If the school district were not intentionally timing the final approval of the parcel tax to coincide with the time that the district’s Chief Budget Officer (CBO) Bruce Colby came forward with the January Budget Update, they could not have had a stronger case put before the public than the one that Bruce Colby put forward – highlighted in technicolor graphics.
Taxpayer Advocate and Former Board Member John Munn remarked that he felt like he was kicking at a house of cards. Indeed, he may have been kind, because unfortunately it is closer to reality to suggest that the district is a house of cards, held together by silly string.
He ultimately did not prevail after making a passionate case. Susan Lovenburg moved for a $180 parcel tax for single family dwellings and $45 for multifamily units, but lost out on a 3-2 vote.
The parcel tax election, if approved by the county, is now set for May 3. Tim Taylor said that he would wholeheartedly support the parcel tax in the form passed, despite his opposition to the terms.
The real story on this night, however, was not the parcel tax but the bleak budget view that puts the district into the most precarious of positions.
The bottom line really depends on what happens with the Governor’s budget proposal. There are really two budget plans for education – which the governor has characterized as a civil rights issue and built the case to restore funding – however that plan is contingent on the ability to put a tax extension on the ballot and then pass it.
If the taxes are extended, education would be flat-funded for 2011-12, still no cost of living adjustment, but at least no new cuts.
However, if the taxes are not extended, it is estimated that education would receive another $9 billion in budget cuts.
The reality right now is that the Republicans are not willing to allow the tax extension to go on the ballot, and Democrats would need two Republicans in the Senate and two in the Assembly to even put the measure on the ballot. Even if it were placed on the ballot, it is unlikely that it would pass, given the fiscal condition of the state and the economic condition of its residents.
So we are really looking at the worst case scenario. And things are unlikely to be restored until at least 2016, which would be eight years from the beginning of the recession.
Even under the best case scenario, the Governor’s Budget would not cover the 1.67% estimated COLA. Thus, “The funded base revenue limit drops approximately $19 per ADA from the 2010-11 level.”
This is what has happened to state funding of the district attendance revenue. The green represents how much the state has funded. The dark red represents the loss in revenue from baseline. And the lighter red represents the loss in real dollars assuming COLA. The parcel tax would restore roughly $390 per student, which still puts the district well behind where it was.
What has really happened now is a cash crisis for the school district. As Bruce Colby explained, the state now defers cash payments to the district by several movements.
“What started as a single deferral of $1.3 billion in 2002-03 that delayed funds just a few days – from June to July – has evolved into a routine cash management tool to mask the state’s structural budget problems.”
He continues, “The state managed to operate without additional deferrals until 2008-09,” but “since 2008-09 deferrals have become a staple of the State Budget.”
The deferrals have increased each year.
This is what it looks like.
The problem with deferrals is that, unlike the state, the local school districts (depicted by the LEA – Local Educational Agencies – designation in the graph) cannot defer their payments. They still have to make payroll and cover their operating expenses.
What that means is that the district has to basically borrow money at the beginning of each school year to cover operating costs both in payroll and maintenance.
But what has happened over time is that they have depleted their cash reserves to the critical level. Basically, they just have enough cash on hand to make the loan they need to operate. And that is a dicey proposition at best. They may have cut personnel just to be able to borrow enough money to make payroll.
Even under the best case scenario, things are not looking good. Flat funding will not protect against further cuts in the best case scenario, and the likelihood of a special election is not realistic.
What this means is that, regardless of what happens with the parcel tax, the district will have to layoff additional employees.
The parcel taxes and the efforts of the Davis Schools Foundation have helped to forestall worse cuts. Davis schools have fared far better than their counterparts, but the emergency funding scenario is a reality.
Sheila Allen laid it out in her statement to the Vanguard last weekend.
Board member Sheila Allen commiserated with the difficult plight of many families and community residents.
“I understand the hardship that many families in Davis are facing now,” Sheila Allen said. “I am a laid-off county employee and my husband, as a UCD employee, is facing additional pay cuts.”
At the same time, she wants to preserve to the best of her ability the quality of education in the local Davis schools.
“We also appreciate the public school education that our children are receiving in the Davis schools,” she said. “Just like so many people tell me, we moved to Davis in part because it is a community that understands and values education.”
The cuts have been painful over the last five years, and Sheila Allen is grateful that the community has stepped up to support the district.
“The school board has made strategic but painful cuts over the last 5 years and I am hopeful that our citizens will step forward to support this focused and short term support for our students,” Ms. Allen said. “I look forward to working with the community as together we make our way through these difficult times.”
As we suggested over the weekend, the changes do not forestall opposition.
“This is $25 more than the previous proposal,” the former Board Member John Munn, currently the President of the Yolo County Taxpayers Association told the board on Thursday night. “It still does not reduce the tax rate if the state funds are restored – as unlikely as the discussion tonight might indicate that is. It provides really only a general idea of how money might be spent.”
He added, “This is not really an improvement from the taxpayers’ standpoint from the earlier proposal – so we can’t support this one.”
