ARIZONA: Governor’s Veto Confirms Pattern of Disrespect for Arizona’s Teachers and Students
Phoenix, AZ – May 23, 2017 – As teachers are saying goodbye to their students after another year’s hard work Governor Doug Ducey announced his veto of Senate Bill (SB) 1209, delivering a final insult to teachers across Arizona. The Arizona Education Association’s (AEA) teacher evaluation bill would have reduced the pressure from high stakes testing on our teachers and allowed our students to spend more time learning.
“Signing SB1209 into law was the simplest action Governor Ducey could have taken to address the teacher crisis, without increasing revenue,” says AEA President Joe Thomas. “Teachers all over the state tell me the overemphasis on standardized testing is limiting their ability to teach and for students to learn. Teachers love teaching because they cherish the moment when they see learning breakthroughs and the light bulb goes on in a child’s eye. We need to remove the hurdles to student learning created by politicians and all of these failed reforms, stop pressuring our teachers to teach the test, and let them get back to teaching our students.”
SB1209 passed with an overwhelming majority in both the Arizona House and Senate, with support from both Democrats and Republicans. If signed, this bill would have ended the nonsensical practice of evaluating teachers using standardized test scores of students they don’t teach. It also would have reduced the degree of standardized test data tied to teacher evaluations.
“As a French teacher, I get part of my performance evaluation and pay determined by my students’ test scores in math and English,” says Phoenix Union High School Teacher Heather Frackiewic. “I have no control over those things, and my job isn’t to teach those things. But I get evaluated and paid based on whether students learn those things.”
SB1209 was supported by teachers, parents, and community leaders who want our public schools to focus on teaching and learning. By vetoing this bill, Governor Ducey is ignoring the will of the people and what they want for our students and public schools.
“This latest insult confirms a definite pattern of disrespect for Arizona’s teachers and students,” says Thomas. “Instead of giving teachers the raise he heralded in his State of the State speech, he offers them a one percent, one-time bonus. Instead of restoring funding to our public schools, he diverts public education money to DeVos’ private school voucher scheme. Instead of supporting Arizona’s teachers and addressing the state’s teacher exodus, he lowers their professional standards and then vetoes AEA’s common sense fix to our teacher evaluation system. When you add up all of his wrong answers this legislative session, it’s clear to see the Governor failed the test.”
Take Action:
NATIONAL: Trump’s Budget Slashes Education Funding, Declared “Dead on Arrival” by Republicans and Democrats Alike
President Trump released his Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 budget on May 23 and immediately received bipartisan criticism from members of Congress concerned with deep cuts to education, health-care programs for low-income adults and children, and a variety of other federal programs.
“I can understand why President Trump wanted to be overseas when he released a budget slashing education at home,” said Alliance for Excellent Education President Bob Wise. “Still, I bet he could hear the outcry emanating from U.S. schools all the way in Rome. Thankfully, members of Congress are already signaling that Trump’s proposal will be parked—permanently—on the tarmac when he returns.”
Trump’s budget would cut discretionary funding for the U.S. Department of Education, excluding Pell Grants, by $5.3 billion or 11.6 percent compared to the 2017 funding levels recently approved by Congress. Funding cuts and program eliminations were plentiful and targeted everything from large programs such as Title I, which was cut by $578 million, and special education, which was cut by $114 million, to smaller programs focused on literacy and afterschool academic opportunities.
In a statement, U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos said the budget “reflects a series of tough choices” and “ensures funding for programs with proven results for students while taking a hard look at programs that sound nice but simply haven’t yielded the desired outcomes.”
Labeling a program as ineffective has been a popular justification to cut funding, even in instances where research says otherwise. In a March 16 press briefing, Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said Twenty-First-Century Community Learning Centers, or afterschool programs, had “no demonstrable evidence of actually helping kids do better in school.” This is despite a U.S. Department of Education report finding that these programs “[touch] students’ lives in ways that will have far-reaching academic impact” and make students “more likely to persist to graduation.”
