edchat

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

Top 4 Group Influences in Public Education Part IV: Federal Government & Federal Courts

There are many external influences that impact public education. In this series the top four groups will be reviewed including the influence of professional education organizations, the involvement of parents, the businesses, and the federal government and court systems. For this part the influence of the federal government and federal courts will be discussed to reveal their impact on public education.

Even though the federal government has no direct control over education, federal authority does have a far-reaching influence over educational matters. Laws passed at the federal level impact schools and their administration. Also, federal courts make rulings that necessitate change in education on multiple levels, while the U.S. Department of Education leaves an indelible mark on the educational system.

The federal government’s interest in education shifts depending on the politics of the political party in power. Traditionally, Republican administrations seek to withdraw federal influence from education, leaving education as a matter for individual states to address. Democrats, on the other hand, generally tend to be more interested in improving the state of education across the country.

Many court decisions have shaped education nationwide, affecting the responsibilities and accountability of school officers in areas as diverse as desegregation, school finance, prayer in the schools, and the rights of individual students. Some oppose the federal court’s involvement in what they consider to be a state matter, whereas others feel that the involvement in education at the federal level ensures that education is brought into alignment with the principles of democracy, guaranteeing that education is truly accessible to everyone.

The influence of the federal government and federal courts are beneficial to understand when reviewing external groups that impact public education. Make sure you are aware of the changes in these groups because they can impact your school district. Remember this is only one type of influence, therefore continue to read about the top four influences on public education.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

Hidden Issues in Educational Funding: Understanding the Controversy of Ethnicity and Inequality in School Systems

Educational funding is necessary for the development of any school including the availability of resources for students and teachers. However, do some school receive more funding than others? If so, who and what determines which schools are adequately funded? This articles answers both questions and discusses the controversy of issues within educational funding that are steered due to ethnicity in school systems resulting in what appears to be inequality.

Minority groups tend to live in poverty in proportions that exceed their representation in society.
Communities of specific racial minorities tend to be areas with a lower tax base. In poorer communities, a lower tax base results in less funding for the schools in those areas.

Running schools costs money. Paying teachers and the school staff; purchasing textbooks, equipment, and computers; and the upkeep of buildings and school grounds all need to be paid for. Because wealthier communities generally have more funds, it makes sense that their schools have a funding advantage. The question then becomes, where does that leave schools attended by racial minorities who live in poverty?

The inaccessibility to resources by specific groups is tantamount to social and economic injustice. One of the most fundamental bases for these injustices also appears to be ethnicity. Social injustices against ethnic minority groups continue to widen the gap between the rich and the poor. Some laws and policies, unfortunately, continue to encourage advantages of particular ethnic groups and disadvantages for others. While universal declarations of human rights were designed to protect the rights of all human beings and limit oppression, oppression by ethnicity and class continue to permeate American culture.

While the federal government contributes relatively little to the schools, more and more state generated revenues are being directed toward these schools. In some states, the state government contributes as little as 20% to schools in local communities, and in others, the state contributes as much as 80%. This can still leave a wide gap between funding for schools in the poorer communities, versus funding for schools in wealthier communities.

Is this method of financing schools discriminatory? Many think so, including the California
Supreme Court, who ruled in the case of Serrano v. Priest in 1971 that a system of financing a school that is based on the wealth of the community is discriminatory and violates the state constitution. It might be fair to say that it violates the U.S. Constitution by denying children equal access to education, but not everyone feels this way. In fact, in the 1973 Texas case of the San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the ruling was five to four that disproportionate school financing based on discrepancies in property taxes could not be challenged. Justice Lewis Powell was instrumental in this ruling, providing the following arguments: as long as everyone is getting a basic education, the differences are not unfair; whether or not the amount of money affects the quality of education is not clear; and education is not a right guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

Those who have disagreed with Powell suggested that despite the fact that the U.S. Constitution does not protect the educational rights of children, the constitutions of most states do. At this point, educational rights are not an issue likely to get voters’ attention, however, due to the fact that a majority of voters are Americans of European descent and are generally wealthier individuals whose children have access to the best schools. As a result, school quality often differs, even within the same metropolitan area, and between cities and suburbs.