He did acknowledge that the two-year term was an improvement, because voters would get to decide sooner whether to keep the tax.
However, from his standpoint the current policy is geared toward protecting the status quo of funding for education and local schools over recent years.
This is being done until there is a return to business as usual when the state budget is again in the black. However, he pointed out that “what has been called a crisis” has actually been going on for several years now.
“At some point we need to recognize that the crisis is actually the reality,” Mr. Munn said. “All indications are that the financial conditions of the state have changed. It is time for schools to recognize this and plan for change themselves.”
He remarked that he was almost hesitant to be up there because he almost felt like he was “kicking at a house of cards.”
“Something needs to be done so that that foundation can support the structure of the organization that we need so badly both in this town and this state,” he added. “I’m not sure that the way that schools are operated now is going to be viable in the long term.”
Others have suggested that the dispute is over the total amount of additional funding needed by the district and the most fair and equitable way to provide those additional funds.
Unfortunately, based on the numbers out on Thursday night, the district really will need $6 million per year in additional funding if the state does not pass its tax extensions.
The parcel tax might provide half of that.
Unfortunately, the situation is far worse than I think most people recognized. And it will not get any better.
The Governor may acknowledge the importance of education and may regret having to cut education, but the reality is that those cuts will happen.
I agree in part with John Munn. Just as we must recognize that the fiscal reality will change the way the City of Davis has to provide services and compensate its employees, so too must we recognize that the funding scenario in the district is a reality.
The district strategy so far has been pound and pray. Pass parcel taxes to mitigate the cuts, and hope that things get better. They are not. In that sense, I think Tim Taylor is probably right, we need to pay longer extensions, otherwise we will have to come back to the voters for renewal of Q and W next year while we are looking at a renewal of this measure in 2013.
Unfortunately, I think the chances of the $495/ four-year plan passing were dicey at best.
At some point, the public is not going to support more increases. And that is when the district will have to change the level of services they provide to students. They need to plan for that day sooner or later.
So far the public has been willing to step up, but already we see a lot more opposition than we did in 2008. Things are not getting better in two years, in fact, they may be a lot worse.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
“At some point we need to recognize that the crisis is actually the reality,” Mr. Munn said. “All indications are that the financial conditions of the state have changed. It is time for schools to recognize this and plan for change themselves.”
Before addressing Mr. Munn’s point, it may be important to decide what K-12 education in California (and by extension, DJUSD) can and cannot do, given the money/resources available.
Up to this point, California schools have inched along toward NCLB & CST goals of student proficiency, trying to improve graduation rates, rates of matriculation toward college, closing the achievement gap, maintaining a safe environment at school. It may not be possible to meet all of these goals, nor meet these goals at the prescribed time table.
This current budget year K-12 schools have been hit hard, statewide. In previous years there was reserve money and restricted categorical money available to help minimize the impact. Possibly this STAR test results for this academic year, not available until ~September 2011, will indicate if schools can still make progress toward meeting mandated goals.
It may be possible to follow Munn’s point if districts decide which goals have highest priority and tailor funding toward the highest priorities (in the list above), recognizing that other goals may not be met, as a result.
That said, I think Davis and California will be on a trajectory toward economic improvement and growth if adequate funding were provided.
In my view the open question is when. If we are looking at 2016, then thats realistically a permanent scenario.
I would guess that if there was the political will in the Democratic governor’s office and Democratic legislative majority, ways could be devised to assist local school districts, perhaps some form of loan program offered by the State, a reverse flow of the “loans”(with as yet unfulfilled promises to be repaid) taken by the State from State Education funds. Without populist resistance, the State will most likely follow the political path of least resistance.
From comcast.net: “OAKLAND, Calif. — As cash-strapped school districts lay off teachers and close campuses, publicly funded charter schools are flourishing and altering the landscape of public education.
Despite a painful economic downturn, the charter school movement is expanding rapidly across the country with support from the Obama administration, wealthy donors such as Bill Gates and Oprah Winfrey, and the highly publicized documentary “Waiting for Superman.”
Charter schools typically receive a mixture of public and private money and operate free of many regulations that govern traditional public schools in exchange for achieving promised results.
Nationwide, less than 4 percent of public school students are enrolled in charters, but that number is expected to rise significantly because of increased financial and political support.
More than a dozen states loosened restrictions on charters over the past year for a chance to win a share of the federal $4.3 billion Race to the Top school reform competition.
The number of charter schools grew by 6.7 percent to 4,936 in 2009-2010 and is projected to increase by 7.5 percent in the current school year, according to the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.
The 2010-11 growth is expected to be dramatic in states such as Florida with a 12 percent increase, Illinois with a 14 percent rise and New York with a 20 percent jump, according to the association’s projections.
“Families that have options are increasingly choosing charter schools over traditional schools,” said Peter Groff, who heads the national association.
California saw a 15 percent increase, with a 115 new campuses despite budget woes that led to mass teacher layoffs and shuttered traditional schools, according to the California Charter School Association.
