The Texas Supreme Court acted last week to force the ineffective, paralyzed hand (read "will" just here) of the Texas legislature.
Our fearless leaders in Austin have enjoyed two regular sessions and three special sessions over the past two to three years. Yet, our elected leaders have been unable to agree upon something as basic and necessary as a school finance plan for our children.
Enter our Supreme Court.
The majority ruling of the all-Republican court last week decreed that by June 1, 2006, the legislature must come up with a new finance plan since its regulation of local school property tax rates amounts to a state property tax that is illegal according to our state's constitution.
The court's not much better than the lawmakers. It judged that today our schools are adequately financed, though just barely. While it did not demand an increase in funding to insure that the legislature lives up to its constitutional duty to educate all of the children in our state, the court did issue a warning that current levels of funding are on the verge of being inadequate.
With this ruling the court provided empirical evidence that none of its sitting justices have been in a Texas public school lately! Talk to students, parents, teachers, educational and business leaders and you get a completely different picture of the state of affairs in our public schools.
Texas ranks in the bottom third nationally in funding on a per pupil basis in comparison to other public school systems in the United States. Our average spending per student is approximately $1,000 below the national average.
The high court did not take any action on the controversial "Robin Hood" provision in current school finance regulations. Our current plan requires wealthy school districts to send funds to the state for redistribution to poor school districts. Thus, the "Robin Hood" tag.
Most people don't realize it, but only 134 school districts out of the state's 1,037 are asked to transfer funds out of their districts for the sake of achieving funding equity. Ask our state's poorest districts and students if they appreciate the current funding stream that brings a measure of parity to their schools.
Our legislators must now act to craft a plan that is legal. I will be surprised if they go further during the special session to increase school funding to anywhere near the levels that are really required to advance public education in Texas.
Any serious plan must include local property tax reform, closing business franchise tax loopholes, increasing business taxes generally and deciding upon some other equitable revenue streams. Most likely, our leaders will elevate the cap on our state sales tax, one of the most regressive forms of taxation that will hurt poor Texans most.
But hey, this is Texas! What do you expect? Certainly not any discussion of a state income tax system that would provide a more equitable and adequate strategy for funding education in the state.
Public education needs more than just an infusion of cash, but make no mistake about it, it does need more funding. Expanding early childhood education, providing more Advanced Placement classes in poor rural and urban districts, improving teacher-student ratios in classrooms, restoring funding for the arts--these needed steps require more dollars. Our state cannot afford to fail this investment challenge.
To be sure, any adequate funding plan must be connected to a continuing effort to achieve new efficiencies by cutting back on the number of mid-level administrators, eliminating unnecessary, non-education related perks and by involving parents and community groups in the entire process. But, new funding must be set in place that is aggressive, creative and bold if we really are serious about the state and national promise to "leave no child behind."
It's time for a new day in Texas schools. Our future depends on it. Our children must not be denied the most important experience of childhood.
Any member of the Texas legislature who refuses to step up to this crucial challenge with clarity of vision, a commitment to bi-partisan cooperation, and courageous leadership against an opposition led by persons whose children don't depend on public education for their future does not deserve my support, my respect and certainly not my vote.
If we fail this test, we will pay for it in much less pleasant ways for generations to come.
7 comments:
One option to consider a school privatization so that people can choose to go to better schools instead of being consided to the local dump without any options.
Larry,
Are there any stats about what percentage of the legislators have or had their kids in public schools vs. private schools? I get the sense that many of the Texans with the power to improve and nurture public schools don't feel ownership of the problem because they have already chosen a different option for their own kids.
Are public schools in Texas the latest arena in which we can see tangible signs of "white flight" so that public schools are considered a minority problem or is there enough shared ownership to enact healthy change?
John and JBS, thanks for the posts.
John, privatization or school choice always comes up. Ask yourself the question, "How many private school desks are there in your town? Now, how many students are there?" This usually ends the discussion and points up the limits of this proposal as a solution.
Our public schools need to be improved for the sake of the kids. They can be. Problem is the decision makers don't have a stake in the deal--no dog in the fight, so to speak and JBS hits at why this is true.
I don't know of any research, but I do know that the money behind the current political reality is anti-public schools for a variety of reasons, including extreme, right-wing ideology. Just a fact.
Meanwhile, our kids are left behind. It is time for a change if we want Texas to have a competitive future for our students and all the rest of us. It is not as complex as it seems.
Wouldn't private schools necessarily have higher overhead, the way that private insurance companies are necessarily less efficient than public health care programs (i.e. Medicaid) since they have to include overhead/profit?
In other words, wouldn't a voucher program that supported 100% of the students be MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE than fixing the public school system?
To Larry's point about capacity: there are not enough desks in private schools to cover the demand. Check this out:
http://www.dallasrelo.com/privateschools.html
Dallas has a MAXIMUM ENROLLMENT of 21,570 in the private school system.
The DISD reports here that its Elementary School Enrollment Projections Fall 2005 is 98,146.
This does not include middle schools or high schools.
There is no question: vouchers are not a solution.
From my experience as an educator in an inner city Dallas high school, I have observed that the schools are not underfunded. Schools often have adequate supplies, but the distribution and use of these supplies is flawed. Many teachers, my colleges, do not make the effort to even use these supplies. Often, boxes of petri dishes, pipets, laboratory equipment are ordered, never used, and eventually thrown away because they are damaged due to years of neglect. What use is spending money on new school supplies if the teacher isn't going to use it? More important than new buildings, fancy lab equipment, and crisp, shiney new textbooks, our public schools need intelligent and motivated teachers.
If funding for our public schools is increased, all the money should go towards increasing teacher salaries, and TEACHER salaries alone. Becoming an educator should be as difficult and as competitive as becoming a doctor. The work of a teacher is just as important!! If teacher salaries were, say doubled, the number of college students wanting to enter the educational field would increase. Teachers colleges could then selectively admit students. The caliber of the teacher would increase. Also, many burned-out, unmotivated, and unappreciated teachers will be renewed. These are good teachers who have been tired by low salaries and disrespect (from the administration, parents, as well as society). Further, because more people will want to teach (due to an increased salary), schools will have the luxury of being able to fire incompetent, lazy teachers without the fear of not being able to find a replacement. Firing an imcompetent teacher does no good, if the replacement is a long-term substitute. Someone has to replace the fired teacher!
Motivated, high quality teachers who are well-paid and who will be fired if they do not do their job, will not allow supplies to go unused. These type of teachers will use the resources available. Once we have competent, motivated, and APPRECIATED (be it financially appreciated) teachers in every classroom, then we can talk about increasing money for new computers, athletic uniforms, and AP classes.
Anonymous, for every data point like the one you present, I can present two that demonstrate the devotion of public school teachers. I have 3 in my close family. I agree we need higher salaries, but I can also tell you that my two daughters didn't get into education because they couldn't do anything else or because of the money. Both want to help children learn. This is actually a matter of all of the above. Unfortunately, our public policy leaders just aren't tuned into our children's education.
Post a Comment