It has been pointed out that equalization of per-student spending is only a part of a total solution for ensuring quality schools for all children, particularly when the amount of money available for all the schools has decreased. This may be the case, but in many states there is obvious bias. Consider the state of Connecticut, which is near the top of the list in the amount of money spent on students. In the 1990s, the average amount spent across the state on books and other learning materials was $147.68 per student. In Hartford, however, where the student population was more than 92% minority, the funding for instructional materials was $77 per student. This was a mere 52% of the state average. A clear message was sent that these students were not as important as other students in the state.

It’s not uncommon for parents and educators to seek political allies on school boards and legislative support to ensure that better funding for schools is found and delivered. Parents and educators often look for adequacy in school funding rather than equality in school funding.
Basically, they want each school to receive the minimum level of funding that is adequate to fully meet the needs of students. This adequate amount was defined in New Jersey as the average amount spent on education by the 130 wealthiest districts in the state. Once school funding in New Jersey was adjusted based on adequacy, and extra funds were added to schools in poorer areas, the results were perceptible. Younger children gained access to high-quality prekindergarten and kindergarten programs, and the gap between math and language arts test scores of urban and suburban students decreased by 50%. New Jersey also has the highest high school graduation rate in the country, and this distinction includes students from minority groups. The difference this funding has made is certainly measurable.

Although more work needs to be done in the area of school funding, the New Jersey example provides a model for states interested in using funds directed toward education to ensure quality educational experiences for all students. A possible next area of focus is not the amount of money spent, but how that money is being spent, with a focus on ensuring it is applied in ways that will create programs that benefit all students.

In closing, do believe that educational funding has hidden issues of inequality when it comes to providing funding? What can you do as an individual to rectify this problem in your jurisdiction?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

What You Need to Know as an Educator: Understanding the Impact of Educational Governance at the State Level

Are you aware of the governing educational structure of your state? Many components of this structure are affected by regulations while still enabling academic freedoms. In this article the basic state structure of K-12 school systems in the United States will be observed.

The educational system in the United States can best be described as extensive (due to the large size of the country), decentralized (determined by the individual states or even, at times, local areas), and diverse (the children to be educated come from a variety of ethnic and cultural backgrounds). In 2007–2008, approximately 49 million children were enrolled in K–12 schools, while 6.9 million teachers worked in the nation’s 99,000 public elementary, middle, and secondary schools.

The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gives individual states control over education within their boundaries, and many state constitutions state that all children have a right to minimally adequate education or include similarly worded clauses. States have the right to determine policy, to set curriculum, and to decide how to spend the majority of funds allocated to education. Furthermore, states are responsible for setting the minimum requirements that a student needs to meet in order to graduate high school. Slightly more than half of the states (26) require students to complete state-regulated exit exams, although these may not be considered particularly rigorous because they contain knowledge and skill levels comparable to proficiency at the eighth- or ninth-grade levels. Finally, states are ultimately responsible for the selection and the evaluation of educational personnel. Chief educational officers or state commissioners of education may be appointed or elected. When elected by the voting public, the chief educational officer is wholly responsible to the public for his or her decisions and policies.

The governance structure can vary from state to state; the governor is typically the head of education, although the members of the state legislature are equally as powerful when it comes to setting statewide policies and regulations. Many states have a state board of education (SBE), which is either appointed, elected, or a combination of both, with some members appointed and others elected. Certain other states, such as New Mexico, Minnesota, and Oregon, have alternate bodies. Check the National Association of State Boards of Education Web site to see what entity exists in your state. Many states have a chief state school officer, who is directly responsible to the SBE and normally serves as the head of a state department of education. At the local level, school districts are governed by school boards. School board members may be elected or appointed. School boards are normally responsible for hiring a school district superintendent, who is responsible for implementing educational policies at the local level. The superintendent is also responsible for managing principals and schools located within the district. Principals are the onsite authority for education in their buildings. Teachers are directly responsible to principals.

Since each state has some leniency with the governance structure it is important to understand your individual school system. Know thing proper protocol will enable you to stay involved and in communication with your local district leaders and provide the appropriate method for addressing concerning about your school system.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation

A Blended Approach to Phonics Helps Struggling Readers and Improves Test Scores

A principal set out to find a literacy tool to help dyslexic students but ended up revolutionizing her early literacy curriculum.