Many charter schools are boosting the academic achievement of disadvantaged students, but critics say charters siphon students and resources away from traditional public schools, result in greater racial segregation, block access to certain groups of students and operate without proper oversight.
“What we’re seeing basically is an effort to impose deregulation and the free market into education,” said Diane Ravich, an education historian at New York University. “The fascination with charters among philanthropists and Wall Street has diverted the attention away from tackling the hard problems of public education.”
Charter schools are growing most rapidly in urban districts with struggling schools and large numbers of poor, minority students. In 16 districts, more than one in five public school students attend charters, with 36 percent in Detroit, 38 percent in Washington, D.C. and 61 percent in New Orleans, according to the national alliance.
Much of the growth is being driven by charter management organizations that have received multimillion-dollar grants from the Obama administration and foundations funded by philanthropists such as Gates, Charles Schwab, Eli Broad and Reed Hastings.
San Francisco-based KIPP, the Knowledge Is Power Program, plans to double its national network of schools to 200 over the next decade.
Aspire Public Schools, California’s largest charter school operator with 30 campuses, plans to open as many as 45 new campus over the next decade, said CEO James Willcox.
The Oakland-based nonprofit, which offers kindergarten through high school, was recently named one of the world’s 20 most improved schools systems — one of only three in the U.S. — by the consulting firm McKinsey and Co. after producing impressive results on standardized tests.
Aspire officials say nearly all of its students are accepted at four-year colleges, and most are their first in their families to attend. They attribute that high rate to smaller schools and class sizes, a longer school day and school year, and its relentless “College for Certain” culture.
“Our entire program from kindergarten all the way through high school is geared toward getting youngsters to go to college and get a college degree,” Willcox said.
At ERES Academy, an Aspire K-8 school in Oakland, every classroom is named after a college and students eat in University Hall.
Jorge Lopez, a senior at California College Preparatory Academy in Berkeley, said he didn’t think college was possible for him before he came to the Aspire-run high school. He’s now poised to be the first in his family to get a college education.
“Upon coming here I found out that college is where you want to be at,” said Lopez, 17. “My parents tell me it’s an honor that I’m leading the family, that I’m being an example for them.”
But not all charter schools produce strong academic results.
A 2009 study by Stanford University found that only 17 percent of charter schools performed significantly better than traditional public schools while 37 percent performed worse and 46 percent showed no big difference.
A 2010 study by the UCLA-based Civil Rights Project found that charter schools tend to be more racially segregated than traditional schools.
“Charter schools are publicly funded schools, and we need to make sure students of all backgrounds have access to them,” said study co-author Erica Frankenberg, an education professor at Pennsylvania State University.
Oakland Unified School District has seen a major expansion of charters over the past decade, when it spent years under state control because of financial mismanagement. The district is now home to more than 30 charter schools.
Betty Olson-Jones, head of the Oakland teachers union, complains many charters recruit top students and get rid of poor performers, boosting the schools’ test scores and saddling traditional schools with a disproportionate number of students with disabilities, behavior problems and poor English language skills.
“You end up with schools that are filled with kids that are really struggling,” Olson-Jones said.”
It sounds as if there may be a movement towards privatization of our public school system. It is still a relatively small movement, but we have already seen this sort of thing in Davis, w DaVinci Charter High School, that was formed w the help of donations from the Gates Foundation. What I wonder is how that figures into the financial picture of the fiscal mess public schools are in…
In a sense, we also see a bit of that w private donations garnered by the Davis Schools Foundation. Perhaps a shift in the paradigm of public funding of education will be supplementing with private donations. Of course that can be a huge problem for poorer school districts, but I have a feeling that is the direction things are almost certainly going to have to go. Our gov’t just is not up to the task of consistently funding our school system, neither public nor universities. In the Davis Enterprise, UC President Yudof made it clear the UC system is most definitely headed towards privatization (“exclusivity” as he put it).
Let’s face it, our local, state and federal gov’t just don’t have their collective acts together. It may be private foundations/corporations/wealthy who end up bailing us out of this mess. But that sort of thing has unintended consequences…
Just food for thought…
It sounds as if there may be a movement towards privatization of our public school system. It is still a relatively small movement, but we have already seen this sort of thing in Davis, w DaVinci Charter High School, that was formed w the help of donations from the Gates Foundation. What I wonder is how that figures into the financial picture of the fiscal mess public schools are in…
DaVinci isn’t a private school. It is publicly funded, part of DJUSD, and must be accessible (within enrollment limits) to all students who are interested in attending.
Also, Da Vinci works great for some students, but not all. In standardized tests, DVHS students perform comparably to DHS students.
Charter schools offer marginal advantages in being able to do certain kinds of fundraising, but they still have to rely on the same state money that the rest of DJUSD does to fund the bulk of its program. That’s the case with charter schools across the state.
Also, interestingly, charter school success often is linked to parent involvement in the school (a culture of parent involvement in the school = school/student success). In Davis, all public schools pretty much have a culture of heavy parent involvement relative to surrounding districts. That culture has helped DJUSD secure resources during these tough times (DSF fundraising, site fundraising, parcel tax, volunteer force, in kind donations, etc.).
