Finance+Week+3+Part+3

The assignment calls for differences within the districts, and positive and negative impacts on programs. Before discussing the differences, I would like to comment on impacts. If one is asking, I am of the opinion that there is no INTENTIONAL negative impact by the current system (no harm intended). My biggest concern and complaint is that it simply does not do enough. One might not compare it to a glass being half full or half empty, but simply to being “too big a glass.” The intent and impact is all positive. It’s just simply not enough. The current system does not have the capability to close the educational gap. In many cases it simply still matters where you live as to the quality of education you will receive.

I think some of the resource headings got switched around. I believe District 1 is actually the snapshot district that should have the highest WADA at $5555.82 due to the high number of LEP, SPED, and Bilingual students. Even so, District 2 ultimately ended up with more staff members (especially teachers). Interestingly, although through weighted funding the target revenue per WADA was more than indicated was needed, District 1 still chose less teachers in the long run. Other costs such as transportation may have offset their ability. The number of students is near identical in both districts. Although more students are at-risk in District 1, their CATE numbers are almost double indicating recognition of a need to go to work directly after high school (my interpretation).

Local tax revenue is the main issue. The state attempts to offset disparities with WADA. The intent is well-placed but not enough. The tax base in District 2 is close to 3 Billion dollars versus 146 million in District 1. The margin is far too great in this particular case for WADA to even touch. Thus, although all indications are that it only costs about $4800 per year to teach a student in District 2, they actually receive close to $8000. The difference between districts leaves the students in District 1 behind more than $3000 per student. HUGE. The system doesn’t work. Although money is never the “end-all-beat-all”, it likely does play an important factor in providing for better opportunities for students in District 2. These sums of money play important roles in the ancillary things that may make a difference in a student’s educational experience. Just a few examples include **lower teacher/student ratios**, increased technology, newer and better-maintained facilities, state-of-the-art equipment, etc., etc. Again, money can never be assumed to be the defining factor in a student’s education. But without having any further information on these two districts, I believe it is safe to assume that a student from District 2 will have the advantage.

It seems as though District 1 will ultimately have to use compensatory funding to help meet even basic educational programming needs considering its lack of tax base. In other words, the funding aid from the state (nearly 30 Million) will go primarily to meet everyday expenses. In this respect, it does not “compensate” or supplement as was intended. One of the things it does ultimately have going for it is the likelihood of title monies for all campuses due to the high percentage of economically disadvantaged students.

On our 2009 snapshot there was indication that each of the two schools had 265 teachers each. District 1 ultimately had a significantly higher staffing number. In fact, it had 10% more employees. This is indicative of high numbers of paraprofessionals who were likely hired as instructional aides. Ultimately, the WADA money didn’t seem to be used to bring teacher/student ratios down from a professional standpoint (as it was intended). The 2010-11 summary shows an even wider disparity between the districts as far as professional numbers are concerned. District 1 showed 285, while District 2 showed 307. This was inclusive of librarians, counselors, and nurses as well. The reality is that classroom numbers did not lower. As a result, the likelihood of increased academic success was probably minimized.

Again, at a cursory glance, the districts will look similar as far as size is concerned. In reality, they are very different academically as well. Despite minimal compensatory funding, District 2 leads the way in overall TAKS scoring, a higher graduation rate, and higher ACT/SAT scores. Interestingly, District 1 has a much higher percentage of students taking college entrance exams. This could be for a number of different reasons. The reality is that I doubt District 1 actually puts more emphasis on college readiness that District 2. So, I am going to venture a guess that a portion of Title money or some other fund is being used to pay for the exams in order to encourage students to look at further education. This could actually play a factor in their average scores being a full 200 points below District 2’s on the SAT. The percent tested in District 1 is SUBSTANTIALLY higher at 73% versus 53% for the other.

Sadly, there is another major M & O program that is difficult to counterbalance. The lion’s share of district budgets are generally dedicated to salary. When comparing the two, although teacher turnover is similar and average years of experience are not far apart between the two, salaries are. If fact, there is a $6500/year gap between the two with District 2 prevailing. Had these two districts sat side by side, it would be difficult for District 1 to compete. Again, we don’t have much indication of specifically where each is, but if compares apples to apples, District 2 would have clear advantage.

In summation, all this points to a system that makes efforts at equity, but comes up short. And unless you’ve been living under a rock, you should be aware of lawsuit after lawsuit that is being filed by districts across the state. It is my sincere hope that through all this, we can finally find a way to provide every child in Texas with the same opportunity (school-wise anyway) to achieve success in life. I believe it is one of the fundamental principles on which both our nation and our state are based upon.

This is posted on my group wiki and I will comment on two additional submissions.