UPCOMING SHOWS:
RECENT SHOWS:
TAGS:
Cutting the Budget
- LATEST COMMENTS
- That is a shame. I hope that the Democratic lead ... - OregonSean
- Yes, NCLB is most certainly still in effect. As an ... - RobManning
- When I say entertainment I was referring to James Woods ... - Cubilist
Government-funded programs are going through massive cuts in this economic recession, and of course schools are no exception. Oregon schools could receive as little as $5.4 billion over the next two years -- $1 billion less than expected. While teachers and administrators prepare to make major cuts, some Oregon lawmakers are talking about giving them even more discretion when taking a scalpel to each budget line.
Currently, school districts are bound by thousands of pages of requirements, everything from reporting the number of hours students spend in P.E. to conducting surveys that determine how ready kindergarteners are for first grade. The state also mandates programs for Talented and Gifted and underachieving students. Meeting all these requirements limits a school district's flexibility when it comes time to cut the budget. Even spending time filling out reports costs money and — some argue — takes educators' attention away from individual students.
Frank Morse is sponsoring Senate bill 441 (pdf) that would free up schools from most of these requirements during the 2009-11 school years, but some legislators say that giving local districts this power sets a dangerous precedent.
Are you a teacher bracing for local cuts? How is your school or district being affected? Do you think more discretion would make it easier for you? Are you a parent of a school-aged child? What control would you like your local district to have when deciding what programs or services to cut?
GUESTS:
- Frank Morse: State Senator (R-Albany)
- Craig Hawkins: Communications Director for the Confederation of Oregon School Administrators
- James Woods: Chairman of Parkrose Board of Education and local blogger about his experience in education
- Suzanne Chimenti: Music Teacher at Fairview Elementary School and the creator of a YouTube video protesting cuts to education
- Steve Kunke: Assistant Superintendent of Albany School District
Tagged as: high school · legislature · school · senate
Photo credit: Mischiru / Flickr / Creative Commons
COMMENTS: (31 total)
-
Tony, you and others concerned about the budget for Gresham and Reynolds should join me at the forum Stand for Children is hosting on May 30th. Sen. Laurie Monnes-Anderson, Rep. Nick Kahl, and Rep. Greg Matthews will be there to participate in a discussion about school funding.
Join me to encourage them to protect kids and schools! The forum is on May 30th, 11 - 12:30 p.m., in the Gresham High School Gym. The details are posted at www.stand.org/or/gresham.
-
Since things look so dire in Salem, I wonder if anyone has thought about other funding options - What about an Oregon "school bond" for school operations, just like the "war bonds during WWII. You could structure it such that folks buying the bonds would either receive a small yield after five years (when the economy is more stable) or better yet, they could cash them in for a reduction off of the tuition at the Oregon State College/University when their kids are college age.
We all donate to PTA and Foundation efforts at our local schools, and while I would like to donate more - there is only so much I can flat out donate before I worry that such donations cut into my child's college fund. But, if I had the choice of buying a "school bond" that could help PPS now while still having some benefit for his education later in life, I would be willing to do so - and I imagine there are others who might be willing too.
I readily admit that I don't really know the first thing about school financing or State financing of schools. And, there probably is a reason that this woudn't work - but given the outlook perhaps we should look to be innovate - to think outside the box - we have to do something. -
This sounds like a wonderful idea! I would really like to know whether this idea has been considered by the legislature and if so, why it hasn't been implemented.
-
There is an inarguable need by Government and Society for a well educated citizenry. Clearly the State Government has a responsibility to achieve funding at not less then 100% for the necessary operations of every primary school (K-12) in the state.
Frankly, this discussion would not be happening IF the Governor and the legislature were not FAILING TO DO THEIR JOB!
Of course that is just my opinion and being just a Native Oregonian and not being a Democant or a Repliwont; What The Fig do I know. -
I don't know what the answer is. Truely. But I just finished reading "Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable" an online article by Clay Shirkey about newspapers failing because they are trying to preserve a model that isn't working any more.
His contention is that we are in a period of fundamental change and chaos and what works today isn’t the same as what used to work and might not be what will work in the future. "Society doesn’t need newspapers. What we need is journalism."