[quote] Perhaps a shift in the paradigm of public funding of education will be supplementing with private donations. Of course that can be a huge problem for poorer school districts, but I have a feeling that is the direction things are almost certainly going to have to go.[/quote]
The poorer school districts come to my mind regularly when asked to contribute through donations or taxes to Davis schools. I, quite frankly, am ashamed of our zealous support for this school district when I hear sales pitches like “providing farm fresh fruits and vegetables” (Measure Q). The plight of neighboring school districts get my attention. This emergency needs to be placed in context, and I’ll need a lot more convincing that once again I haven’t given enough.
Articles that are connected to this topic:
Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday called education funding a civil rights issue, defending his plan to eliminate redevelopment agencies as necessary to reduce California’s yawning budget deficit and to push more tax revenue to schools and public safety.
[url]http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/21/3340293/gov-brown-calls-education-funding.html[/url]
School districts across the state may have to prepare their 2011-12 budgets with the hope that voters in June approve an extension of state tax hikes.
[url]http://www.dailybulletin.com/ci_17152126[/url]
Last night Mr. Colby indicated that DJUSD will plan its 2011-12 budget as if the proposed parcel tax money isn’t coming, and as if the tax extensions aren’t coming, either. For purposes of solid budget planning to maintain local control over schools, it is the safest thing to do. It means that we will probably be seeing a large PKS list (“cut list”), probably as early as the next school board meeting.
The plight of neighboring school districts get my attention. This emergency needs to be placed in context, and I’ll need a lot more convincing that once again I haven’t given enough.
Well, we have poorer families in Davis, and not making as much funding available to DJUSD will exaggerate whatever achievement gap we already have. More affluent families will find ways to supplement what is cut. Poorer families won’t. The fundraising that is done pools the resources to be available to all Davis students.
wdf1: “DaVinci isn’t a private school. It is publicly funded, part of DJUSD, and must be accessible (within enrollment limits) to all students who are interested in attending.”
DaVinci may not be a private school, but it received private seed money to begin from the Gates foundation. What I don’t know is if the Gates foundation continues to give money to DaVinci. That gives DaVinci a huge advantage – it is getting funding from another source (private funding) than just public funding. Even Davis public schools have gotten private funding through the efforts of the Davis Schools Foundation. UC is also going in that direction (pushing heavily for business/alumni donations). It seems to be a real trend, that may have unintended consequences…
Yudof has admitted the UC system will become exclusive if there is not more public funding – exclusive to wealthier/out-of-state/foreign students…
UC is also going in that direction (pushing heavily for business/alumni donations). It seems to be a real trend, that may have unintended consequences…
This is a values judgement. Voters will have to decide if they want accessible education enough to extend/raise taxes. Sometimes it’s hard for folks to appreciate what they have right now until it’s taken away.
Citizens who want accessible education should consider…what type of education they or their children need. We need mathematics, technology, science courses. Foreign languages. History perhaps. Yet the schools continue to fund massive athletic departments, and…ahhts programs. So, the question should be…should edu-bureaucrats be allowed to axe algebra or higher math, physics, chemistry, etc, and yet continue to toss millions at a basket/foot/base ball programs, or …poetry? Now maybe keep a piano teacher, but save algebra and higher math, and nix the sports and poetry if necessary (prioritizing may be a bit beyond the usual edu-crat). You probably don’t want your kids to turn out to be…some unskilled, emotional basketcase, like Davis’s own Byron Bullamy [url] http://www.poetrywar.com/ [/url] .
Perezoso: “Citizens who want accessible education should consider…what type of education they or their children need. We need mathematics, technology, science courses. Foreign languages. History perhaps. Yet the schools continue to fund massive athletic departments, and…ahhts programs. So, the question should be…should edu-bureaucrats be allowed to axe algebra or higher math, physics, chemistry, etc, and yet continue to toss millions at a basket/foot/base ball programs, or …poetry?”
You make a very valid point…
[i]”We [b]need[/b] mathematics, technology, science courses. Foreign languages. History perhaps.”[/i]
Yes, if your child is college bound for a bachelor’s degree or more in Letters or Science. But what about the half of kids in Davis (and 75% of kids in most districts) who will never earn a BA or BS? What about the kids who aspire to be chefs, mechanics, farmers, electricians or maybe sports coaches or ahtletic trainers?
[i]”Yet the schools continue to fund massive athletic departments, and…ahhts programs.”[/i]
If a student hopes to go on to earn a Bachelor of Music degree ([url]http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/application_process/nec.html[/url]) or to become a graphic artist ([url]http://www.graphicdesignschools.com/[/url]) or a fine artist ([url]http://design.ucdavis.edu/undergraduate/ba.html[/url]), he needs those programs every bit as much as the girl who wants to become a mechanical engineer needs math and physics.
