By Kristin
In the spirit of keeping our energy on the issues and not parties or people, I want to say right up front that I'm not intending this to be a forum for endorsing either candidate for governor. I hope we can keep the conversation focused on schools and what schools need from Olympia right now. I'm opening this topic up because Rob McKenna has a clear plan for education in Washington State and Jay Inslee does not. Frankly, that concerns me. I think they need to hear from us.
McKenna's website has a lot of information, including an "issues" tab that takes you to his stance on the three issues of education, jobs and government reform. Inslee has…not much. When you open his website, a short video begins playing. I watched it and he talks about what seems to be his only issue – creating jobs in Washington. His plan seems to be to create jobs, make Washington attractive to businesses, and create a great workforce.
When he gets to the workforce part of the plan, he briefly mentions education because, (one needs to assume, because he doesn't say it) a great economy begins with a great workforce and our schools create that workforce. That's it.
So here's what I'd like to ask you: Is education an issue? Are schools doing so well that education shouldn't be an issue in the governor's race? Are schools funded? Are they fully funded? If not, how is that going to happen? I think there are some huge things on the horizon – the continued debate over charter schools is one of them, and adequately funding education is another. When I vote for Washington's next governor, I'd like to be casting a vote that includes the future of education.
Schools aren't in crisis because teachers can't teach, families can't parent, and test scores are low. Most teachers are teaching well. Most parents are parenting well. Test scores are an indicator, but until they're absolutely reliable indicators of a school's quality I don't buy into the hysteria that children are learning nothing.
Schools are in crisis because resources have been stripped away until there's little left, and it looks like they're going to be even more underfunded in upcoming years, if that's possible. Randy Dorn's been told to cut another 10% from his budget and he said no. Good for him.
We have said many times on this blog that poverty is dragging schools down more than any other factor. Is creating jobs going to give schools the boost they need?
If you could give Washington's next governor a few tips for what the plan needs to be, share them.
Dr. Pezz,
I’m interested in hearing more of this, because I’ve many times touted the importance of putting more resources into k-5.
Here’s one thing I know, having always taught grades above k-5, and that is that a lot of damage, a lot of stagnation, and a lot of forgetting can happen when a child is not in school.
For other children, the time they’re not in school is a time of great growth. They travel. They go to camp. Their parents take them to the theater and the aquarium.
This backsliding vs. taking strides forward is well researched. It’s not a “gut instinct” thing. It’s real.
So maybe the solution isn’t to pour more teachers and resources into k-5. Maybe the solution is to provide year-round school for children who aren’t yet at standard. Maybe the summer segment of the school year could include more outdoor ed., more environmental ed., more art.
Maybe Washington’s next governor should get a task force together and take a look at how children who live in poverty are spending their summers.
Then, maybe they should find the courage to raise some revenue to give every child a fighting chance.
I don’t mean to sound negative, but the constant investments in k-5 education in my district is not helping us at the high schools. Training for teachers, smaller class sizes for k-5, and more are funneled to those early years, and we have seen little to no difference with our incoming freshmen. We can even tell which schools the kids some from based on how they do on our pre-tests (formative assessments).
I guess I’m just not seeing the benefit (yet?).
It would be great to have the next governor of our state be well informed enough on these issues to have an opinion or two.
You’re right, Pezz, there are costs that come up that aren’t predictable, but I think the reason they create a problem is that resources in education are spread too thin anyway. From the child who needs his own room to the sex-offenders who need a taxi home from school because they can’t share a bus with other kids, education is facing some major, expensive, societal responsibilities. Schools do way more than educate children.
I’d like both McKenna and Inslee to be aware of the situation, able to speak on the situation, and to have some plan for funding schools so that schools have the resources to deal with those children who require massive resources and also have adequate resources and effective structures to teach the general population.
@ DrPrezz… I think Kristin offered a good solution on another post: invest more in K-3, and don’t let a kid past grade 3 until they are truly, deeply, totally ready to move on. Then, maybe do the same at grade 6. This will save on costly interventions in the future, because rather than having to pay to intervene in grades 7-12, we’ll have invested to fully prepare in grades K-6. Then, imagine how much further we could take the whole group…
“Those costs need to be fixed.”
How does that work in reality? How can we truly know what it costs to educate our kids because there are just so many variables, especially when it comes to special ed.?
Our district had to hire a full-time person to be a one-on-one teacher for a special ed student, and the high school had to build a special room for this student. This type of cost would never be set in a fixed way since it can’t really be anticipated.
Plus, intervention and assistance programs can be expensive, and no two kids need the same thing. I just don’t know how to estimate those costs.
However, having said that (and preparing to contradict everything I just said), I think we need new formulas for for special ed, the definition of classroom space, and more. 30 year old funding formulas do not work, especially in this new age of technology and global learning.
@Kristin: I’m okay with taxes, too. I wish we could encourage taxpayers to realize that investment in education is in fact an investment in our collective future. Just as it is unwise to forego investing in my retirement fund even though retirement is decades away, it is unwise to forego fully funding education, even though the tangible payoffs may not be evident until our present kindergartners are in the work force.
I think we should cut the corrections budget completely…close all prisons and pens, courts and public defenders… and divert all that money to education as a form of preventive corrections. I believe the current trendy word in ed is “intervention.”
Not really, of course. But a greater investment in one, I believe, would certainly affect the other to some degree, and this causal connection only goes one way.
Rob, I agree. I’m tired of education being saturated with funding when times are good and then put on a big diet when times are hard. It means that no momentum can be gained, that programs just begun are abandoned. It means that any data gathered is meaningless, as we’re forced to compare it to the data of new, cheaper studies.
Tom – I know!!!!! Here’s how they can raise revenue – TAXES. I am so tired of politicians being scaredy cats when it comes to taxing. I’m waiting for someone to have the courage to say the wealthiest can afford to pay more tax. I’m tired of politicians having the nerve to pay themselves with tax dollars that come out of an increasingly smaller pot, and yet instead of raising taxes they simply eliminate programs that the general public needs. Cut 10% more from education in Washington State? That’s absurd. How about raising revenue?
Kristin, the biggest problem Washington – and every other state – faces in regards to education is money. McKenna knows this as well as anyone else. So does Inslee. Neither of them will be able to do anything different without more money.
I’m waiting for one of them to talk about how they plan to raise revenue.
Nothing new here- We need to establish a clear cost for basic education. Much of this work has already been done. But I’d like to see a governor clearly communicate what a state needs to do to educate every child. If the expectation is that every student meet standard then what structures need to be in place to ensure that happens and what are the costs associated with that?
Those costs need to be fixed. They should be the first line on the budget and not subject to political whim. But speaking about the importance of education while cutting ability of the system to serve our children is inexcusable.