Challenging Times Ahead

The 2009-2010 school year has been a challenging financial time for school districts. The state reduced funding to schools by $165 per student. Here in Grand Ledge that was a reduction of over $850,000. If you add in our modest decrease in enrollment of 66 students, our district had a decrease in revenue this year of over 1.3 million dollars. We planned for part of this. We anticipated a decrease of $100 per student or a decrease in revenue of over $500,000. We also anticipated a decrease in enrollment of 84 students. In all we anticipated a decrease in revenue of 1.1 million dollars.

As we look ahead, we are a;ready planning for the 2010-2011 school year. Yesterday, December 22, a report was published the Senate Fiscal Agency that looked ahead to the 2010-2011 fiscal year. This agency, which provides insight for the State Senate as they plan for and prepare state budgets, states on page 41 of the report that there will be a 339.4 million dollar imbalance in the school aid fund for 2010-2011. Put another way that would require a reduction of $215 per pupil. In Grand Ledge that would be a reduction of over 1.1 million dollars. Together with another modest enrollment decline our district could face a potential loss of revenue of 1.5 million dollars for fiscal year 2010-2011.

As we continue to plan and prepare for the 2010-2011 school year, this report from the Senate Fiscal Agency just reinforces that unless there are some changes in how the state finances education there are challenging times ahead.

Update from Grand Ledge

It has been awhile since I wrote on this blog. The weeks between these posts have been interesting.

First, I presented a restructuring proposal to the Grand Ledge Board of Education. (More information can be found at the district website under the Our District tab.) This proposal asks the board to approve changes that would result in a savings to our district of 4.1 million dollars. The plan requires us to change the way we look here in our district.

This proposal was presented to the Board after months of discussion and planning. Two goals drove the development of this proposal. First, we needed to present a plan that prioritized our commitment to academics, and to a lesser degree preserve our commitment to the arts and athletics. The plan had to maintain or improve our academic focus - helping students be successful while they are enrolled in our school district and making sure they are prepared for the next step in their lives.

The proposal presented to the Board works hard to continue our commitment to our students. The proposal adds elementary counselors and an at-risk team for students in grades 7-12. Additionally it makes a commitment to keep classes within reasonable limits - K-2 would be 25 students, 3-6 would be 28, and grades 7-12 would be 29. An early childhood/kindergarten center is proposed. Funding for athletics and the arts, while cut, are still part of our the proposal given to the Board. Elective choices would still be available at the middle and high school. Music, art, and physical education would continue to be available at every level. Reading teachers and reading interventions still be a part of the district's program.

Secondly, the proposal had to save the district money. We have a structural deficit of two million dollars in our budget. We spend two million dollars more than our income. That has to be fixed. We also are receiving less state aid. The Michigan economy and revenue to the state continues to decline. This year we were anticipated a $100 per student drop in revenue. We were one of only 30% of districts in the state that anticipated a drop in state revenue. The drop we planned for added up to almost $520,000 less revenue than we received last year. The state actually has cut revenue by $292 a student. That's a drop in revenue of over 1.5 million dollars. Additionally, as with most Michigan school districts, we are experiencing a drop in enrollment. We anticipated we would have 84 fewer students this fall. We actually only lost 66 students. So while it is a drop in revenue of almost $623,000 it is not as bad as we anticipated.

How can our district save money? Unfortunately, 85% of our district's budget, as with every school district, is connected to people. So while we reduce our expenses for supplies, energy, and other non-personnel related matters, in the end we have to have fewer employees if we are to reduce our budget. That is incredibly difficult to do. Every one of our employees works hard everyday for our students. Our employees make a difference. The difficult part of trying to balance a budget, to make sure our expenses and our income are aligned, is that it will impact the lives of many employees.

As I said earlier, more details are on the restructuring link under the Our District tab on our district website.

The whole educational funding issue has been coming to a head here in Michigan. On November 10 a rally intended to spur communication with our state legislators was held at the Capital. The Save Our Students, Schools, and State (SOS) coalition was behind the rally. The goal is to help our legislators understand that continued cuts to funding will have a dramatic affect on the quality of our schools.