[quote]Unfortunately, based on the numbers out on Thursday night, the district really will need $6 million per year in additional funding if the state does not pass its tax extensions[/quote]
Cut our housing subsidies, subsidized daycare, and vagrant programs and we will save $10 million plus.
wdf1: I’m less concerned about the achievement gap amoungst DJUSD students as I am the achievement gap between school districts in California.
But what about the half of kids in Davis (and 75% of kids in most districts) who will never earn a BA or BS? What about the kids who aspire to be chefs, mechanics, farmers, electricians or maybe sports coaches or ahtletic trainers?
Yes many students are probably better off in vocational programs for apprentice mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc. But sports, and ahhts funding take away from needed Vocational programs as well.
If a student hopes to go on to earn a Bachelor of Music degree or to become a graphic artist or a fine artist, he needs those programs every bit as much as the girl who wants to become a mechanical engineer needs math and physics.
Well, that would be part of the education prioritizing, IMHE. She probably should be counselled to enter another career path–or maybe vocation, like electrician track–unless she has a rich papa who can afford Julliard. She can work on Bach in her spare time while working on her integrals, so forth.
Why are citizens obligated to fund public education in the first place? One doesn’t have to be a vegas-style libertarian to perceive that the CA Education slushbucket needs a great deal of reform–one solution would be …eliminating the massive entitlements handed out to Athletic programs.
Well, we have poorer families in Davis, and not making as much funding available to DJUSD will exaggerate whatever achievement gap we already have. More affluent families will find ways to supplement what is cut. Poorer families won’t. The fundraising that is done pools the resources to be available to all Davis students.
Well said wdf 1. I am afraid we are headed toward a two tier system-those who can afford the “extras” or private schools and those who cannot. Just look at San Francisco-where about 30% of the total school age population and a much greater percentage of Caucasian kids (about 90% I think) attend private schools. It would be tragic to let that happen here. We must fund public schools for everyone-Brown is right that it is civil rights issue. But if the state cannot/will not do it we must do so at a local level.
I guess I’m a bit slow on the uptake here, but I’m still vexed as to where all the money money goes.
If, for example there are 25 children per class room, and the per child revenue is $5,000, then the per class revenue is roughly $125,000. If the total compensation for the teacher is, lets say, $75k ($55k salary plus 20k benefit load), that leaves $50k/class for overhead… where does this money go?
I realize this is an unfair assessment riddled with SWAGs, but I suppose the lack of transparency may be the point.
[quote]The reality right now is that the Republicans are not willing to allow the tax extension to go on the ballot, and Democrats would need two Republicans in the Senate and two in the Assembly to even put the measure on the ballot. Even if it were placed on the ballot, it is unlikely that it would pass, given the fiscal condition of the state and the economic condition of its residents.[/quote]
A May 2010 survey from the Public Policy Institute of California found that 69% of respondents would pay higher taxes to avoid cuts in K-12 education. A December survey conducted by Democrat Jim Moore found support for keeping those taxes on the books “to prevent deeper cuts in public schools, public safety and healthcare.” Moore’s poll found that 58% of respondents favored the idea of maintaining the taxes proposed by Brown this week; 37% said they were opposed to the idea.
So…. the DJUSD is screaming wolf to get us to vote for a massive tax increase using assumptions that are based on a worse case scenario which is contrary to to what the polling numbers say. They also also seem to think that those of us who are still employed, but with significant reductions in pay and benefits should be jumping at the opportunity to vote for a massive tax increase that will be used in part to fund COLAs for school employees.
No thank you!
where does this money go?
I realize this is an unfair assessment riddled with SWAGs, but I suppose the lack of transparency may be the point.
Helping to pay for a school librarian, maybe a music teacher, a school secretary, teaching aide(s)/paraeducator(s), nursing services, crossing guards, computer technician(s), custodial/groundskeeping services, yard duty (some teachers actually cover this), principal, administrative overhead to deal with whatever the state or federal government want in the way of assessments, reports, and compliances.
AeroDeo: but I suppose the lack of transparency may be the point.
One problem is that it often looks bad for a publicly funded agency to spend money on public relations. Why should they spend money on that, when they ought to be spending it on teaching kids?
Coca-Cola, however, can spend millions on an ad campaign associating their product with Christmas cheer and smiling young beautiful people. BP and Chevron spends as much and more on ads explaining that they really do care about our environment. Public schools don’t have the ability to put together any such ad campaign to influence a more positive perception, nor even to pay somebody whose job it is specifically to answer questions. If you contact most administrators and ask these questions, however, most will respond helpfully.
Perezoso: Massive entitlements to athletics? District coaches get stipends, hardly enough to be paying bills with. Much of the support comes from parent booster groups.
As for music, if you want to argue that very few students will ever end up studying music anyway, then you make a pretty good case for eliminating math. How many students ever grow up to do math for a profession? And maybe English or history, likewise, would be over-rated as professions?
The value of music isn’t exactly just for learning to hum or play twinkle twinkle. It has value because it is one of the only disciplines that requires students to work together to succeed. Most other disciplines operate on the principal of individual assessment (standardized tests) and competency. In music you can tell if the group is working well together or not because when they do, it sounds in tune and is entertaining to hear/watch.