Afterschool Alliance Executive Director Jodi Grant said Trump’s proposal is “painfully short-sighted and makes a mockery of the president’s promise to make our country safer and to support inner cities and rural communities alike.”
Trump also proposes that funding be eliminated for the brand-new Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) grant program created with bipartisan support under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The program supports a well-rounded education for students; a safe and healthy school climate; and the effective use of schoolwide technology.
“Republicans and Democrats consolidated and eliminated several different programs to create SSAE and give flexibility to school leaders,” said Wise. “Now the president’s budget removes the funding—and flexibility—designed to improve education. Instead of eliminating funding for the program, President Trump should take the advice of two key ESSA architects, former House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline and U.S. Representative Bobby Scott who have urged that the program receive the full $1.65 billion for which it is eligible under ESSA.”
Even programs recently praised by DeVos and Trump did not avoid the budget cleaver. In an April 18 speech in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Trump said that vocational schools are “going to be a big factor” in the his administration. However, his budget proposes to cut career and technical education grants to states by $168 million, or 15 percent.
Proponents for charter schools were among the very few winners in Trump’s budget as it includes an increase of $158 million, or 46 percent, to start new charter schools or expand and replicate existing high-performing charter schools. Still, charter school advocates disagree with Trump’s approach.
“The National Alliance supports the administration’s investment in opening, expanding, and replicating high-quality charter public schools,” said National Alliance for Public Charter Schools President and Chief Executive Officer Nina Rees. “However, we are concerned that the proposed budget doesn’t maintain final FY 2017 funding levels for IDEA and reduces Title I Part A formula funds. Both IDEA and Title I are foundational programs for some of our most vulnerable students.”
In addition to expanded funding for charter schools, Trump proposes $1 billion for a new program that would provide supplemental awards to school districts that allow federal, state, and local funds to follow students to a public school of their choice. These Furthering Options for Children to Unlock Success, or FOCUS, grants would help school districts establish or expand “student-centered systems that (1) differentiate funding based on student characteristics, providing disadvantaged students more funding on a per-pupil basis than other students; (2) offer a range of viable school options and enable the federal, state, and local funds to follow students to the public school of their choice; (3) make school performance and funding data easily accessible to parents; and (4) empower school leaders to use funds flexibly to address student and community needs,” according to the U.S. Department of Education’s budget summary.
“Under the guise of empowering parents with school choice, the Trump administration has proposed a federal budget that would hurt the very communities that have the most to gain from high-quality public school options,” said Eli Broad, founder of the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation. “The budget would undermine the purpose of Title I by encouraging states to redirect resources away from the highest-need schools and students. It would slash other education and social support programs that serve students and families in need. Arts education and science instruction, a safe place to go after the last school bell rings, an affordable home, and financial support to make it through college—these are all essential to a student’s success. Public school choice cannot come at the expense of all public school families and students.”
Members of Congress from both parties quickly panned Trump’s budget. U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-TX), the second-highest ranking Republican in the Senate, and John McCain (R-AZ) called it “dead on arrival.” U.S. Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA), top Democrat on the House education committee, said Trump’s budget “undermines public education.”
Current and proposed funding levels for programs under the U.S. Department of Education are available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget18/18pbapt.pdf.
Source: Jason Amos is vice president of communications at the Alliance for Excellent Education.
NATIONAL: Betsy DeVos defends school spending plan that cuts $9 billion
By
WASHINGTON — Education Secretary Betsy DeVos refused to say Wednesday whether she would block private schools that discriminate against LGBT students from receiving federal dollars, explaining that she believes states should have the flexibility to design voucher programs and that parents should be able to choose schools that best fit their children’s needs.
DeVos returned frequently to the theme of what she called a need for more local control in her first appearance before Congress since her rocky confirmation hearing in January.
Fielding questions from members of a House Appropriations subcommittee, she said that states should decide how to address chronic absenteeism, mental health issues and suicide risks among students and that states should also decide whether children taking vouchers are protected by federal special-education law.
Researchers have found that many states allow religious schools that receive taxpayer-funded vouchers to deny admission to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students or children with LGBT parents.