By Dr. Christy Hiett

According to the International Dyslexia Association, approximately 15% of the general population has some symptoms of dyslexia, with a significant number of them going undiagnosed. Many young students with dyslexia struggle silently and have lifelong literacy issues. To help these students, in the fall 2015, the Alabama State Board of Education voted to define dyslexia as a learning challenge. This means every school in our state is required to screen students for dyslexia, and provide accommodations and intervention so they have the resources to become successful readers.

As part of the new requirements, Alabama schools provide assistive technology so students with dyslexia have the option of having text read to them and using speech-to-text software instead of writing. Last fall, I was informed our first dyslexia-diagnosed student was planning to transition to Fruithurst for the following school year. At the time, Fruithurst didn’t have assistive tech meeting the requirements for dyslexic students, so I began my search for the right technology tool.

Building a Foundation of Phonics

To prepare, I took a trip to a nearby school in Georgia to see what tools they were using to help students who were classified with dyslexia and other reading disabilities. There, I discovered a phonics-focused, blended learning print and digital curriculum called Reading Horizons that is designed to help students with dyslexia and a wide range of reading difficulties.

Fruithurst is a rural school where 76% of students are considered at poverty level, and getting students to read at or above grade level has often been a difficult task for us. After seeing a steady decline in student reading levels over my eight years as an administrator, I finally found the key to reversing that trend: ensuring that all students receive a solid phonics foundation.

In January 2016 we overhauled our entire K–2 reading curriculum to include Reading Horizons Discovery® direct instruction and software. Our goal was to serve students with reading disabilities as well as provide all of our students with a solid reading foundation.

The Blended Approach

Fruithurst uses Reading Horizons Discovery as its main reading program for students in grades K–2, and as reading intervention. Lessons typically last 30-40 minutes per day and incorporate whole-group instruction, small-group work, and individual work time. Many of my teachers use print resources like word list cards for dictation and transfer activities during whole-class instruction. Then, they use the digital program during reading stations so students can practice and reinforce the skills they worked on as a group.

Within two weeks of overhauling the K–2 curriculum, Fruithurst saw increases in student test scores, especially through spelling tests. I saw students as young as kindergarten learning how to decode words and, ultimately, to read. The decoding process actively involves students in their own learning: Students stand up from their desks and use whiteboards to decode words using the phonetic skills. We’ve found the phonics-based curriculum is a great solution for a classroom of children with a mixture of ability levels because it challenges those at a higher level while reinforcing phonics skills for children who are still struggling.

The engaging and comprehensive program helps children truly learn phonetic skills as opposed to memorizing spelling words for a test and forgetting them the next week. Before, many students were not doing well on spelling tests because they couldn’t grasp the concepts of the English language “code”. A handful of students were constantly making zeros and lacked the most basic foundations for spelling. I’m happy to report even students who were making zeros were making 100s after only a few weeks!

A Literacy Success Story

A great example of how our new approach works was a first-grade student who entered Fruithurst after completing kindergarten, twice. After multiple moves between family members and foster homes, he transferred to Fruithurst with the hope of finding a quality education and a stable living situation. Teachers diligently tried to teach this student to read, and to help him look past his struggles at home for a few hours each day, but he continued to struggle and had failing grades. With the implementation of the new phonics curriculum, he started getting 105% on spelling tests within a few weeks.

After grasping the concept of phonics, he was able to connect what he was learning to the classroom, which is something this particular student had never done before. He finished the school year above average, full of confidence in his ability to read.

At Fruithurst, the hunt for a new curriculum to help students with dyslexia and other struggling readers evolved into a complete curriculum overhaul. Using a blended approach to teach core reading skills allows students to move at their own pace and allows teachers to provide appropriate intervention to struggling readers. I am now confident that all of our students are receiving a great phonics foundation and have the best possible chance to be great readers in the future.

Dr. Christy Hiett is the Principal of Fruithurst Elementary School in Fruithurst, Alabama.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education, OpEducation

What Makes a Great School Counselor

For many of us, there’s no better feeling than having a positive impact on a kid. Growing up can be tough, and school and what lies beyond can feel like a maze. You’ve been through it yourself, and if you were lucky, you had a school counselor who helped set you on the right path.