It is the only discipline (unless you throw in athletics) that has a practice/performance aspect. The public isn’t going to show up to watch you take a Spanish test. With the public performance experience, a music group learns to take pride in their work. A lot of people are scared to stand up in front of an audience and speak. Performing arts offers a chance to develop that kind of experience.
Fiscally, performance music class are staffed more efficiently than other disciplines. The district tries to have maximum class sizes of ~34-35. Band, orchestra, or choir may have as many as 60-70 students. If you got rid of your music program, then you’d have to pay two teachers to take on the same number of students.
With respect to discipline, the more students who participate in performing arts or team sports, then the less a school has to deal with discipline issues. These activities are like sanctioned gangs (good gangs) on campus. Some people have tribal instincts. If you provide them with gangs that you approve of, then they won’t go off and form gangs that you disapprove of.
AERO: [i]”I guess I’m a bit slow on the uptake here, but I’m still vexed as to where all the money money goes. “[/i]
This chart is a few years old, but (if you can read it) I think it basically answers your question:
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9pR-0mkLeic/SK63wwG-KkI/AAAAAAAADLM/xKMTgE-Re1M/s400/DJUSD+Expenditure+Pie+Chart.jpg[/img]
A few points that need to be made:
It would be helpful if people looked at entrance requirements to UC and CSU before decided which programs are or are not needed. At some point we will have to cut programs like art and music – as other districts have, I think that’s not a good thing, but perhaps you view it as unnecessary.
Second, I didn’t mention it in my story but the meeting started with over a 100 parents there to protest the firing of the girl’s bball coach at the HS. Far more passion and far more people than came for the budget discussion. I can only imagine what would happen if they cut the athletics program and I think that would probably preclude them from passing a parcel tax. It would be interesting to see what the budget is for the athletics program, my guess is not enough to close the gap we have now in spending.
[quote]If, for example there are 25 children per class room, and the per child revenue is $5,000, then the per class revenue is roughly $125,000. If the total compensation for the teacher is, lets say, $75k ($55k salary plus 20k benefit load), that leaves $50k/class for overhead… where does this money go? [/quote]
Bloated salaries — For example, we pay more for positions that manage school athletic activities than the state of California pays to individuals who manage the operations of statewide departments. Please anyone, compare what we pay to state employees for management positions, to what we are paying our Davis school administrators. Before we discuss cutting programs out completely, we need to dramatically pare down our administrative costs.
It would be interesting if one of you did the research on where the rest of the money goes.
I would start with site-based positions: so you have principal, librarian, counselor (which is generally shared between campuses at the primary grades), custodians, secretaries, etc. So figure out the cost, the workload performed.
Then you have strict maintenance. You have grounds to upkeep. You have food service.
I was stunned by how much staff was involved for instance in an IEP. But you have to have them for a lot of reasons. Some of that does not come from ADA/ general fund sources, but it is still required by Ed Code (and common sense).
So of that number of ADA funding, I think I have seen the figure 85% goes either to the classroom or in direct support of the classroom.
But that is the research you need to do and then figure out what jobs are performed and what the cost (non-economic) to losing those services.
Looking through the eyes of students you would find that they have varied interests. Among them sports, art and music. Funny that the intellectually lazy Perezoso forgets to include english in his old, tired, three R’s rant.
To keep kids involved in their education we must provide opportunities to learn the things that they are interested in learning. We present a bargain; we will provide you opportunities to do the things you are interested in doing but we insist you learn these things that we value. Dehumanizing education to what we value without consideration of what the student values is a recipe for failure.
” I can only imagine what would happen if they cut the athletics program “
They proposed that in Dixon when their budget hit the fan a couple of years ago. The outcry was phenomenal and the proposal was rescinded. Choosing academic programs based on their popularity would likely lead to few cuts in sports programs.
UC A – G requirements are the core courses that schools need to provide: [url]http://www.ucop.edu/a-gGuide/ag/a-g/[/url] Vocational courses are very important. I’m afraid art and music are always the first to go, and are good candidates for private donations.
If I based my decisions for course requirements on what I have used in my professional career as a nurseryman, it would be very different than what others here might come up with. I have no use for calculus or foreign language, but basic sciences were very important to my upper division course work. I happen to think everyone should take public speaking, but I’d guess others might consider that frivolous.
The best bet is to provide a firm grounding in sciences and liberal arts along with the basics, and to recognize that some of the other course offerings have vocational applications that we may not be aware of in our narrow world views. If there are students filling a class, there’s probably a reason. I don’t see micro-managing the course offerings as appropriate for citizens or even the school board.
wdf1: “How many students ever grow up to do math for a profession?”
