public elementary school in the bay area

Last week I watched the State of the Union message and was caught by the section that school districts should be helping students so they don’t drop out and instead graduate from high school. I had a hard time, thinking about my school district that was not in the least concerned when I didn’t finish high school as long as I had already completed the basic courses I needed. The district just took me off their records. I wasn’t counted as a “dropout.” I took Adult Ed classes to finish. It was only my family that forced them to let me be part of the graduation exercises.

My students this year are strong and willing to pursue their education. Let’s see what happens when they get to high school. Are they like me who went on to community college, then a four year college, and am now finishing a Master’s degree- in spite of the fact that I hated high school? Or are the high schools changing? Right now, I’m doing my best to make what is on the state standards relevant and interesting to fourth graders.

Then I saw an article in Tuesday’s New York Times that told about exaggerating SAT scores at one well-regarded private college to improve its ratings in the US News annual College Bound manual. Am I supposed to resolve this latest revelation?

Stop worrying about me, the teacher.

Start worrying about the money needed to run the institution of public education. Worry about those kids who aren’t upper or middle class and whose parents are just glad they are going to school much less their SAT score since the parents did not have any education. It’s going to take a long time to change their status.

high school in the Los Angeles area

Not only is California at the cliff’s edge, all states are looking into the abyss. Few states are not “at risk” and even those lucky states must address reinvestment in young and old adults. Find ways to stick it out in school or renew skills.

This blog has talked about dropping out and graduation from high school, another issue of the day for all states. In California, the main issue revolves around the money available to the state government. Tax initiatives are being put forward for the November 2012 ballot.

Do any of the following bring to mind the fiscal issue in your state? It is said that California leads the nation in legislation that takes effect.

A worry, according to Rachel Norton of the San Francisco School Board, California “voters’ clear desire for a solution” will dissolve when asked to choose among the many initiatives gaining prominence.

As has been noted in this blog, California’s Governor Jerry Brown has gained enough signatures for his initiative to be on the ballot. As is being fought in the federal government, it will increase temporarily taxes for the wealthy by 2%, increase temporarily sales tax by ½ cent, and guarantee that $7 billion is spent on education. Today, January 25, 2012, the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) has noted in its latest poll taken in January 2012 that 68% of likely voters of all stripes will vote “yes” to the governor’s proposal.

Another tax initiative by the Think Long Committee, detailed in this blog as the Think Long Blueprint, is set to improve the state’s finances, not just the schools. Read the details of the committee on the internet.

Another event associated with Next California and California Forward under James Fishkin from Stanford University has shown the lack of knowledge in California. After a turn in Torrance, California, the nearly 500 participants came to the following conclusions which leads this blog to the following questions. How can voters defeat tax proposals in one poll and 68% approve in another? How can outrage with the initiative process be turned around and accepted as is in a poll? How can participants still think that a good part of government is wasteful when schools, which all voters love, are about to lose $4.8 billion if the favored tax bill doesn’t pass?

Another proposition not explained on this blog has not yet been approved. It is the state Parent Teacher Association (PTA) and the civil rights group called The Advancement Project initiative “Our children, Our Future” that asks for $10 billion in new revenue, all of which is for Pre-K to 12. Remember Prop 98? Similar. What is included to make this tax more viable is the phrase for re-approval after twelve years.

Other initiatives not yet approved call for a tax on oil and gas extraction and a “split roll” tax. A split roll affects Prop 13 and makes corporations pay a different property tax rate than home properties.

Will you read your ballot pamphlet? Will you use your money on schools (public, private, charter) or will you turn away?

The answer by the mid 1970’s was to equalize the funds that a school district gets. At that time, the state was not only thinking of poor black students like on the east coast, but of the rising demographic of poor Hispanic students and a multitude of other children who spoke many languages, but not standard American California English.

Sounds good but led to Proposition 13 which, in this blogger’s opinion, has done no good for schools even thirty-five years later. Much to the regular guy’s surprise, the state took over the schools. There had been plenty of warnings: while property taxes were a problem, only 35 years later are the actual details of the proposition being looked at and the rules coming to light.