If you’ve been teaching and want to switch gears, or if working with elementary, middle school, or high school students feels right and you know you have a lot to offer, a career in school counseling may be a perfect fit for you. You can even keep your current job while you get a Masters of Education in School Counseling at one of the country’s best colleges for counseling.

With a bachelor’s degree (in any field) from an accredited university, and taking only two classes per semester, most online degree programs can be completed in eight semesters and will qualify you for Licensed Professional Counseling Certification. Go to this website to find out the exact requirements and curriculum involved. There’s usually even financial aid available.

Being a school counselor means becoming personally involved with young students of all ages and helping them along the way to becoming productive and successful adults. School counselors work as a team with administrators and families to meet challenges students might be facing at school or at home, and serve as mentors on the journey to high school graduation and beyond.

At every level, what makes a great counselor is compassion and the ability to understand a student’s needs, interests, talents, and desires, and relate them to real-world options. Maybe above all is skill at listening to both what the student says and doesn’t say, and knowing how to channel his or her strengths and overcome his or her weaknesses.

The specific scope of the work varies with the age of the children:

Elementary School

Working with young children in elementary school, counselors are often involved with students who have behavioral issues or learning disorders. Their work can involve assessing those problems and conferring with parents and teachers as to recommended ways to resolve them, sometimes bringing in other professionals like psychologists and therapists. The earlier these kinds of difficulties are dealt with, the smoother the road a child has to academic success.

Middle School

It’s in middle school that students who may have had childhood dreams about being ballerinas or cowboys begin thinking in earnest about what they want to be when they grow up. A school counselor at this point can be an invaluable aid in guiding middle-school students toward other opportunities they may not even have known existed.

Working with students at both ends of the academic spectrum — from those with learning disorders to those in advanced placement classes — a counselor is called upon to adapt thoughtfully to each child’s needs and be a sounding board for their concerns.

High School

High School

In high school, students begin wrestling with the very real choices that lie before them. College is a goal for many, but which college and why? Technical training instead of a traditional university is another option, and students who might be inclined in that direction need help in evaluating those choices and the careers they may lead to.

High school counselors are often involved in helping students select classes and electives that will bolster their chances of acceptance, and assist them in applying to schools and finding financial aid. At the same time, high school counselors are sometimes called upon to help kids through difficulties in the social realm that can derail even the best students. Often a student finds a counselor easier to take a problem to than a parent, and it’s a fortunate teenager who has a counselor he or she can really talk to.

College-Level

Counselors at the college level work with students to plan courses of study and maximize the benefits of their degrees. They may help direct them to graduate studies that fit their career goals, and counsel them on available internships and entry-level jobs. Some may even offer assistance with writing resumes and learning how to interview. It’s a great counselor who sends a new graduate off into the working world with the confidence and skills to succeed.

For more information, and lists of each state’s licensing requirements for school counselors, visit the American School Counselor Association.

 

 

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Teachers

What You Need to Know as an Educator: How to Deal with a Difficult Principal

As a teacher you may find it very difficult to work with your principal. Therefore this article provides tips for surviving the work place as you continue to invest in the lives of students.

Being a teacher was hands down one of the most difficult things that I have ever done in my life. It was also, however, the most rewarding. I had excellent relationships with my colleagues and my building principals, who served as a support system during times of uncertainty and difficulty. I hope that you will have a similar experience, but I also want you to be prepared if you do not.

Your school principal serves as an immediate supervisor and has direct authority over the day-to-day management of the school. A principal can be an invaluable ally in your pursuit to educate students or can be a nuisance and make your life a living hell. Here are some strategies that you can use to deal with a difficult principal.

  1. Take steps to open the lines of communication, and build a healthy reciprocal relationship with your principal. There is nothing wrong with appeasing your principal, and even “kissing up.” Your objective is to coexist with him or her and be the best teacher that you can be. Document every interaction between you and your building principal. If there is a problem down the line, you will have a detailed record of your interactions. Also, if your colleagues witnessed important interactions between you and your principal, be sure to record their names and other pertinent information.
  2. If you feel as though your principal is bullying or persecuting you, try to stay calm and remain professional. Give the principal the benefit of the doubt at first, but if he or she crosses the line, it may be time to seek help. This is especially true if you feel that you have done all that you can to solve the problem.
  3. If you do decide to seek outside help or advice, your union representative will be your first line of defense. The representative will inform you of your rights and help you devise a plan for dealing with the situation. If your principal is exhibiting bullying behaviors toward you, odds are that he or she has also bullied others. There is a possibility that your union representative has fielded complaints about this principal in the past.