The legislators that I have spoken with, emailed, and called argue that schools need to become more efficient before they would agree to look at changing how schools are funded. I argue that Grand Ledge leads the way in becoming efficient. Our employees pay 30% of their health insurance. Our custodians and bus drivers agreed to significant contract concessions last year. In contract negotiations last year, every other employee group agreed to 0% on the base. Our administrative costs are in the lowest 18% of all districts in the state. We cannot do much more - yet they seem blind to the changes that we have made.

The SOS rally was an attempt to get parents, community members, and school employees rallying to save our state's investment in our schools. Parents and community members will truly make a difference. On our district website under the Board of Education tab we have a Capital Connections link that provides information that is important as we try to protect school funding.

Finally, students from Grand Ledge High School organized a rally on the Capital steps to fight for school funding. I am proud of our students and their interest in quality schools.

I will try and do a better job of updating this blog so that we can continue our conversations about issues that matter to the Grand Ledge Public Schools.

The Value of Education

I read an interesting piece by David Levy in the Washington Post about art education.  His argument is really about how we educate the teachers who teach art, but a secondary argument is what do we value in education.  In other words, what should we get out of an education?

I believe that we could come to quick agreement on what needs to be taught in our schools. Reading, writing, math, science, and history would make the list.  How about physical education, art, music, and health?  I would think most of us would agree that those need to be taught. 

Yet, how much and at what level?  Should everyone take advanced math or only those who interests lie in science and engineering?  How about music? or art?  When I started college in 1974 I was required to take a music appreciation class even though my major was not going to be music.  Did I benefit from being in that class?  I absolutely believe that I did, but I would have a hard time identifying specifically why it was a benefit.  I was exposed to music that I had never considered.  I began to understand the complexity of music.  I developed an appreciation of how music can play an instrumental role in helping a person express ideas and emotions.  Yet, in my role today did that class benefit me?

Maybe that is not really the question that should be asked.  Maybe the question that should be asked is how have my cumulative experiences helped define who I am and how I live my life?  It is probably unfair to try and place a specific value on a specific course.  

As someone who is intimately involved in trying to define what courses students should take I have come to understand that I need to take the long view.  One course in one semester will probably not make a difference.  But taken together the cumulative effect of my education should make a big difference in how I live my life and how I view the world. 

Interesting Times in Michigan

Last week our state legislature indicated that the new budget that they would pass for fiscal year 2009-2010 would include a $218 per pupil reduction.  In other words, districts would receive less money for the school year that started for school districts on July 1.  For Grand Ledge, the $218 per pupil reduction translates to a reduction of just under $600,000 dollars.  

Cut the fat critics say.  Do with less.  The whole world is having to prioritize, schools should do the same.  Get rid of non-essentials.  Focus only on the core.

What is the core?  Do we eliminate transportation?  That's a 2.2 million dollar expense for our district.  Do we eliminate athletics?  That's a $600,000 expense.  Do we not offer any clubs or after school activities?  Is school just what happens from 8:00 AM until 3:30 PM?  

Some schools may be able to postpone difficult decisions because they have built up a fund balance.  Other schools may not be so lucky.  Will the schools that eliminate popular programs be able to retain and attract students the next year or will those districts begin a downward spiral that they will not be able to climb out of?  

Will the state be able to attract and retain highly educated employees if those employees see benefits and salaries reduced below what is comparable in other states?  

Budget decisions are difficult.  In my mind the state needs to value education because it will support our economy, create informed citizens, and help create a better future.  If we fail to support education, business development will suffer and the state will slowly decline.

My hope is that our state can figure out how to support education in a fiscally responsible manner.

What Do We Want?

Jack Lessenberry, a political commentator, wrote that when "Ed Koch was campaigning for mayor of New York, an elderly woman came up to him. She was clearly distressed about the way the city was changing. “Make it like it was,” she told him.

He looked at her, and in a moment of candor rare for any politician, answered, “It was never like it was.”

An article in Wired Magazine, called "The Good Enough Revolution," suggests that increasingly people are satisfied with things that are "good enough." No longer are people holding out for the highest quality products. Good enough is truly enough.