Now in spite of the proposition’s faults, which will take forever to be ironed out in our legislature, the governor must, to balance the budget, either have the great state of California raise taxes or defund the schools next year (2012-2013) by 6 percent. And school districts, much less the regular guy, won’t know until votes are counted in November 2012.

Two adjustments are certain.

First, if the tax initiatives don’t pass-and there are several-and if 6 percent of funds must be cut, that will mean teachers will be gone. In anticipation, pink slips galore will appear March 15, 2012. It’s anyone’s guess if one of the many tax measures passes in November 2012, but school districts will have to rehire teachers and reallocate students to classrooms three months after the new school year has begun.

Second, transitional kindergarten, a program for all the children who are not five years old by September 1, 2012, will not begin. This model has been organized for three years to start this year after the legislature changed the school age law.

These two education changes, which do not lead to any happy outcome, are the tip of the school district’s  iceberg. Let’s hope the state Department of Education can do its part to urge the legislature to balance the state budget without failing students.

The District has engaged in a proactive process in its budget work.  The County Financial Officer (CFO) consistently uses conservative numbers to calculate budgetary possibilities.  That tack helped the District build a large surplus in the mid 2000’s that has buffered some cuts.  Even so, the drop in tax dollars has been relentless, and reserves are tapped.

The District developed a “Budget Academy,” a six week program that covered all aspects of its budget.  Over 100 people participated, patiently listening to reports from district personnel on facilities, transportation, athletics, instruction, technology, compensation, health benefits, and pensions.

These people then became involved in Budget Work Groups that focused on sections of the budget, scouring departments and school budgets for any excess flesh.  District personnel took the first whacks, reviewed the whacks with citizens, and tried to mitigate cuts for classrooms.

Citizens and employees completed an online survey asking where cuts should occur.  The cry went out, “Get rid of administrators.”  One person suggested getting rid of buildings as well, saying a tent, children, teacher, and blackboard are enough.  Suggestions included expanding transportation walking distances another half mile (up hill both ways), increasing fees for athletics and other after school activities, trimming librarians and school counselors, and getting rid of music and arts in elementary school.  Long ago the district eliminated after school athletics for middle school.

What the District hasn’t done yet is decide where it needs to hold the line.  It hasn’t made triage decisions.  So, if the District decides it must get all third graders reading at grade level, how can it fund that decision?  Or if the district needs to put money into middle school to keep those kids on track, how can it fund that need?

The District hasn’t explored whether it’s possible to reduce costs and increase teacher income by asking some teachers to take on more students, pay for the extra work, but save money by reducing the staffing.

The harsh recession continues to take its toll.  We may not know the full impact for 12 years when today’s kindergartners are seniors.  If drop out levels are high in 2024, and lots of graduates need remediation in college, we can look back to their early years and know that the recession of 2008-2012 wreaked havoc on our ability to deliver the excellence kids deserve no matter what year they’re born.

Let’s see of what Pearson-Always Learning consists. Associated in the United States with Scott Foresman for the grade school crowd and Prentice Hall for the secondary and higher education folks, it is a big publisher. Along with Macmillan-Harcourt, McGraw Hill, Addison-Wesley, Longman, and Allyn and Bacon, it has stakes in every field of education it can tackle. The latest: it is geared up for digital education and testing services. In addition, Pearson-Always Learning owns Penguin Group, with its trade book imprints, and the newspaper the Financial Times.

Let’s hear about its pal, the Pearson Foundation. The website looks great and under About Us suggests all the right educational words and tools. It is a 501c3 non-profit organization that promotes literacy, learning, and great teaching. Why does the New York Times have questions?

It turns out from the article that the foundation offers trips around the world (London, China, Finland, Singapore, Rio de Janeiro) to see education programs that work, paying for the air fare and accommodations for members of the Council of Chief State School Officers. As one might realize, the Foundation is choosing Chief State School Officers where Pearson-Always Learning is selling.

Other posts have commended the Council of Chief State School Officers for support of Common Core Standards. Education blogs all over the United States have commented about good schools and how they find success. But, remember that a teacher is being criticized every day by the same education experts that are selling the state testing services or digital analysis materials.

