Presentation Before The Rancho Bernardo Rotary Club (ppt excluded)

By Kimberley Beatty

Poway Unified and the State of Education

Thank you for inviting me here today to speak about education policy as it relates to PUSD. I have four children who currently attend Poway Unified Schools and I am currently on the PTA Board at Mt. Carmel High School, Black Mountain Middle School and Creekside Elementary. My husband and I both volunteer in the classroom every year. This past February, I attended a 3-day State PTA Legislation Conference in Sacramento, where I spoke before education panels at the Capitol, and met with State Senators, Assembly Members, and staff from the Governor's office to discuss the current education crisis and challenge them to craft real solutions.

Before I address the funding crisis in education, I would like to briefly mention some important education policy changes that are currently taking place. Two involve an overhaul of the Federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which under the Bush Administration was known as No Child Left Behind. Under the Obama Administration the current act is called Race to the Top and involves a competitive grant funding system aimed at turning around the lowest performing schools.
The California legislature spent 2 months last year enacting legislation to qualify for the competitive grants. California failed to qualify for the first round, but did recently qualify for approximately $400 million to turn around 188 identified failing schools. The newly enacted state laws allow these schools 4 methods of intervention: replacing 50% of the existing staff (turnaround); turning a school over to an outside manager (restart); closing the school and transferring the students; or providing professional development to teachers and making curriculum changes (transformation). In addition the 10% lowest performing schools, approximately 1000 of them, are just now being required to allow their students to enroll in other schools or districts.
This has little direct impact on the Poway Unified and the vast majority of the state's 10,000 schools. So, why did the California legislature spend 2 months crafting legislation to vie for a relatively small amount of money considering our education budget is $40 to $50 billion? The legislation was part of a reform movement to over haul the structure of public education. Community groups are empowered to take over their schools. More charter schools can be formed and, perhaps the most controversial, the state law creating a firewall between teacher evaluations and student test scores was eliminated. Critics say this will exacerbate teaching to the test and it goes to the fundamental question of what makes a good teacher and how that is determined.

An even more significant education policy change is the Common-Core Standards. 48 state governors and their schools chiefs, plus Washington, DC, came together this year to create national education standards. 31 states have adopted the standards, including California 3 days ago, and a dozen more are expected to do so in the next 2 weeks. These standards determine what students should master at every grade level. The argument is that uniformity of standards across state lines will allow for better evaluation of states, create lower costs with economies of scale and make it easier for students to move interstate. This was partly precipitated by NCLB, where states were lowering standards in order to avoid the penalties of failing grades.
One problem for California is that, while it's per pupil funding ranks near the bottom, its' educational standards ranks at the top. For instance, under the Common Core Standards Algebra is taught in 9th grade, but the California standard requires it to be taught in 8th grade. One solution was to develop a 2 track system, which was opposed because of its' potential harm to minority groups. So, it was written into the agreement to allow for a 15% deviation in standards, which CA sees as allowing it to maintain 8th grade algebra.

In tandem with the Common Core Standards is an effort to develop standardized tests. The states have divided into 3 different consortias that are vying for a federal grant to design assessments aligned with the Common-Core Standards. All the proposals would get away from bubble tests and emphasize students' ability to analyze and apply knowledge, not just recall it. They would also incorporate performance based testing during the year, as well as a computerized year end assessment.

The last and perhaps most important policy development is the California Department of Education Report, Multiple Pathways to Student Success, written as a result of Assembly Bill 2648. This has the potential to transform our high schools. The report is known as Linked Learning and is focused on preparing each student for both higher education and 21st Century careers. The next step is an advisory board tasked with making recommendations on implementing the report. Here are some things that linked learning does:

1. Changes the structure of high schools to focus on mastery of subject matter, with personalized learning plans. 3-5 years.
2. merges postsecondary education with career preparation.
3. additional school days and hours per day.
4. includes project/problem based learning in the curriculum.
5. increases school/local business relationships with partnership academies, regional occupational centers and programs, internships and includes career-themed small schools.

Possible problems: This is going to take a big monetary investment at a time when schools are being cut through the bone. Many more counselors will be needed to tailor individualized programs.

POWAY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

We have a treasure trove of teacher talent and dedication. Our teachers do so much more than help our kids achieve high test scores. Many spend hundreds -- and some even thousands -- of dollars out of their own pockets on books and supplies for their classrooms; many others devote themselves in unquantifiable ways. There's the teacher who organizes summer poolside book club parties for her students and throws classroom parties, but refuses to take parent money; the Spanish teacher who periodically takes orders for fun ethnic food for her students; the first/second grade teacher who is determined to create individualized instruction for each of her students, no matter how challenging the circumstance; the high school biology teacher taking her students on an overnight fieldtrip to Lake Dixon to do field labs and rock climbing. And I get a lump in my throat thinking about the teacher who so loves her students that when her husband had a massive stroke she continued to come to school in the evenings to prepare lesson plans for the substitute and work on the myriad of details required for the students' upcoming overnight Star of India fieldtrip, including staying with them on the ship until the evening. I have a hundred stories and so do other parents. But we are at a breaking point.