Asked by Rep. Katherine Clark, D-Mass., whether she could think of any circumstance in which the federal government should step in to stop federal dollars from going to private schools that discriminate against certain groups of students, DeVos did not directly answer.
“We have to do something different than continuing a top-down, one-size-fits-all approach,” DeVos said.
Democrats immediately criticized DeVos’ philosophy, saying the nation’s top education official must be willing to defend children against discrimination by institutions that get federal money. “To take the federal government’s responsibility out of that is just appalling and sad,” said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif.
DeVos pushed back against the notion that the Education Department would be abdicating its authority. “I am not in any way suggesting that students should not be protected,” she said.
DeVos traveled to Capitol Hill to defend a spending plan that has drawn criticism from both ends of the political spectrum.
President Donald Trump has proposed slashing $10.6 billion from federal education initiatives, including after-school programs, teacher training, and career and technical education, and reinvesting $1.4 billion of the savings into promoting his top education priority: school choice, including $250 million for vouchers to help students attend private and religious schools.
The administration is also seeking far-reaching changes to student aid programs, including the elimination of subsidized loans and public service loan forgiveness and a halving of the federal work-study program that helps college students earn money to support themselves while in school.
In her opening remarks Wednesday, DeVos said that while the size of the proposed cuts to K-12 and student financial programs “may sound alarming for some,” the president’s budget proposal reflects a push to return more decision-making power to states and more educational choice to parents.
“We cannot allow any parent to feel as if their child is trapped in a school that is not meeting their needs,” DeVos said.
Democrats predictably attacked the administration’s budget proposal as an effort to undermine public schools and low-income students’ ability to attend college.
“This budget reflects the views of an administration filled with people who frankly never had to worry about how they were going to pay for their children going to college,” said Rep. Nita Lowey, N.Y., the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee. “And yet I’m most upset that this budget would undermine our public education system and the working families who depend on them.”
Several Republicans praised DeVos, particularly for her push to expand school choice.
“I’ve always made known my preference for giving parents the choice of where to send their students, because in the end the parents are the taxpayers. The parents are the ones who probably know best,” said Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md.
But GOP members also displayed their share of skepticism about the administration’s proposed cuts.
Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., chairman of the education subcommittee, questioned the proposal to dramatically cut college financial aid programs such as work-study and college-access programs for low-income students. “Frankly, I will advise you,” Cole said, “I have a different point of view.”
Another key Republican, Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, N.J., chairman of the Appropriations Committee, emphasized that it is members of Congress and not the president who hold the power of the purse and will ultimately design the federal budget.
Declaring “awe” for special-education teachers’ hard work, Frelinghuysen also questioned whether the administration had proposed adequate funding for students with disabilities. DeVos seemed open to devoting more money, calling it a “matter for robust conversation.”
A 1975 federal special-education law promised that Congress would pay 40 percent of the cost of providing additional services to students with disabilities. Lawmakers have never come close and in 2017 are footing only about 15 percent of the cost. The Trump administration is proposing to hold funding at that level.
Critics said they are hopeful that Congress will reject many of Trump’s ideas, as lawmakers did this month when they reached a bipartisan deal to fund the government through September.
But even in that scenario, Trump’s proposal creates damaging uncertainty for school districts and students seeking to pay for college, said John King, who served as President Barack Obama’s education secretary and now helms the nonprofit group Education Trust.
“The administration has framed the conversation as a conversation about cuts rather than a conversation about investment,” King said. “We should be talking about investing more.”
While the administration’s proposed cuts have been embraced by fiscal conservatives who argue that Education Department programs need to be trimmed or eliminated, some conservatives are also troubled by the administration’s proposal to invest new money in school choice, saying that represents an unwelcome expansion of the federal footprint in education.
“As much as I want to see every single child in America have school choice, it is just not appropriate for the federal government to be using new dollars and new programs to push states in that direction,” said Lindsey Burke, an education policy expert at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “You need local buy-in for these school-choice options to really be supported and viable in the long run.”