Be knowledgeable what your district chooses.

So, the Obama administration hasn’t shown leadership-when?

Here is a list from Elaine who commented on David Brooks and Gail Collins post on the Opinionator, December 14, 2011.

President Obama’s successes:
-End the Iraq War.

-Health care reform-this will change the way Americans can access health insurance . It will make health insurance affordable for everyone. Who in their right mind can argue the benefits?

-Brought down Osama bin Laden. This is a big deal.

-A great deal of financial intervention, aside from stimulus, during a time when the economy was poised to go over a cliff.

-Recognized the problem with unemployment and the reasons behind the problem-meaning recognizing the real reasons unemployment stays high. Corporations are holding back, not hiring, and also taking this opportunity to practice age and other discrimination.

Also one might add, help to orchestrate the demise of Muammar el-Qaddifi.

Stimulus funds, though not enough and fought over since they were voted for, helped California fix Interstate 5 after trucks had destroyed the right lane. Have you seen the ARRA signs around?

The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

The resuscitation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (NCLB) that was about to go another year without revision. The administration finally suggested “waivers” and offered them to states.

The California Early Learning Challenge grant of $52.6 million squeezed out of Race to the Top monies given to eight other east coast states is for a specific program that will primarily fund local Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS) being developed by Regional Leadership Consortia - voluntary groups of local First 5 commissions, county offices of education, and county governments. These Consortia will work with licensed child care programs, school districts, and child care partners.

Although the current Congress has a perverted way of counting every penny, one of the ways that the administration has led the nation is by looking out for young children. All those, including teachers, who need to criticize, must keep their students in mind.

For instance, last week, Friday, December 9, 2011, I read an article that caught my attention: “Funding, not reform, upgrades schools” by David Sirota, a well-known columnist. Although he included many facts, a few of which were new to me, the article was on the Opinion page of the San Francisco Chronicle.

On International student Assessment exams American students in low-income public schools are among the high-achieving. So are public schools “in crisis” as is the opinion of many? Another fact: the opinion that teachers’ unions are destroying public schools doesn’t hold up when the high Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) proficiency-a number fact and No Child Left Behind goal-is found in unionized public schools.

In addition, Sirota directs the reader to a report written by Sean F. Reardon and Kendra Bischoff of Stanford University in July 2010. The abstract states, “both income inequality and income segregation in the United States grew substantially from 1970 to 2000. Using data from the 100 largest metropolitan areas, we investigate whether and how income inequality affects patterns of income segregation along three dimensions-the spatial segregation of poverty and affluence; race-specific patterns of income segregation; and the geographic scale of income segregation. We find a robust relationship between income inequality and income segregation, an effect that is larger for black families than it is for white families. In addition, income inequality affects income segregation primarily through its effect on the large-scale spatial segregation of affluence, rather than by affecting the spatial segregation of poverty or by altering small-scale patterns of income segregation.”

Another report issued by the United States Department of Education “More Than 40% of Low-Income Schools don’t Get a Fair Share of State and Local Funds” November 30, 2011, shows that “high-poverty schools receive less than their fair share of state and local funding.”

Now, Sirota gives his opinion and guess what it is? That low-performing schools in low-income neighborhoods should get more money. But with the facts above, do I call it Opinion? I know what schools are like. Our school receives little Title I money, but I know teachers in schools that rely on those funds to cover tutors and extra personnel. Each time the budget is cut, another person leaves.

The question is will there ever be a funding policy, federal or local, that helps low-performing schools in poverty areas? It’s a good thought for the holidays when it is the opinion that Americans feel more generous.

In addition to the report offered by the Think Long Committee under the auspices of the Nicolas Berggruen Institute, analyzed in this blog last week, another report titled “A Blueprint for Great Schools” authorized by Mr. Torlakson, the new California Superintendent of Instruction, and funded by various California foundations, has appeared. It came out in August 2011, but a summary seems to be available to teachers only in the November 2011 issue of California Educator magazine. Its purpose is “the development of a new mission and planning framework for the California Department of Education (CDE). [It provides] innovative and strategic advice to ensure that the state provides a world-class education to all students, preparing them to live, work and thrive in a highly connected world.” Sound familiar?