If the problem does not subside with time, I would either transfer to another school in the district or simply leave. If you are not satisfied with this course of action, perhaps you should report the principal’s actions to someone further up the chain of command, but make sure you have done your part by having a heart-to-heart with your principal. Remember, it’s not your fault, and everyone, even principals, must face the consequences of their actions.

We would like to think that principals are all altruistic people who treat everyone fairly and have our best interests at heart, but in the end they are human just like us. I have seen strong relationships between teachers and principals devolve into toxic ones within the blink of an eye. The funny thing is that it was usually over some petty matter or a product of miscommunication.

There may come a time when you have to deal with a difficult principal, and I just want you to be prepared. If you implement these strategies, you should have no problem standing up for yourself. Remember why you love to teach and use these tips to deal with your principal.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

What You Need to Know About the Conditions of Local Funding

It is important for educators and parents/guardians to understand the funding conditions of their local school district(s) because each condition impacts the amount and continual financial support provided to each school. In this blog the details of local funding conditions will be observed in order to bring awareness for the type of education your students may be receiving within their school.

Many states label schools under their jurisdiction and allot either descriptors or grades to them. Thus, schools can be characterized as “Excellent,” “Above Average,” “Fair,” “Poor,” or “Unacceptable,” receive a letter grade such as “A,” “B,” “C,” “D,” or “F,” or be labeled using other types of systems. To meet its responsibility for openness and transparency, the state has an obligation to publish all such designations, whether in local or statewide news sources.

Schools that consistently receive poor or failing grades can be taken over by the state department of education. In some instances, state control of schools results in dismissal or reassignment of both administrators and teachers. Clearly, teachers are being held directly accountable for the achievement (or nonachievement) of the students in their charge. Student performance is looked at as a reflection of both the teacher’s and the school’s effectiveness. When choosing a school for their child, parents can use the schools’ designation (e.g., “Excellent” or “Fair”) as part of their decision. The potential enrollment of schools is impacted by the publication of the schools’ grade, and school funding can also be affected because enrollment is one of the measures used to determine the funds a school can receive.

Differences in the amount of money for education gained through property taxes mean the difference between getting a good education that enables students to become productive members of society and failing to do so. For parents and teachers alike, this can be a source of frustration. Teachers sometimes can’t obtain required materials, have to teach in buildings where the environmental conditions are not conducive to learning, and have to deal with social issues that are more prevalent in less-affluent areas, such as crime, violence, drug and alcohol abuse, and the presence of gangs.

On the other hand, it can be very difficult to redistribute and reallocate funds for education, because wealthier areas may not be happy with their funds being taken away from their schools to finance schools in poorer districts. This approach has been termed the Robin Hood effect, where money is taken from wealthier areas and reallocated for spending in poorer areas of the state. The objective is to allow all students to receive the same access to education, thereby bringing about equity in the education received by all students in the state. This does not, however, always have the desired effect.

Redistribution of funds from wealthier areas may, for various reasons, cause a decline in the quality of education, teaching, or access to resources in the wealthier areas without bringing about a similar increase in the same factors at the recipient school in the poorer area. This creates an overall decrease in the quality of education offered to all students in the district. Several states, including Arizona and New Mexico, have a system in which all taxes go into a central fund and are then reallocated according to a complex “equalization formula.”

Some groups argue that instead of focusing on educational equity, districts and local administration should be focusing on educational adequacy. Unfortunately, adequacy is a term that is ill-defined because there are no prescribed criteria to define how you determine whether or not education is adequate. It could mean that you expect that all high school graduates are capable of attending university-level instruction, whether they choose to or not.

It could also mean that you expect that high school graduates are competent in handling life outside of the school environment, which may not focus on higher education at all. Alternatively, it could simply mean that all students are required to pass all standardized, state-level testing requirements, without placing any focus on future objectives. It is unlikely that, without a clear definition of educational adequacy, any further remediation of funding disparities between wealthy and poorer areas will lead to a solution that is beneficial to all.

