5342+Week+1

It took great foresight of our fore fathers to see value in education. The landscape in the 1800’s looked much different in sight as well as in mind. To provide an education to all who wanted it and to know that it was the government’s responsibility lets us know how important education has been to the people in Texas. When you plant pecan trees, you will not reap the benefits of the harvest for many years. That simple metaphor holds true for Texas Public Education. An early investment my not pay off overnight but will pay large dividends in the future. With that, the first historical moment came in 1836 when the Texas Declaration of Independence sited the failure of the Mexican Government, “to establish any public system of education, although possessed of almost boundless resources…” among the reasons for severing political ties with Mexico. This simple act is where it all started and why we do what we do today. The second major historical event was the passing of the Gilmer-Aikin Act of 1949. This act prescribed the reorganization of state education administration while also established the “Minimum Foundation Program,” which created a funding system that provided revenue for education from both state and local sources. Those sources were broken down into eighty percent of the funding would come from the state and the local funds would furnish the remaining twenty percent. This act also created an elected State Board of Education that appointed a commissioner of education, and reorganized the administration of state public school policy through the Texas Education Agency. Lastly, the third major historical event is Senate Bill 7, better known as Robin Hood, passed in 1993. This bill allowed for the state to recapture property tax. The bill has come under much scrutiny, but its heart is in the right place. The purpose for recapturing revenue from high-wealth districts in using it to fund lower-wealth districts was to improve equity in the funding system. Although Robin Hood seems too many of those wealthy districts wrong, there is nothing lurking around the corner to take its place. Once the state opened that box, it will be hard to call back. That money that has been taken from the wealthier districts and given to the districts having less is counted upon. If the lawmakers were to do away with Senate Bill 7, the state would have to make up for that lost income for those lesser districts.
 * Three Most Historical Moments in Texas Public Education **

**Three Basic Issues Impacting the State Formula** There is nothing basic about the state funding formula for public schools in Texas. Woody Brewton, long time superintendent in Lorena, and I were talking and when he was informing the state legislature on school finance and when he was asked the question, “how many people in Texas totally understand the state funding formula?” Woody replied with, “Six people totally understand the formula.” I understand our formula must meet the needs of many districts, but when it is so complicated that only a few people truly understand it, that is the most important issue. The second issue facing our funding formula is Senate Bill 7 or Robin Hood. I know it has its merit and its heart is in the right place but is this method best for funding Chapter 42 school districts? Taking money from taxpayers in one district and giving it to another the proper practice? If someone moves into a district and pays taxes, should that money not go to the children in that district? Federal funding is the third issue that faces school districts and not just in Texas. Since 2002, the federal educational plan or No Child Left Behind, allow for federal monitoring of students and that job their schools were doing. Average Yearly Progress is the monitoring system that the federal government uses yet their contribution is very small to the overall cost of running a district. Now this monitoring is needed and we want to keep the states’ rights to educate its children, but the federal government should be contributing more than it does. If the federal government wants to monitor and govern what the schools are doing, then there should be more of a contribution to the betterment of its countries children.

**Equality, Equity and Adequacy** Equality refers to the root word of everything being equal and that holds true for our classrooms. You want all of the children being given an equal share of their education. Senate Bill 7 tries to support equality by giving money to districts that they would not normally generate themselves so that they may in turn provide a more equal education. Another example is the funds that are designated for certain areas of the educational process. Equity refers to the needs of the individual student and what these needs may be. This allows for funding to be greater or lesser depending on what needs each individual student has. Two examples of equity are students on career and technology paths generate more money for a school district and students who require special education will do the same. Adequacy is the term that refers to what level your children are achieving and is it good enough. An adequate education is what every district strives for and should be striving for a more than adequate education. Meeting the needs of your students and making sure they pass the standardized testing gives the school district a good picture of their provision of an adequate education.

**District Improvement Plan Review** Funding is a hot topic in the state of Texas when it refers to education and this year it will be hotter than most. Much of that is brought on by the lack of attention funding has received in the previous sessions in the state government. In Salado ISD, a chapter 41 district, we receive 59% of our funds from local revenue, 36% from state and 5% from federal. Our operating cost for a year is roughly 11.5 million dollars and we have a K-12 enrollment of 1357. Broken down our cost per student is around $8500. With that said, some of our students do not receive their share of those resources. In a perfect world, we could consider giving that money to each student and telling them they are responsible for getting educated and you are free to get educated in any way you would prefer and in any discipline of your choice. Now that is farfetched and poses a whole other set of problems but is that the only way you can have equality in education? As you would guess, Austin ISD has a much larger budget and I have not done the breakdown on the amount of money per student but I am sure it is somewhere in the ballpark. Their district improvement plan is vast and covers many different goals of their district. They have many more programs to support a large amount of students and these programs support students with many different needs. Living close to Austin, I have been familiar with their district and the community. The challenging part about Austin ISD is what also makes it great. Being the state capitol has many perks and many opportunities to drive revenue into the district. The downside is there is land in your district that is not taxable. The University of Texas, Texas School for the Deaf and all of the land owned by the people of Texas is not available to be taxed which leaves the bulk of the responsibility on the home owners. Both improvement plans have many differences but if you look closely they are very much alike. Salado and Austin ISD have their children in mind when they set out to make their district better. A budget for a district is much like the budget for your home. You have bills that you must every month and year but what are your goals for your home and your family. Is it a new car every four years or maybe paying off your home? At the school district level, you have goals for your district and how to make it better. Change is the only constant and if you are not improving your district then your district is stagnant. Just paying the bills and the employees every year is not enough. You must have goals, those goals must have a beginning and an ending and they must be measurable. These goals cannot be nameless and faceless and must be accompanied by who is responsible for them and they must be data driven and open to the public. The district site based committee should develop the district improvement plan so that there is buy in from the community and ownership of the district and its direction. The improvement plan should include budget amounts and be considered transparent, as all things should be when dealing with community monies. The improvement plan has a purpose and in my opinion is looked at as a burden more than a path.