Knowing how the California Department of Education is entwined with the state legislature’s struggle with funds, this blog has been most interested in how all those pages of goals and objectives in any of the reports that have surfaced are going to be paid for.

The report in last week’s post has offered an initiative for funding at the November 2012 election-one of many.  This report offers to

Create a weighted student formula approach to funding, with most K-12 funding streams consolidated into core formula funding, supplemented by a small number of block grants to ensure that students who are at risk or high cost would receive the services they need.

Establish a flexibility/accountability task force to identify strategies and metrics to determine whether districts are using their funds in ways that support successful outcomes for all students.

Seek new revenue sources for schools: At the state level, explore taxes on selected sales and services; at the federal level, initiate efforts to recapture more of the imbalance in funds between California and the federal government.

Seek legislation to allow districts to pass parcel taxes with a 55 percent majority vote.

Right now (December 2011) in the California education world, school districts are deciding how to economize their resources and adjust the school year to allow five more furlough days in order to absorb the deficits that have shown up in the state budget adopted in June 2011. According to Dan Walters, columnist for the Sacramento Bee, the California budget that governs school aid in California is crazy. In June 2011 as part of balancing the state budget, if revenue did not accrue, the legislature agreed that school districts would be responsible for revenue reduction by automatic spending cuts. That’s currently $1.8 (about ¾ of the current $2.5) billion not being generated.

How many years will pass before the goals outlined above actually become law? Let’s hope the taxpayers suddenly find money, one of the many initiatives pass, or the legislature is willing to stand up.  Everyone wrings their hands about schools, but can’t put out the dough.

For report see www.cde.ca.gov/eo/in/bp.

The committee’s main function was to design a “blueprint” for the state budget and taxes. In addition, the group has addressed education, noting the past high quality of education and the loss of funds to sustain the quality.

Anything that will help education in California is welcome. So far the main principle is to raise the funds spent on K-12 and community colleges and more funds for the University of California (UC) and California State Universities (CSU). Also, proposals for teacher and principal evaluation are prominent in the plan. See bullets for meaningful evaluation, non-seniority based lay-offs, earned tenure over 5 years, equitable distribution of teacher talent, and data analysis in the report. The generalizations seem a lot like the proposals put forward by the U.S. Department of Education but also represent thinking by people outside of the education field. How much did the new state superintendent contribute? And, until teachers are included in the deliberations, the proposals will remain generalizations. Neither the superintendent’s name nor the names of any teachers were listed in the report. The president of CTA and the superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School district were listed.

Looking again at the design for the California state budget and taxes, it includes best practices, and includes a new tax rate initiative for voters to approve in November 2012. The new tax rate is supposed to generate revenue to support schools. Also, a citizen’s watchdog group, which is supposed to make sure all the recommendations occur, is a proposed initiative for November 2012. Right now, there are organizations, California AAUW for example, examining the Initiative Process itself and recommending changes. So initiatives are currently up in the air.

However, if there are no changes, there will be no benefit for schools. The big obstacle in the room is Proposition 13, of course. Until brave souls are willing to make further revisions to that insidious legislation will money ever appear for schools?

Finally, it is a shame that university and city administrators can’t see the value in letting the Occupiers demonstrate, like UC students did at the UC regents’ meetings on Monday, November 28, 2012. Over time, the majority of those people will be working and paying taxes, so what does it say when the sites they occupy are public property, but the occupiers are treated as criminals? All of the members of the Think Long Committee are well-to-do and hold sway in the state. What will the occupiers think of the committee’s proposals if speech is cut off?

See the editorial “A solid set of reforms” in the San Francisco Chronicle, November 27, 2012. For a look at the detail of the report go to www.berggruen.org/thinklongcommittee.

California newspapers have warned the public of the downturn to the revenues estimated last spring to balance the budget. That means students will have five fewer days of school-fewer than the furlough days already in the school budget. With the failure of the “Supercommittee” to come up with a plan to dissolve the nation’s deficit, cuts to federal monies sent to states will play havoc in California schools as well as other state’s school districts by Fall 2012.

That’s the education news for Thanksgiving 2011.