Speaking as a mathematician myself (BS in math, MS in applied math), math is a very employable major. If you read the want ads for scientific positions, it very often will say “computer science, engineering, math or other degree in related field required”.
wdf1: “Helping to pay for a school librarian, maybe a music teacher, a school secretary, teaching aide(s)/paraeducator(s), nursing services, crossing guards, computer technician(s), custodial/groundskeeping services, yard duty (some teachers actually cover this), principal, administrative overhead to deal with whatever the state or federal government want in the way of assessments, reports, and compliances.”
In my day, we did not have teachers aides, school nurses, computer technicians, yard duty personnel, and we got along just fine. We had only one counselor for the entire high school.
As for music programs, statistics have shown that those students who take music are more likely to do better in school.
Elaine: In your day, did your school have a computer network?
but I suppose the lack of transparency may be the point.
This website has lots of data about DJUSD, as well as other districts around the state. It takes a little sifting to see what data is available, but it is helpful for many questions:
[url]http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/welcome.asp?[/url]
A couple of years ago, DJUSD put up a kind of FAQ about the budget situation. They have updated it occasionally, the last time in Sept. 2010. It’s called “District Dollars”:
[url]http://www.districtdollars.org/welcome[/url]
There’s another website about standardized test scores, statewide and for each school that links from the ed-data website above.
In my day, we did not have teachers aides, school nurses, computer technicians, yard duty personnel, and we got along just fine. We had only one counselor for the entire high school.
I suspect some of the difference is that we have become an increasingly litigious society, and a society that is more demanding of accountability.
I remember running around the school yard before school and during lunch without adult supervision. Some of the consequences weren’t good; a way for bullying to develop, so I’m not sure that “we got along just fine”. As a first grader (late 60’s/early 70’s) I saw a speech therapist because I wasn’t pronouncing all sounds correctly. Also, you probably have to have a school nurse to oversee the administering of medication (usually more than just aspirin these days).
As for music programs, statistics have shown that those students who take music are more likely to do better in school.
I would agree with that. Probably attributable to several reasons, including some that I listed above at 6:54 PM.
I would also suggest that we once survived without electricity, without vaccines, without antibiotics, without a whole host of modern inventions and conveniences. Are we better off having most of these innovations? Sure. Are there downsides to modernity? Of course. Are there costs associated with them? You bet.
We had only one counselor for the entire high school.
In your day, perhaps not as many students went on to college. But after witnessing what is required to navigate the college application process these days, I don’t think you’d want to have just one counselor for an entire HS of 1800 if you want to have good college matriculation statistics.
I would also suggest that we once survived without electricity, without vaccines, without antibiotics, without a whole host of modern inventions and conveniences.
Go back far enough, and I would argue that we got along just fine without public education. Of course in those days, most of us couldn’t read, write, or do math, infant mortality was high, most of our teeth fell out by age 30, average life spans were slightly longer than that, malnutrition was high, taxes were lower, slavery was a reality, but otherwise we got along just fine. Those were the good old days. (sigh!) 😉
dmg: “Elaine: In your day, did your school have a computer network?”
I knew someone was going to point this out. In my college days, the computer took up an entire room, and we turned in programs that were a heavy box of IBM cards, each line of code on a card! Makes me feel o-o-o-o-ld! But in my public school days we did fine w a lot less. I think too many people think of most of the things we have as “necessities” when they truly are not…
DMG: Second, I didn’t mention it in my story but the meeting started with over a 100 parents there to protest the firing of the girl’s bball coach at the HS. Far more passion and far more people than came for the budget discussion.
Which brings up another point to develop about performance arts and athletics. They are activities that foster a positive and collaborative relationship between the public/parents and the school district. Parents want to have the opportunity to watch/applaud/dote on their kids’ efforts, and spectator activities allow that. They also foster the formation of booster organizations that allow the district to co-opt thousands of hours of free volunteer time to run such programs. In the process, it develops a certain amount of community buy-in and ownership of those programs and overall support for the schools.
I think there’s probably a good case to be made that the more frequently a parent steps onto a school campus, then the more engaged their kid will be in school. That would include stepping onto campus to watch a sports game, a theater production or a music concert. Without those programs, the relationship between the school and the community, and as well the buy-in of students to the school, erodes.
“I think too many people think of most of the things we have as “necessities” when they truly are not… “
But do you think having computers in school are a necessity in this day and age?
WDF: At some point we may have to consider cutting athletics and music. It is not where I want to go. It’s not where the school board wants to go. The voters will have the ultimate say, they will decide whether to support an increase to the parcel tax or whether they want the district to start cutting these programs. I’m fine with that. I think Jerry Brown made the right statement, the voters will decide which direction we go, if they want to cut programs, then we will have to do that.
dmg: “But do you think having computers in school are a necessity in this day and age?”
In tough economic times, no, computers are not a “necessity”. In fact, I would argue DaVinci, w seed money from the Gates foundation, is really a way for Microsoft to encourage the use of its computers(product). I’ll bet the laptops they were provided were not Apples…
In tough economic times, no, computers are not a “necessity”.
So many jobs these days assume/require knowledge and competency with several basic computer programs — Word, Excel, Explorer (or some equivalent). If we get to that point, then the discussion has to center around what is a grade school education supposed to do?