Well, I would say that maybe we need to stop thinking about schools and start thinking about education.
Maybe what we need to do is start building education for the 21st century, instead of putting more bandaids on what it was in the 20th. Because the whole world, and the way people access information, and even the way they learn is changing and right now, schools aren't keeping up. I think money spent on education is vitally important, but not if it simply goes toward patching a sinking boat.
We live in scary times. It is up to us whether they are scary good or scary bad.
-
Unfortunately, the research needed to determine which kinds of changes might be worth trying costs money, as well as the cost of restructuring the system, and money is what we are short of at this time. When times are better I would say this is an excellent idea and that greater innovation in education, possibly a paradigm shift, is long overdue.
-
We need to try and prevent the worst of the budget cuts – if we don’t act now, Oregon’s public schools could be forced to cut 5,500 teachers! Oregon’s students already learn in the largest elementary classes in the nation and have one of the shortest school years. Legislators need to take bold steps to increase revenue available for schools and other essential public programs that protect our state’s most vulnerable citizens. We can do something-send a message to your legislators today to ask them to raise revenue and prevent further harm. Click on this link - www.stand.org/or/postcard.
-
I have a B.S. in Geography and am currently employed with the USDA. Outdoor school was the beginning of my interest in the natural sciences and without it I may have ended up in god knows, business...ugh.
I don't know how a school district, whose end goal is the education of it's students, can justify funding entertainment rather than an education.
A temporary "positive" cash flow of pools compared to lifelong benifits to the individual and the state through natural science education is immeasurable. I thought we were heading toward making our state the "greenest" in the country.
-
I'm assumming that by entertainment you mean sports, and I agree that there are far more fundamental aspects to education. Unfortunately, I think this is an issue that will take much reeducation of the parents in order to reverse the tide of public opinion.
-
When I say entertainment I was referring to James Woods comments that his district is going to continue to fund the school pool because of it's "cash flow" while cutting Outdoor School for 6th graders.
-
Cut the T.A.G. program already. My experience has been that at the elementary level T.A.G. money intended for talented and gifted kids get spent on teacher education "so that all the students can benefit." The money isn't going where it was originally intended.
When my student reached high school and I called a meeting with the T.A.G. coordinator I was told that there was no program at the high school level, since high school students were expected to be able to self-select classes.
-
Cutting TAG programs is NOT in the best interest of our children, our schools or our communities. Why is this lumped in with Senate Bill 441. I'd like to hear Sen. Frank Morse defend this.
-
I'm a retired educator and the idea of giving more discretion to local districts really scares me unless we are VERY clear about what outcomes we expect from those local administrators. Just recently we saw when "No Child Left Behind" require higher standardized achievement test scores, some of the local ideas for meeting this standard included:
*schools encouraging poorly-performing minority students to drop out (so their scores did not appear on the test report
*staff changing student responses on the test sheets to remore wrong responses
*eliminating critical school activities that did not directly improve test scores
*using untrained/minimally trained personnel instead of fully trained employees who have reached a generally recognized level of competence
Thus, when faced with a demand to report, some schools responded by unethically bending and breaking rules in order to "look good on paper." (There are sterling exceptions, of course! But my point is it's not the reporting itself so much as it is the value of and the use of the report results.)
Also, I think we tend to forget that ultimate goal of the public schools is to socialize youth into responsible adults who know how to participate in our democracy. But it is soooooooo easy to measure progress by testing reading and math achievement, that we use that as our yardstick of progress and thus ignore essential co-curricular activities.
-
I agree that schools could do more to socialize youth. Parents just don't seem to have the time for it these days. It would be wonderful if some basic principles of behavioral science could be introduced to help students understand the societal value (as opposed to moral) of treating others with respect and appreciating (as opposed to merely tolerating) diversity. Just these two would do a lot to make society more livable.
-
I hear politicians and school administrators speaking about programs that do not directly participate in classroom instruction. I hear remarks that indicate classified employees can do the job of libratians. This is a considerable misunderstanding of what librarians do. Librarians are teachers. Media is a major part of all the learning that goes on in schools and is no less important than any other subject. Try again: Libraries are classrooms and should not be reduced.