It’s essential that schools adapt within a fast-changing economy, but our system still arranges funding in an inequitable manner. Those realities severely limit our educational system’s ability to effectively and accountably use resources in planned ways. Critics of increased spending on education routinely highlight nationwide cases of misspending of major increases in funding that provided little or no positive outcomes for student learning. Without adjustments in the distribution of resources, their use, and accountability, Americans may end up with a more expensive, though not necessarily more efficient, public education system.

Our children require and deserve a proper education, and we must strive to provide them with the type of education that they deserve. The money available for schools must be used in the most effective manner possible. And most important, we must understand the deficiencies in our educational funding system and strictly forbid placing blame—which rarely serves to encourage cooperation. Rather, we must demonstrate accountability for our situation and fulfill our responsibility to our children.

Funding is crucial for the support, survival, and overall level of success for school districts. Therefore take time to review your jurisdiction and the functionality of funding.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

Understanding State Funding: 4 Types of School Financing Systems

Educators can argue that the funding within education determines student success, staff morale, and the overall functionality of school system. The importance of understanding all types of funding is crucial to your development as an Educator, parent/guardian, and student. In this blog, state funding will be addressed and aid in creating a better understanding of school financing systems.

States generally use one of four types of school financing systems to provide districts with state funds: foundation, general aid, flat rate/local effort equalization, and full state funding. When using the foundation financing system, states set a desired (guaranteed) per-pupil amount they wish to see spent on students’ education in the state (e.g., at $12,000 per pupil). States then make up the difference between the amount generated by districts’ local taxes and the state-guaranteed per-pupil amount.

General aid is a foundation approach using three separate calculations to establish the amount districts receive from the state. When determining state aid to districts, states consider the guaranteed minimum per pupil and calculations of the percentage of district resources below or above the guaranteed minimum.

The flat rate/local effort equalization financing system is based on a quantifiable unit of need, such as a district’s average daily attendance or total school enrollment, and on districts’ property tax rates to determine state aid. Schools are fully funded in Hawaii and Vermont, with no consideration of local taxes.

Two other states have rather unique ways of providing state funds to local school districts. In Pennsylvania, school districts receive a percentage of state funds based on the amount a district needs to address key educational principles established by the state. Wisconsin uses a guaranteed tax base system, where all districts, regardless of their level of wealth, have the same tax rate. As a result, Wisconsin raises the same amount allocated per pupil from a combination of state and local sources.

Tax sources of funding are equally diverse and vary according to states. The three main tax sources providing input to education are income tax, sales tax, and property taxes. Income taxation, however, is generally enacted at a federal rather than at a state level, with much federal education aid originating from income taxes. Taxes levied on corporations are also included in income tax, although the rate of taxation differs among states. Sales tax is generated based on the sale of goods or commodities, which is paid by the person buying the goods. A special type of tax, excise tax, is levied on items that are considered undesirable for consumption, or that consumers are encouraged to spend less on, including cigarettes, gasoline, and liquor. Sales and income taxes make up approximately two thirds of all monies channeled into education, while the income derived from excise taxes makes up the remaining third.

Currently, lotteries are being marketed as a novel way of paying for public education. But in many cases, education actually ends up getting the short end of the stick. Instead of using lottery funds as additional funding for schools, state governments use these monies to cover the education budget and spend the monies that would be traditionally earmarked for education on other issues. In short, public school budgets have not received any additional funding as a result of lotteries. In the end, it’s true that billions of dollars pour into the U.S. education system, but not in the manner that we have been led to believe.

Property taxation is the most important source of revenue-generating taxation at a local level. Approximately half of the revenue generated from property tax is allocated for education. The exact amount of revenue generated from property taxes varies from region to region, due to differences in property tax rates that are based not only on the perceived value of the property but also on the amount/percentage that a constituency is willing to charge its homeowners as tax.

The school district tax rate is determined by calculating the total assessed valuation of the district, which refers to the amount of money required to be generated divided by the local tax base. The school district tax rate, however, is subject to a legal maximum, which may not be exceeded. The school district tax is added to the tax rates of other services (including fire relief, ambulance, or police services) and is described as a percentage or “millage,” where one mill is equal to one tenth of a percent. Thus, a tax rate expressed as 312 mills is equivalent to 31.2%.