Trump and DeVos are seeking to increase the federal investment in charter schools by 50 percent, bringing the total appropriation to $500 million per year. They also want to establish a new $250 million fund to expand and study private-school vouchers, and they want to dole out $1 billion in grants to school districts to adopt policies that allow tax dollars to follow students to the public school of their choice.
In a speech Monday night, DeVos called the push for school choice “right” and “just” and an opportunity to “drag American education out of the Stone Age and into the future.” She referred to her critics as “flat-earthers” and said that while the federal government would never force states to adopt choice-friendly policies, those who opt out are making a “terrible mistake.”
By Emma Brown, Danielle Douglas-Gabriel
Copyright 2017, The Washington Post
NATIONAL: A Growing Recruitment Strategy for a Diverse Teacher Workforce
In the last three years, Alejandra Guerrero Morales has been making her way through the education profession with the Salem-Keizer School District in Oregon. Two years ago, she started as a bilingual instructional assistant. Today, she’s a special education instructional assistant. By September, 2017, she’ll be a special education teacher. Born in the U.S. to Mexican parents, Guerrero brings her skillset and commitment to the table. She also brings her culture—a resource that centers on the need for more teacher diversity.
Guerrero was one of the many panelists who were brought to Washington, D.C. on May 17 for a two-day conference called, “Grow Your Own: Teacher Diversity and Social Justice Summit,” hosted by the National Education Association, American Federation of Teachers, and the AFL-CIO. The summit focused on a growing recruitment strategy called “Grow Your Own” This approach addresses the national need to recruit, develop, and retain diverse and culturally responsive, community-based educators of color to help advance the achievement of all students—particularly students of color.
Research supports that students of color who are taught by a teacher of the same race or ethnicity perform better in school. In March, the IZA Institute of Labor Economics released a study called, “The Long-Run Impacts of Same-Race Teachers.” One of the findings underscored that “assigning a [B]lack male to a [B]lack teacher in the third, fourth, or fifth grades significantly reduces the probability that he drops out of high school, particularly among the most economically disadvantaged black males.”
John Hopkin University’s Nicholas Papageorge, one of the co-authors of the study, said, “Black students matched to [B]lack teachers have been shown to have higher test scores but we wanted to know if these student-teacher racial matches had longer-lasting benefits. We found the answer is a resounding yes.”
Despite evidence that shows the need for diversity within the education workforce, gains have been slow.
In her remarks to summit participants, NEA President Lily Eskelsen García shared that when she entered the profession, she had all the right support systems: support from other teachers, encouragement from her family, and federal grants to help her get through college.
“Today, that is happening against all odds, especially in communities of color and in communities of poverty,” she said. “How do we find ways to get people to college and not be crushed by student debt … How do we help those who should be [in classrooms] working with students who look like them, sound like them, and will connect with them?”
The answers may rest within grow-your-own programs.
What Is Grow Your Own?
In short, these programs recruit local community members and help them become teachers, creating a workforce that’s reflective of the full diversity of the student population.
No one program is alike. Some programs have an intense focus on undergraduate students while others reach out to students in middle school and high school. Colorado-based Pathways2Teaching, for example, works with high school juniors and seniors. Throughout the school year, students explore related careers through a social justice and equity lens.
“It’s a sad reality to think that a child can go from K-12, get a bachelor’s degree, get a masters, and complete a Ph.D., and never have one teacher of color throughout his or her trajectory,” says Margarita Bianca, an associate professor in the School of Education and Human Development at the University of Colorado Denver—and founder and executive director of Pathways2Teaching.
Alejandra Guerrero Morales
“What message does that send to students of color,” she asks, adding that “you can’t be who you don’t see.” A point that is critically important considering the growing shift in demographics.
Approximately 42 percent of PK-12 public school students today are students of color, and this number is expected to rise through 2024.
