  Schools aren’t starving (yet) but they are mighty hungry.

With the Race to the Top lottery Arne Duncan and President Obama are waving a small piece of cake before these hungry schools and saying “if you jump through these hoops we may give some of you one bite each.”

Make no mistake that this is cake, a treat, not life-sustaining bread.  The amount being discussed for Wisconsin is $80 million and this relative pittance would all be targeted for specific programs and when the $80 million is gone, Wisconsin would be stuck with more things that we can no longer afford.

Yet Wisconsin and other states are running toward those hoops Duncan is holding, shouting “how high should we jump,” because they are desperate for any education funding, no matter how small, how misdirected or how ephemeral.  As I write this, the Assembly Education Committee is fast tracking the legislation to get Wisconsin through those hoops.  Only in times this desperate could the chance at so little leverage so much.

I hate to see the staff and students at Wright being used in this cynical game.  I’d much rather they heard Obama at his best, inspiring hope and aspirations; speaking of the power and joy of teaching and learning, reminding one and all that  our public schools are basic to the promises of equality of opportunity; praising our educators and students for their accomplishments; and most of all congratulating the Wright community for their good work and telling the world in some detail how these things are happening at James C. Wright Middle School, despite the odds.

Sadly, I doubt we will get much of this.  The Doyle, Duncan, Obama education agenda is tangential, irrelevant or counter to what makes Wright a school we should be proud of.

Our older son finished 8th grade at Wright last year and I participated in the School Improvement Process as a “friendly observer” so I write from experience and with Panther Pride.  Some background on Wright first.

Wright is a small school, with relatively small (if limited in their offerings) classes and  a “Social Action” focus.  86% of the students qualify for free or reduced lunches, 39% are classified as English Language Learners; the racial and ethnic demographics are 1% Native American, 38% African American,  37% Hispanic, 12% Asian and  13% White.

As measured by state standardized tests (with the notation that this is a very limited measure of teaching, learning and school quality) Wright does well by most students and better than most schools for poor and minority students.  here are some graphs:

CFT1103_1356442D7

From the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, click for WINSS site.

 

CFT1103_13565637

From the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, click for WINSS site.

There are still gaps in achievement and the test scores in other subjects are not as strong, but the general picture is of a relatively successful school.

In other areas, where data is of even more limited utility, Wright is a very successful school.  There is a sense of community and an atmosphere of caring that transcends (but does not obliterate) racial, ethnic and economic differences.  The staff function as a professional, collaborative team much of the time.  In general there is pride, Panther Pride that encourages all to do their best and encourages all to aspire to do even better.  Through the social action focus, Wright seeks to bring this “we can do better” message to the wider community.  I can’t write this without once again crediting Principal Nancy Evans and the entire staff for these accomplishments and thanking them for all they do.

Reviewing the Doyle, Duncan, Obama agenda, I don’t see much that would help Wright get better and I see some things that will make it harder for Wright to maintain the quality and qualities they have achieved.

Due to the cuts in education funding in the recent state budget, Madison — like so many other districts — is looking at a very difficult budget in 2010-11.  Doyle, Duncan and Obama aren’t offering any help at all with this.  A difficult budget will likely mean that small class sizes, particularly those at Wright where they are below the norm for the district, will be targeted.

The support staff at Wright is already minimal, with psychologists, social workers, librarians and others only in the school a day or two or three a week.  That too could get worse (see here for a report of what is happening in Minnesota).

The demographics of the school highlight the importance of funding for students in poverty and English language Learners.  The state of Wisconsin provides no poverty aid beyond the limited SAGE program for the early grades, state reimbursements for English Language Learners as a percentage of costs have been falling for over a decade and the Federal money in both these areas remains small.  None of the current proposals from Doyle (or Duncan and Obama) do anything to fix this.

Much of the agenda they are pushing has to do with more data and more uses of data.  It is hard to be against better assessments, better collection of data and better coordination in the use of data; but most of this is a distraction and is linked in their agenda to misguided noti0ns of national standards and expanded use of flawed test data to make decisions about almost everything, including teacher compensation (Doyle’s legislation on the last, here).

One at a time on data issues, mostly in the “for further reading” mode.

On National standards, I recommend reading what what Deborah Meir wrote here and checking out what William A. Proefriedt has to say to understand how the standards movement is working to undermine the engaged democratic ideals at the base of Wright’s social action mission.  This recent report that the development of standards development is being shaped by profit motives of the participants is also worth a look.

On the limits of data and data analysis and their potential for abuse, the recent letter to Secretary Duncan from the Board on Testing and Assessment of the  National Research Council is a must read.