During the late 1960s and in the 1970s, property values and taxation increased far more rapidly than other forms of wealth, resulting in mass dissatisfaction with the rate of property taxation. This gradually led to various legal reforms regarding the taxation of property, which again varied between individual states. In 1993, Michigan decided to replace school funds generated from local property taxes with state-generated funds. The state increased both sales tax and taxes on luxury items such as cigarettes, reallocating funds to its poorer districts, and ensuring a more equitable education for all children in the state. Other states have followed suit and have come to rely less on property taxes as a funding base for their educational systems.

In some instances, wealthier school districts have reacted to the redistribution of educational funding by actively setting out to ensure that their schools are not endangered or placed on a fiscal par with less economically fortunate areas. The Parent Teacher Association (PTA), which can receive state and national funds, and Parent Teacher Organizations (PTOs), which cannot, work with local businesses to ensure that funds other than those generated and allocated by the state are available to their schools. Parent groups conduct fundraisers and seek monies from private foundations. Some parent groups have sought legal support to ensure adequate funding for their schools. These advocates want to ensure that all schools have a base minimum amount of money on which to operate their programs and services.

The allocation of funds for education is determined by the governor and can vary greatly from state to state. The authorities must determine how available funds will be divided among all educational entities in the state. States typically funnel education funds to school districts through state departments of education. Schools may receive funds based on any or all of the following: enrollment, educational programs, or the types of activities they offer students.

Furthermore, some funds are designated for specific purposes: some can only be used for technology; others are solely for textbooks or school supplies. Thus, some schools may have a pool of money allocated to one resource, while sorely needing another. This can have a direct impact on you as a teacher. For example, you may need art supplies for your third-grade class, but because no money is specifically allocated for this purchase, you may have to be creative in how you provision your art program. You may have to consider approaching local businesses for donations of money or supplies. You may also have to sharpen your grant-writing skills and apply to both corporations and foundations for that much-needed extra cash.

Take the time to review your school’s financing system and how state funding may be creating a greater impact that is unaware to you. If your school is lacking in areas that are effecting student success consider researching the suggestions made in this blog such as submitting grants for additional funding.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership

Why social interaction is essential to learning math

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest post by Robert Sun

Not long ago, while visiting Israel, I had the opportunity to sit in on a fourth grade class at a progressive school in that country’s North District. The young teacher that day was leading her group of 19 students as they learned English. Over the 40 minute session, as the students were introduced to 20 new English vocabulary words, speaking them aloud and using them in sentences, I suddenly realized how important active, verbal and reciprocal exchange is to learning any new language.

And math, most definitely, is a language.

I know first-hand how difficult the task of learning a new language can be because, like those Israeli students, I had to learn English as a fourth-grade immigrant from Shanghai. Speaking English day after day, my new home in Philadelphia slowly became a much more inviting place—for me, a city of promise.

Fluency in English requires the mastery of 4,000 to 5,000 new and unfamiliar words. That’s a long process. By contrast, learning math should be much easier. After all, with math you don’t have to know what a “9” means; you only need to understand how a 9 can relate to a 3 or a 27, because math focuses on relationships and how numbers connect.

One reason I believe math is challenging for so many young people, is because it is so rarely spoken. In school, math instruction focuses on the written component: the constant litany of textbooks, board work and worksheets. At best, students listen to the teacher talk about math—but rarely do they speak it at length themselves.

Each of us, from the moment we hear our parents speak our name for the first time, gained our fluency for language through verbal interaction. The constant give-and-take, as we sharpened our pronunciations and built our vocabulary, became essential in our transformation from inarticulate toddler to fully functioning adult. The process of learning math would benefit from just such a dynamic. But it’s something we’re sorely missing.

All too often we forget that language acquisition demands a verbal component. You can focus on all the writing you want, from grammar to composition to reading—but without receiving the constant interaction, feedback and encouragement from people through conversation, your progress in mastering any new language will be limited.

Developing a working vocabulary is an exercise that can take many years. Until we build a foundation of competency, we are reluctant to speak because speaking is public—and in that public act we reveal ourselves.