For Oregon’s Guerrero, she wants to be seen as someone who can represent the growing Latino population in the Salem-Keizer school district. This was one of the reasons that propelled her to apply for a grow-your-program through Pacific University’s Master of Arts in Teaching Flex Program. The program is a 17-month experience composed of university coursework and school field experience. The program is flexible and accommodates part-time students with courses that meet late afternoon, early evening, and on weekend. Upon completion of the program, Guerrero will qualify for a Master of Arts in Teaching degree and an Oregon Initial Teaching License.
“Many of our teachers in the Salem-Keizer district are not bilingual, and with a population of students who are Latino, they need a voice, “says Guerrero, who grew up in the Salem-Keizer area and is the first generation in her family to graduate from a four-year university. “We need more people who speak Spanish and who know what it’s like to live and grow up in the area.”
The Summit
During the summit, participants discussed some of the framework for growing your own teachers. One key takeaway emphasized that this work needs to be done with different organizations.
Brian A. Turner, a special education teacher, high school baseball coach, and athletic director from the Salem-Keizer district, urged participants to work with local unions to help change school policy. “Our local union established a pathway for paraeducators to get into the teacher workforce,” he explained. “The change allowed them to work in the schools that they’re currently in—that’s a policy change.”
Other programs have been developed with the help of higher education institutions, which have offered free or reduced college tuition for students entering education programs.
State legislators have passed laws that promote respect for different cultures, too.
“You often don’t feel included if your mascot is racist,” says Matt de Ferranti, legislative director for the National Indian Education Association. He explained that states like Washington and Montana have passed legislation that incorporates native American history, culture, language, and government into the curriculum.
This curriculum change opens the doors for elders in native communities to become teachers. “Elders can be phenomenal teachers, and we have to get them to the classrooms,” said de Ferranti. “They know the history, culture, and language—and those are the pieces that are often missing.”
Cultural sensitivity and cultural diversity are essential components of a qualified teacher workforce that positively impacts student learning. These components need to be inclusive and mindful of students and their communities, too.
“There are a number of programs to diversify the workforce, but it’s done the wrong way,” says Colorado’s Margarita Bianco. “Bringing teachers from Puerto Rico to teach Mexican kids, just because they have brown skin, doesn’t mean they understand the kids and the community. Insider knowledge is what we have to promote.”
Click here for more information.
West Virginia Continues to Rank Among Top States in Access to Quality of Early Learning
CHARLESTON, W.Va. – West Virginia’s Universal Pre-K Program once again ranks among the top in the nation, according to the 2016 Yearbook released today by the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER).
The State of Preschool Yearbook is the only national report on state-funded preschool programs with detailed information on enrollment, funding, teacher qualifications, and other policies related to quality. Despite a slight decrease in preschool funding, West Virginia continues to rank among the top states, maintaining quality standards and broad access. In fact, West Virginia was one of only five states that met all 10 of NIEER’s quality benchmarks.
“Research has shown again and again that high-quality early childhood education can prepare children for greater success in elementary school and beyond,” said West Virginia Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Steven Paine. “Maintaining quality standards for Pre-K learning throughout the Mountain State ensures that all children – no matter the socioeconomic background – are given the start they need to succeed.”
The West Virginia Universal Pre-K Program boasts a 76 percent participation rate based on 4-year-olds who go on to attend the state’s kindergarten program as 5-year-olds. West Virginia Universal Pre-K enrolled more than 16,000 children, which census data notes is 66 percent of 4-year olds and 11 percent of 3-year-olds in the state. Nationwide, state-funded preschool program enrollment reached an all-time high, serving nearly 1.5 million children, 32 percent of 4-year-olds and five percent of 3-year-olds.
“The success of our early learning programs is reflective of the collaboration with the Governor’s Office, state agencies like the Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR), and the legislature, all of whom see the impact quality early learning programs have on children,” said West Virginia Board of Education (WVBE) president, Tom Campbell. “We are constantly striving to maintain the highest-quality early learning programs to give West Virginia’s youngest students the best start possible.”
The full report can be accessed below
or by visiting the NIEER website at http://nieer.org/.
