Fixing Schools

Over the past 40 years, taxpayers have provided the public education system
with steady improvements in funding, teacher pay and lower student-teacher
ratios, but student outcomes haven’t improved measurably, says Peggy Venable,
Texas director of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation.

New solutions are needed to improve public education without dramatic
increases in funding:

O School district officials must set spending priorities and direct
money to the classroom first.

O Expenditures on teacher pay must be tied to student outcomes, which
means merit pay or incentive pay initiatives.

O Bold ideas can work: New Zealand eliminated school boards, made every
public school self-governing and allowed school choice-and student
performance improved.

If a complete overhaul of a state’s education system isn’t possible,
incremental changes are needed. For example, educational options like tutoring
or extra course work can be offered to lagging students, while high achievers
can learn from a more challenging curriculum, says Venable.

Another idea, she says, is to appropriate state funds to schools for teacher
pay only, while local dollars fund administrative salaries, facilities and
other expenses.

Source: Peggy Venable, “Spending what we have now,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram,
July 20, 2004.

Spending what we have now

By Peggy Venable

Special to the Star-Telegram

Revamping Texas school finance is a daunting task, with as many twists and turns as a Six Flags roller coaster and as many frustrations as trying to keep second-graders quiet during recess.

On one side of the debate are the education union lobbyists, seeking more dollars for education. On the other side are taxpayers, demanding more education for their dollars. Our schoolchildren are locked in the middle of the debate.

Let’s look before we leap. Are we adequately funding education?

While per-pupil spending in Texas is above average, 31 states spend a greater percentage of their education dollars on teacher salaries. And Texas spends an average of only 50 cents of every education dollar on instruction, which includes teacher salaries.

Just how do Texas teachers fare in comparison with teachers in other states or in comparison to other professions?

Texas teacher salaries are 17th in the country when adjusted for cost of living, according to the American Federation of Teachers.

Still, teachers have perks that many other professions don’t offer. Teachers officially work 187 days, while most workers spend 235 days a year on the job.

And teachers are school district employees, not state employees. That hasn’t kept the state from monkeying with teacher health insurance, but perhaps it is time that we consider reforming the education delivery system, not just tweaking it.

Like all individuals, teachers understand and respond to incentives. No doubt we could attract and retain good teachers if we provide them with more autonomy in the classroom, reduce the administrative oversight and pay the best teachers as much as we pay administrators.

Texas ranked second among the 50 states in total public education expenditures for 2002-03 and third among the 50 states in public education spending as a percentage of total state expenditures.

These figures come from the National Education Association report "Rankings of the States" issued last year. According to that report, Texas education spending represents more than 36 percent of the entire state budget.

Teacher salaries, according to the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), represent 38 percent of the education spending, whereas the Heartland Institute released a study this year that puts that figure at just 31 percent.

Since 1966, the percentage of education spending devoted to teacher salaries has continued to decline, according to the AFT report "Survey and Analysis of Teacher Salary Trends."

Where is the funding going, if not to the classroom?

In a five-year period, superintendent salaries grew an unbelievable 77 percent, according to Education News.

With the average of around one nonteaching employee for every teacher, overhead is high.

Also, taxpayers are becoming aware of the waste, fraud and abuse in education systems. One Web site, dubbed the "Educators Witness Protection Program" and hosted by Americans For Prosperity, cites examples of waste and fraud. That Web site even includes testimonials from individuals who were harassed when they dared to challenge their school district’s spending.

One could argue that over the past 40 years, taxpayers have provided the public education system with steady improvements in funding, teacher pay and lower student-teacher ratios, but student outcomes have not improved measurably.

A new study by Johns Hopkins University reveals that students in eight Texas cities have at least a 50 percent chance of dropping out. Too many students’ needs are not being met by our current system.

It’s time to consider new solutions.

First, school district officials need to set spending priorities. The priority should be to educate Texas children — and to direct dollars to the classroom first.

Second, as we address teacher pay, perhaps the question should not be multiple choice: A.) across-the-board pay increases; B.) support merit pay; or C.) incentive pay initiatives. Clearly, the right answer is B or C. But the right question might be: How can expenditures be tied to student outcomes?

Third, we must be bold. New Zealand instituted an interesting and radical reform, eliminating all school boards and essentially making every public school self-governing. The funding was provided to each school with no strings attached. Then all parents were provided the ability to put their children in any school, private or public, at public expense.

And what happened? Did hell freeze over? No. It appears that once those changes were instituted, student performance improved.

Short of totally revamping the education system — which merits consideration — Texas legislators could take another approach to provide more parental involvement and local control.

Educational options could be provided outside the classroom for tutoring or supplemental course work for some, more challenging curriculum for others. Not all children learn at the same pace, and technology offers new approaches to instruction.

State funds could go directly to schools with no stipulations except that they be spent on instruction, including teacher pay. Local dollars could then be used to pay for other educational expenses, like administrative salaries, transportation and other expenses.

If parents want to determine the educational environment where their children have the greatest opportunity to learn, funding should be made available to send those students to the school of their choice.

Perhaps the Legislature should not be focused on how much more to spend on education but rather on determining how to better spend the dollars currently available and how to provide more parental choice, greater teacher autonomy and more local control.

Peggy Venable is Texas director of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, formerly the Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation. [email protected]

For Star-Telegram text (subscription required)
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/9196667.htm

For more on Education
http://www.ncpa.org/iss/edu/