-
Libraries are definitely an under-utilized resource. I would advocate a study or additional resources devoted to helping educate this students in a way which is meaningful to them.
-
As a parent to two TAG students and the teacher of many more (at a Gresham charter school that most certainly does "have to deal with special needs, poverty, ethnicity,etc"), I want to advocate for maintaining TAG programs. I know from both experiences and from research that TAG students whose educational needs are not met are at risk for failure. My children's school district hired a TAG coordinator this year who has done a phenomenal job (Kasshawna Blamer at Oregon Trail), and it has made a world of difference in my children's learning and attitude toward learning. Every year I have bright, talented students with tremendous potential going to waste because they are so frustrated with what they've been given in our schools. They are not lazy, unmotivated, uncaring, etc. They are frustrated. They need a different educational program. This is not elitist, any more than it is elitist to provide an appropriate public education to students who need accomodations for learning or physical disabilities. I'd like to write more, but need to begin my class.
-
I can't believe that they will take teachers out of classrooms, drop reporting standards, and limit a number of other extra curricular activities so they can keep FOOTBALL. The excuse that some kids will stay in school because of THAT sport is spurious. Having larger classes chases other kids out of school. . .and to keep. . . .football?????
And, the legislature's approach of letting the districts decide on a local basis is just a continuation of legislative inability to make hard decisions. . .a problem we've had for years.
-
Fully agreed. Please see my reply to cubilist above.
-
Can someone state (or repeat) how much money will be saved by SB 411? If you can't define it in $$, how much time will really be saved? Do school districts currently have a REAL estimate of how much time/money is spent on reporting?
I am glad that this bill suspends reporting reqm'ts for two years rather than totally eliminating them. Taxpayers and pearents have asked for the reports and programs for valid reasons. I am willing to trust my district board and administrators over the next two years, but look forward to reinstating programs in the near future.
-
Cutting programs that benefit our brightest students is like shooting ourselves in the foot. Cutting physical education when our children are obese makes not sense whatsoever. At the same time our schools are faced with the need of serving ever more children who need special assistance with language barriers. So here is my idea for a solution.
At our universities incoming international students are required a certain level of language proficiency before being mainstreamed into regular classes. This decreases the disruption to the students who know the language the class is being taught in while decreasing the frustration and failure rate of the international student. Why not use the same format for our K-12 schools where we provide ELS instructors for elementary (maybe one for two or three schools) middle and high school aged incoming kids until they can understand, communicate, read and write well enough to function in the regular classroom. This would ease the burden on already over filled classrooms and teachers who already have a very full plate working with our children trying to meet the standards demanded for proficiency and No Child Left Behind.
Polli Butzner, Albany
-
The bottom line is that the legislature and the citizens of Oregon have failed the children of Oregon. We should not be cutting the quality of education in times of economic downfall, or at any time. We need a long term stable funding model for public education.
Allowing districts to cut these programs does not help students. It may save a very small amount of money, but at a much greater cost to students in most cases. In general I am in favor of giving the districts some flexibility, but it needs to be done as a broader reform. This bill amounts to a tacit recommendation that districts cut these programs in order to save money.
-
I find it particularly odious that when the chips are down, Conservative Republicans stoop to stabbing children and their teachers in the back. This looks like just one more attack in a long history of attacks on public schools because Conservative Republicans see pubic schools as "socialism".
My guess is that two years from now they would say "just look, we got along without those programs so we don't need to reinstate them".
-
Long term solutions are needed to take Oregon's education system off the existing funding rollercoaster. We got big kicker checks two years ago, and yet we face budget cuts now. This doesn't make sense.
Shorter school years and bigger class sizes are short term solutions that will have rotten long term effects.
I support my legislators to make those tough decisions to raise new revenue by enacting reasonable increases to taxes on profitable corporations & the wealthiest Oregonians and reducing tax loopholes.
We can do something-send a message to your legislators today to ask them to raise revenue and prevent further harm. Click on this link - www.stand.org/or/postcard.