We are a top quality school district because of our outstanding teachers and support staff, extensive parent volunteerism and high-achieving students. Test scores rank among the top in the state but the quality of our education has been eroded by nonstop budget cuts since 2003, in addition to decades of inadequate funding. Our district revenue for this coming year is $226 million. In 2008, it was $270 million. This is not just a differential of $44 million. Every year our district incurs additional costs of approximately $6 million. This includes step and column increases for teachers and staff, as well as increased fuel and utility costs. With year over year expenses, we should be at over $300 million.
Programs such as art, music, drama and PE now exist, if at all, only because of parent funding. Supplemental fees are required in order to participate in band, orchestra, sports, fieldtrips and bus transportation. This requires extensive fundraisers and large out-of-pocket expenses to pay for basic school activities. School site educational foundations that originally were set up to pay for classroom technology are now having to purchase core curriculum material in science and other subjects. Parents are photocopying daily lesson plans, providing workroom and classroom support and even helping teachers clean classrooms. Gone are school librarians, counselors, nurses, vice principals, resource specialists and supplemental programs to help struggling students. K-3 class size reduction (CSR) is being eroded and school buses have almost all but been eliminated. High school classrooms are being measured for maximum capacity, with class sizes this coming year of 46 to 55 students. And while other advanced countries are lengthening their school year, we are shortening ours, from 180 to 175 days. These are Depression Era times for education and there has never been a more urgent need for an overhaul in education financing.

California per pupil spending in 2008/09 was $2131 below the national average, ranking the state 44th in the country. New York spent $6000 more per pupil, Rhode Island and Vermont each spent double. Adjusting for cost differences, California dropped to 47th in per pupil funding.
In 2007/08, prior to the recent budget cuts which have amounted to well over $2000 per student, California ranked 49th in student teacher ratios; 48th in total school staff; 47th in total principals and assistant principals; 46th in district officials and administrators; 45th in instructional aides; 49th in guidance counselors; 50th in librarians; and 49th in access to computers. California ranks among the lowest in the nation on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the national report card for education. In the most recent assessment, CA was 47th in 4th grade reading and 46th in 8th grade math.
California educates 1.7 million more students than Texas, but does so with 16,700 fewer teachers. Just to reach the national average in staffing ratios, California would need another 104,000 teachers, 26,569 instructional aides, 5,740 guidance counselors, 5,740 librarians, 5,630 principals or assistant principals, and 63,000 more computer work stations. Because of continuing budget cuts this spending gap is expected to grow further.

So, how did we get here? Two lawsuits have been filed this year, in May and July, against the Governor and the State for unconstitutionally underfunding education. The first lawsuit, Robles-Wong v. California is joined by students, parents, school districts, CAPTA, the California School Boards Association and the Association of California School Administrators. The complaint states that the constitution requires the state to fund a system of "free common schools". California has developed a standards based curriculum, dictating what all schools will teach and all students will learn, but has failed to provide the funding to meet those rigorous standards.
The state also requires numerous services and programs deemed necessary for students to succeed, such as meals, transportation, interventions and health related services.
In 2007 the Governor's Committee on Education Excellence, after 2 years of studies, concluded that education funding is based on "anachronistic formulas, neither tied to the needs of individual students nor to intended academic outcomes."
For a detailed historical chronology of California's irrational, complex and flawed school funding system I would encourage you to go to http://www.fixschoolfinance.org and read the Robles-Wong complaint. I only have time for a very brief outline of the history of public school funding in this state:

1849 + Cal. Const. art. IX, s2 + The State School Fund was created 1910 + Const. Amendment + "There shall first be set apart the moneys to be applied by the state for support of the public school system" (no longer finite revenue sources) 1920 + Const. Amendment to provide for minimum state funding per Average Daily Attendance (ADA) and local property taxes to provide additional support for schools. 1946 + Const. Amendment: "The Foundation Program Minimum" + each school district to receive a minimum amount of funding from state, plus could levy local property taxes: If state "basic aid" + local district tax revenues < Foundation Program Minimum, then State "Equilization Aid" 1959 + Legislative Report finds shrinking state support of schools and greater reliance on local revenues, creating large disparities between districts. 1971 + Serrano v. Priest + CA Supreme Court held that large disparities in education funding violated students' constitutional rights to equal opportunity within the public education system. 1972-1973 Response to Serrano + "Revenue Limit" controls. Each district's Revenue Limit was based on the state's Foundation Program Minimum Funding and local property tax revenues as of 1972-73.

- Revenue Limits were completely unrelated to the actual cost of the educational program in that district.
- System attempted to "Level Up" and "Level Down"
- Revenue Limits (adjusted for inflation only) became maximum funding levels.
- Generally, this funding continues to be based on historical data unrelated to the actual costs of providing the educational program and services required by the state.

1978 + Proposition 13 + Const. Amendment severely restricting taxing authority of all local governments, including school districts.

- Rolled property assessments to 1975-76 levels
- limited property tax rate to 1%
- Gave state complete control in allocating reduced property tax revenues among school districts, local governments and special districts.
- eliminated school districts' ability to levy ad valorem property taxes for education.

1988 + Prop. 98, Const. Amendment to set minimum funding level for K-14 education. + Ties school funding to growth in State General Fund revenues in a given year

- volatile and unpredictable, with revenue projections changing over the school year, affecting actual allocation
- can be suspended during economic crisis
- funding formulas based on 1986/87 education budget, which was based on antiquated caps set in 1970's (adjusted for cost of living and population).
- Proposition 98 "minimum" has become a maximum AND now includes the costs of certain education related programs: child care, adult education, probation schools, California Youth Authority programs, health screening, public safety and more.
- Many accounting gimmicks to manipulate minimum funding guarantee.
- Instability:
- Prop. 98 funding cut by $17 Billion in last 2 years

Categorical Funding + Funding is tied to the provision of a specific program or service. 1980 + State and Federal Categorical Programs + 13% of state education funding. Today + 1/3 of state funding is categorical with general purpose funds being reduced correspondingly.

And this brings us to today's crisis in education. As you can see, it is a deeply complex problem requiring legislative resolve that does not seem to exist today. And so it is going to require engagement of the people. This affects all of our futures. I attended the University of Virginia. Thomas Jefferson created the University of Virginia as a free institution of higher learning because he believed that a democracy could not survive without an educated and informed citizenry.

Thank you again for inviting me.