In fact, I would argue DaVinci, w seed money from the Gates foundation, is really a way for Microsoft to encourage the use of its computers(product). I’ll bet the laptops they were provided were not Apples…
I don’t think the Gates grant is still funding (I could be wrong). I would also point out that right now it is major private companies that are beginning to show earnings growth, especially Apple, but also Microsoft. If there is one current source of money for computers right now, it might be these companies.
At some point we may have to consider cutting athletics and music. It is not where I want to go. It’s not where the school board wants to go. The voters will have the ultimate say, they will decide whether to support an increase to the parcel tax or whether they want the district to start cutting these programs.
As with my previous comment above, if we get to that point (maybe we’re already there), then we have to discuss what a grade school education is suppose to do. And I guess that’s what I’m engaging right now:
A lot of other districts have cut back music and athletics because school success has been defined in recent years by whether a student is making sufficient progress in certain core subjects, especially reading and math. While that is important, is that all there is when it comes to defining whether a school is successful with respect to serving the students? I think it overlooks other fundamental values. If DJUSD were to cut back on the music and athletics, then our schools wouldn’t be much different from any other school district.
Relative to other things we might expect a school to do: Is it important to have experience working together with others? Is it important to develop a concept of group commitment? Is the practice/training/public performance model worth developing?
Rather than rehash a lot of good, articulate material already out there on music education, I invite you to check out these websites that mostly describe the “El sistema” program developed in Venezuela. It is a comprehensive music education program mainly targeted at lower-income, at-risk populations. There is plenty of discussion and effort at duplicating similar efforts in the U.S. Davis is not a typical population in this respect, but if Davis schools should have a commitment to serving all students, then this material would suggest that keeping your music program is an effective way to do that:
Video, “TED Talk” on “El sistema”, an articulate, 15 minute summary, but it is in Spanish with English subtitles:
[url]http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jose_abreu_on_kids_transformed_by_music.html[/url]
A Wiki article on the same thing, in English:
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Sistema[/url]
An hour-long video of a recent Tavis Smiley show (Dec. 2010) on the topic, and efforts to develop such programs in the U.S.:
[url]http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/reports/s1e4/[/url]
[i]”At some point we may have to consider cutting athletics and music. It is not where I want to go. It’s not where the school board wants to go. The [s]voters[/s] [b]teachers’ union and the unions which represent other employees and the members of the school board who negotiate with the unions[/b] will have the ultimate say; they will decide whether [s]to support an increase to the parcel tax[/s] [b]in the face of lower revenues they will accept less compensation[/b] or whether they want the district to [s]start cutting these programs[/s] [b]lay off more of their colleagues[/b].”[/i]
Fixed.
Don’t get me wrong, I think computers and technology have been the best thing since tacos and beer. But, I don’t have enough fingers and toes to count the times I have walked into a store and purchased something and the person behind the counter couldn’t count my change back to me.
Computers and other electronic devices are used as a crutch and that little muscle between their ears is NOT being exercised enough. I think being linked electronically whether it is e-mailing over the computer or texting over a cell phone 24 hours a day actually makes it difficult for kids to develop and maintain important face to face social skills that will make them employable.
I have hired people that could not fill out a hand written time card correctly. During interviews, I have had perspective employees that couldn’t even read a tape measure. So, do I think education is a failure? YES.
I stongly suggest they go back to slide rules. I remember my high school chemistry teacher made us use them, because he thought hand-held calculators were a crutch and “a passing fad.”
I would like the Davis School District to do a little experiment. Challenge the students to balance the districts budget. For that matter, let them solve the cities budget. That is of course, without the help of teachers or parents and other lobbyists.
It sure beats the heck out of hiring outside consultants!!!
If anything, it would be an excellent economics lesson. Just think, it might even help future generations from repeating history by learning from our mistakes.
Rifkin: “”At some point we may have to consider cutting athletics and music. It is not where I want to go. It’s not where the school board wants to go. The voters teachers’ union and the unions which represent other employees and the members of the school board who negotiate with the unions will have the ultimate say; they will decide whether to support an increase to the parcel tax in the face of lower revenues they will accept less compensation or whether they want the district to start cutting these programs lay off more of their colleagues.””
I think this is a very valid point…
I’m voting against this tax. Enough is enough. The Davis schools want to be completely isolated from the national and state budget problems. A flat parcel tax is extremely regressive. The school system, like the city government, has a long way to go to become more efficient with what they have. Furthermore, what about the large number of out-of-town students who attend Davis schools? There are lots of intra-district and, uh, “extra-legal” transfer students here. Their parents haven’t paid a dime in extra taxes and take payday loans no checking account ([url]http://ameriloansearch.com/payday-loans-online/payday-loans-no-checking-account-fast-cash-advance.html[/url]). The local paper uses terms like “slashing the budget”, etc but in fact the Davis school district has received a 10% cut in state funds over the last 3 years. Hardly severe. Davis schools will be just fine without this tax, and they can learn, under budget pressure, how to be more efficient.