-
At the end of the day, the system has to change. What is in place now obviously isn’t working for us. However sacrificing a solid K-12 education to any group of students within the whole is unacceptable. Once the current economic crisis is past, there will be some other obstacle to prevent the full funding of educational programs such as TAG unless the requirement to provide an education to meet EACH student’s needs is maintained. Once a debt is forgiven, how many people opt to go back and pay against that debt down the road? This is no different. By giving local districts the discretion to not fund particular compliance programs, even for a limited time, the state is forgiving their educational debt so to speak. Once the obligation to fund this program can be ignored on a local basis, it will likely be permanently removed from consideration of future available funds. Many smaller districts are already functioning out of compliance with State educational ordinances for a wide range of required curriculum, why give them the official blessing through Senate bill 441 that mediocrity is acceptable. After all, isn’t that the message that is being sent that TAG students will “find their own way” and a partial education is good enough for these kids, as well as any of the other programs that local districts will conveniently be able to ignore under this proposed bill? That’s like building a new high rise building to 50% or even 80% of the state building code requirements, would you want to rent office space in that building knowing that everyone thought 50% was good enough when it was being constructed? Where does that place our kids if they are only being educated to 50% of their needs/abilities, high or low, before they are sent out into the world to supposedly become a productive member of society? Exactly where along the way does the other 50% get made up?
-
A good point this makes is that we need to educate our own youth, not just rely on the continuing influx of talent from out of state. Our we making Oregon good for our children or good for people from other states that don't care to do the hard work of making it a wonderful place to live.
-
According to my state legislators the vast majority of state spending is on education, healthcare, and public safety (prisons) aka medicate, educate, incarcerate. All three of these areas are too critical to allow for a system that repeatedly underfunds them when times are bad, which is inevitable from time to time. A long term solution needs to continue to be developed. The most promising I've heard is the future increased diversion of revenue to the rainy day fund, so that we have savings when we need it. This can be accomplished through a variety of methods.
I believe that reducing funding on education is possibly the least practical of the three choices because it is an investment in the future. Educated and well rounded students become educated and well rounded citizens and can contribute more to our society, not just socially, but economically as well.
In the short run, I think that giving control to local school districts make the most sense because it is easier for parents to organize on that level to influence their local *elected* school board members, and allows each school district to tailor it's decisions to the will of the parents. -
Is "no child left behind" still in effect?? Wikipedia is not clear on this fact.
-
Yes, NCLB is most certainly still in effect. As an act of Congress, the Obama Administration is not at liberty to revoke it, or change it (beyond some regulatory tinkering), so yes, it's still the law of the land.
RobManning — Thu April 30th 1:50p.m.
-
That is a shame. I hope that the Democratic lead congress will revoke it for something better. Things are looking potentially more hopeful with a near filibuster proof majority in the Senate--Arlen Specter converting over and the, seemingly, eventual seating of Al Franken.
-
I don't have much time to write this as I am on my way to school so forgive me if this rambles a bit.
I am a music teacher in Gresham / Barlow School District. Elementary music and PE have been cut in half here as well as counselling. Besides music and PE many teachers will be losing their jobs. This is the tip of the iceberg. Every aspect of our schools has been and will be hard hit. We went through a horrible process of prioritizing cuts for next year. Next year children with special needs will be mainstreamed into the classrooms which will already have huge enrollments. If the model is consistent with what we have this year their will be grossly inadequate personnel support. At the same time the district receives $500,00 from the federal government to open an on-line middle school and is actively pursuing students to attend. This could mean more cuts to the middle schools as the funding shifts. We have several other charter schools in the district that directly received money from the state and are not held to the same regulations as we are. The Montessori charter school boasts small class sizes of about 20. Teachers in the regular public schools have been pleading for low class size for years. Our district received a substantial increase in Title 1 funds that cannot be used to alleviate these obvious problems of overcrowding and lack of resource. Rather the district is using the money to hire instructional coaches for staff development (to meet the requirements of the grant). I fear the federal stimulus money that we will receive will have such strings attached that it will not help the essential problems in the school. I predict there will be an exodus of students from the regular public schools into charter schools which our run much looser than pulic schools and don't have to deal with special needs, poverty, ethnicity,etc. This could leave the public schools in a terrible situation which could resemble the segregated, elitist schools of the past. It is very sad to see. The federal and state requirements associated with NCLB have had a negative impact on the innovative and exciting educational practices that were a hallmark of the Gresham Schools in the past.