All of this started me thinking about what people want from schools. Ocassionally I hear that we need to do things like we used to; that the past was better, more rigorous, and more demanding than the present.

I also hear that what we are doing is adequately preparing students for the future. We are good enough people say. We don't need to make sure that all students get successfully through Algebra II. A basic understanding of math is good enough.

Schools are torn between those who think we are demanding enough and those who think our demands are just fine. What should we be?

All I know is that the future is going to look different than the past. What it will look like I do not know. But preparing students with the skills and knowledge to live in a changing world will be important. Our students have to be well prepared. Our students have to have the knowledge and skills to compete with anybody in the world. Yet we also need to include in the conversation that not everyone is going to get, or need, a four year college degree.

I hope that we want skills that will challenge students, help students expand their horizons, and identify where they want to go and how they can get there. We need to be both demanding and practical.

Technology and Teaching

Teachers have a lot to worry about. The state of Michigan has identified a vareity of grade level and high school content expectations. The Michigan Merit Curriculum requires a lot from all students.

Where does technology fit into all of this?

I agree with Larry Magid, a technology writer, who suggests that those of us in education need to embrace technology. Instead of trying to clamp down on it and eliminate it from our schools, we need to find ways to become familiar with it and use it to enhance instruction.

Embracing technology in the classroom would serve at least two purposes. First, it might serve to engage students in learning in meaningful ways. Students might be more willing to learn the content of a class if technology was used to help them get access to the content. Secondly, since it appears that technology is becoming more ubiquitous we need to make sure that students understand the benefits and the risks associated with using it. Helping students learn to navigate through the promise and the peril of technology seems like something with which schools should be able to assist.

My concern, however, is how to do this. How do we manage to teach our content, use technology in meaningful ways, and teach students how to be responsible with technology all at the same time?

The only way that I can see this successfully happening is if we - the educators - begin to see technology like we see textbooks and paper and pencils. That is, if we begin to see technology as just one of the tools that we use naturally then we have a shot at making technology use meaningful.

If we see technology as an add on, something else to do, another thing that will take valuable time away from the content, then we have no chance at using technology in ways that will encourage students to use technology. It would be overwhelming instead of empowering.

Yet how do we - the educators - have time to figure out how to use technology well?

Maybe we don't have to. Maybe we could enlist our students - the ones who know and use technology effortlessly - in identifying for us how technology could support or enhance or change learning.

I know that technology is not going away. My concern is how are we going to figure out how to incorporate it in powerful ways without all of us becoming technology teachers?

Funding Schools

There was an interesting article in USA Today on September 2. It addressed how some schools are grappling with how to pay for extracurricular activities. It profiled a school in Ohio that had shut down its athletic and other extracurricular programs. It says in the article that one hour after the final bell the school is shut down for the day. The district spokesperson said the move saved 2.5 million dollars.

In Michigan, we are headed toward a funding crisis. There are projections that next year - 2010/2011 - funding will be reduced by $500 dollars a student. In Grand Ledge that would mean a reduction in funding a 2.5 million dollars.

How will districts throughout our state manage if that actually happens?

The Ohio district decided to eliminate athletics and extracurricular activities. That seems like a bad idea to me. Students need opportunities. While these activities are not directly related to math or science, they do help students learn skills and attitudes that are invaluable as they grow. Skills like teamwork, discipline, and perseverance can be learned in a variety of places, but they can truly be learned on an athletic team or a marching band.

In addition, extracurricular activities can connect students to schools in meaningful ways. Students who are connected to school through an extracurricular activity are often connected academically as well. Without these opportunities we may find it harder to engage students in the learning that should be the centerpiece of our schools.

I don't know what the answer is in Michigan. We need to have a better funding system. Many of us are working hard to find ideas that would help Michigan find a better way to fund education. Can we change the system before the 2010-2011 school year? I hope so but it truly does take time to develop a new way to fund schools.

My hope is as we try to work through what school funding looks like in the years to come we won't sacrifice opportunities for students in the short term.