Our education system seeks fluency in the language of math, yet it does not encourage students to use it in a social way, producing many who are anxious about math. If they don’t have to speak math, few people really know the extent of their math proficiency. It becomes easy to keep the “secret” of how weak they may be. Like all secrets, anxiety builds the longer the secret is maintained.

Over the last several decades, in fact, being “bad at math” has become socially acceptable. Admitting you are not proficient enables you to divert the subject and protect your deficiency. Unfortunately, so many people publically make this admission that it has become a culturally accepted way to avoid getting good at math. We need to change this dynamic.

I believe that as educators and as a society, we need to develop the idea of “social math”: the use of spoken math to inspire the human interactions that provide the feedback and motivation to master fluency. We can start to develop social math by encouraging our children, from a very early age, to speak as well as write the language of mathematics.

Just as the students in that Israeli classroom learned English by speaking words out loud, we can do the same when teaching math. Teachers can encourage their students to express themselves verbally using mathematical terms; even in the early grades, children can be asked to explain what they want or mean using numbers, or relationships between numbers. Anything that encourages them to talk about math and mathematical concepts is beneficial.

Today we understand how to remove the traditional stumbling blocks that prevent many from acquiring math proficiency:

  1. Provide immediate feedback; i.e., social engagement.
  2. Offer engaging and comprehensive content at hundreds of entry points, ensuring that no matter the skill level of a child, he or she can find an entry point to experience success and move progressively to advance their skills.
  3. Give children a sense of control and ownership over the learning process.
  4. Allow students the freedom to make mistakes, so they will push their skills right to the edge. That’s where the real active learning occurs.
  5. Encourage our children to SPEAK and write math so they will be truly fluent.

Technology has enabled us to develop tools that are designed to incorporate these features. Schools using these innovative tools discover that their students are eager to speak and practice mathematics.

Whenever children in a school are struggling to learn English, we invest considerably more resources into building their competence in that subject than we do when a comparable deficiency exists with math literacy. If our children are not expected to speak the language of math, they do not reveal their weakness and it becomes easier to ignore.

On the other hand, when we speak the common language of math with vibrancy and passion, we inspire our children to explore and pursue the rich opportunities offered in this essential and universal form of communication. This will benefit our next generation of thinkers immensely, providing them with the foundation to support careers in the STEM professions and every part of life.

________________________

ROBERT SUN is the CEO of Suntex International and inventor of First In Math, an online program designed for deep practice in mathematics.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform

What You Need to Know: 9 Characteristics of Successful Schools

Do you want to have a successful school? Are you searching to work for a success school system? Check out this article to understand nine characteristics of success schools.

Successful schools often have exemplary leaders at their head. Other factors also define effective learning environments. A recent study conducted by the Office of the Superintendent for Public Instruction (OSPI) discovered that successful schools, which performed well on standardized testing measures, had nine characteristics in common:

1. Everyone in the school—students, faculty and administrators—shares a common goal and vision. The school’s individual mission statement has been arrived at collectively with input provided by many interested stakeholders.

2. Everyone in the school believes that all students can achieve and attain high standards. Students are encouraged to rigorously follow grade-appropriate courses of study.

3. School leadership is proactive in seeking solutions and is effective at promoting achievement among all concerned: students, staff, and interested stakeholders. In a high-performing school, leadership is assumed at many levels and is not simply confined to a principal; teachers and other staff are encouraged to take on leadership responsibilities.

4. Teamwork is apparent. Everyone in the school works together, communicates effectively with one another, and collaborates to ensure student success.

5. The curriculum is in line with state standards. Teachers understand state assessment procedures and use effective instructional methods grounded in research to support student performance on assessment measures.

6. Students are continuously assessed and are offered support whenever necessary. Teachers make adjustments to their teaching methods to ensure that all students have access to learning.

7. Instructional staff receive professional development opportunities in line with the school’s vision and educational mission. The ongoing learning of the staff coincides with the school’s direction.

8. Students are treated with respect and feel connected to the staff. Learning is personalized to meet individual student needs. Class sizes tend to be small.

9. The community is actively involved in the school. Education is not simply a responsibility for educational professionals.

Is your school successful? If not, what changes can you make or suggest to help your school implement these characteristics of success?

 

  • no reactions
0
Share