Linking teacher compensation to test scores is wrong in so many ways.  Just three things for now; it prioritizes test scores in selected subjects as the be-all-and-end-all of education, shunting aside all those things Wright that make it not just a “relatively successful school” but a great school; it has great potential to undermine collaboration and professional relationships; and it doesn’t appear to work, even by the crude measures of standardized tests.

Duncan, Obama and now Doyle like charter schools and Wright is technically a charter school.  Technically is the key word.  There is nothing about the governance of Wright that is any different than any other school in Madison.  The charter status is a historical artifact.   If they want to use Wright to make the case for charter expansion, they picked the wrong example.  Expanding charters won’t help Wright and it probably won’t help create more Wrights.

While on the topic of charters, it is also worth noting that the pedagogy and curriculum of one of Duncan’s favorite charter groups — KIPP — is the exact opposite of the engaged, questioning, challenging lessons that Wright teaches as the basis for social action.  Jim Horn has posted on this aspect of KIPP many times, see here, here and here for examples.

A few last words on Mayoral control and some other ways that the Doyle, Duncan, Obama agenda is working against the ideal of an engaged citizenry having a voice in public education, how what they are pushing and how they are pushing it undermines the social action ideas of Reverend James C. Wright and the school that bears his name.

Mayoral control and the pending legislation for State Superintendent takeovers of districts “in need of improvement” (no further requirements spelled out. just that the State Superintendent says they need improvement) if implemented will make it more difficult for activists to be involved in their schools.  School Board campaigns are local, grassroots efforts.  Mayoral and State-wide campaigns are mostly about money and advertising.  In the first, candidates meet people and listen.  In the latter they craft messages based on polling.

Once in office,  School Board members are relatively accessible; Mayors and State Superintendents are busy and difficult to reach.  In practice, the public has an opportunity to testify at most Board meetings.  Mayors tend to listen to power brokers and though I like Tony Evers (and even met with him once), I don’t believe he has held any public “listening sessions.”

These proposals won’t completely shut the public out, but they will mute the voices of the grass roots.

The voices of the grass roots have also been muted in the way the RttT legislation is being handled in Wisconsin.  Governor Doyle  issued general outlines a couple of weeks ago with few of the all-important details.  The first batch of legislation was introduced Friday 10/29 and the first hearing was scheduled for today (Monday, 11/2).  As of this morning there weren’t even Legislative Fiscal Bureau notes attached. Full floor votes in both houses may be scheduled before the end of next week (the session is scheduled to end Friday, but will likely be extended).

This isn’t enough time to analyze, much less organize and mobilize.

I’d like to hear President Obama and Governor Doyle explain to the students at Wright how this accelerated schedule serves the democratic process and why it is necessary to make it so difficult for students and others concerned with the future of education in Wisconsin to have their voices heard.

This is no more likely than the promise of new priorities and pledge of  full educational funding I wished for at the top of this post.

So in closing, I’ll express my hope for one thing that I think may actually happen:  President Obama, please be sure to spend some time with “Mother” Jacqueline Wright and share some of the stories of Mother and Reverend Wright’s activism with the world.  If, as you do this  you are reminded of why it is so important that voices from the outside be heard in the halls of power and have some second thoughts about the rest of the agenda for your visit, please heed those thoughts.

Thomas J. Mertz

1 Comment

Filed under "education finance", Arne Duncan, Best Practices, Budget, education, finance, Local News, National News, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized

by | October 28, 2009 · 8:33 am

WAES School Funding Reform Update, the Week of October 26, 2009

waesgraphicFrom the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools. Table of contents below, with related material on AMPS linked to some items.  Click here for the full update.

  • WAES, others groups criticize Governor’s “funding plan”
  • Electors saying no to levy hikes resulting from state budget (and here and here and here)
  • Public, media understand the source of school funding problems
  • State of Washington wants pennies for its kids, too
  • Business leaders back expansion of early childhood education
  • WAES needs renewals, new members to continue work
  • Other states get it … what’s wrong with Wisconsin?
  • Colorado Supreme Court will hear adequacy challenge
  • WAES members take case on funding reform to the public
  • It’s time for America to pay attention to its schools again
  • Help WAES correct e-mail update glitch
  • School-funding reform calendar

    • The Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools (WAES) is a statewide, independent, membership-based organization of educators, school board members, students, parents, community leaders, researchers, citizens, and community activists whose lone goal is the comprehensive reform of Wisconsin’s school-funding system. If you would like more information about the organization — or on becoming part of WAES — contact Tom Beebe at 920-650-0525 or tbeebe@excellentschools.org.

Thomas J. Mertz

Leave a comment

Filed under "education finance", Best Practices, Budget, education, finance, Local News, Pennies for Kids, School Finance, Take Action, Uncategorized, We Are Not Alone