NATIONAL: NASBE Identifies Pros and Cons of Fifth Indicators
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) paved the way for states to create holistic accountability systems that measure school quality and student success by means other than academic test scores. States incorporated a variety of “fifth indicators” in state plans they submitted this spring for review by the U.S. Department of Education, while others are weighing which indicators to include in their fall submission.
This NASBE policy update series explores the pros and cons of five frequently discussed indicators. It highlights what states have proposed in their ESSA plans so far and offers key considerations for state boards that are refining their plans for September submission.
From this series:
Career and Technical Education
School Climate and Student Discipline
Social and Emotional Learning
Chronic Absenteeism
Access to High-Level Course Work
DOWNLOADS
PENNSYLVANIA: PA Education Advocates Stress Importance of Teacher Voice in Creating ESSA Plan
Philly.com VIEWPOINT by Pedro Rivera & Mairi Cooper
Too often in policy debates, each side comes to the table with talking points and an agenda, rather than an open ear and a commitment to find common ground. When it comes to schools, whatever differences we may have on issues like Common Core, testing, and accountability, our unifying goal must always be to ensure that all children receive a quality education, regardless of zip code, and to find solutions that accomplish that.
In order to move educational equity from a shared priority for policymakers and practitioners to a reality for students in our state, education leaders and advocates have pushed for more intentional conversations and actions to address the underlying problems that prevent so many of our students from working on a level playing field.
This commitment to equity reflects many of the recommendations outlined earlier this year in the joint report from the Aspen Institute and the Council for Chief State School Officers titled “Leading for Equity: Opportunities for State Chiefs.” The suggested policy and engagement actions include pushing for greater funding, investing in professional development, and proactively engaging and listening to communities so they can hold state leaders more accountable in meeting goals.
The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act gave us an opportunity to reignite conversations in our state about what it will take to create quality educational opportunities for all students and how we can work together to achieve that vision.
As part of our effort to design a new state education plan, we created stakeholder workgroups made up of educators and the broader community to inform our efforts. We knew it wasn’t simply about changing policy or talking to community members – it was about listening to those who have been most affected by inequities and working with them to meet students’ needs.
Teachers have been at the core of that engagement. They are the ones who, on a day-to-day basis, educate, mentor, and bolster our children. In Pennsylvania, we’ve been fortunate to have exceptional teachers from across the state come together to form the Pennsylvania Teacher Advisory Committee, which will serve as a pipeline for teacher voices and input into our collective work.
Giving teachers a seat at the table allows them to share their stories and those of their students and provide timely insight on how changes in state education policy could make a positive difference in classroom practice – or where it might not have its intended effect. Policy makers must understand how their work might alleviate or exacerbate systemic inequities statewide for students most impacted by a legacy of inequitable access and opportunity.
Equity is also about assessing and meeting all the unique needs of our children, and not just the ones that can be measured in test scores. One of our state’s more successful ventures in this arena has been the launch of Pennsylvania’s Superintendents Academy, a two-year professional development program that addresses challenges faced by students, including poverty and mental health. This setting provides an important opportunity for superintendents to discuss how inequities outside of the classroom affect schools and what can be done to systematically support the whole child.
If we want to change students’ lives for the better, everyone – from the secretary of education to teachers to anyone in between – must not shy away from the difficult conversations that a discussion about equity sometimes surfaces, or avoid pointing out the real inequities that continue to affect many children.
With so many advances in technology, we have more opportunities than ever before to engage and connect with others that don’t share our own background. Let’s keep talking. More importantly, let’s keep listening, and work together to act on what we’re hearing.
Pedro Rivera is Pennsylvania’s secretary of education. @pedroarivera2
Mairi Cooper is the 2015 Pennsylvania Teacher of the Year. @patoy2015
NATIONAL: Initial analysis of Administration’s FY2018 Budget request to Congress
On May 23, 2017, President Trump released the Administration’s FY2018 budget request to Congress which calls for a number of program eliminations within the U.S. Department of Education, a few of which would impact K-12 programs. For a number of programmatic changes that are proposed, the Administration is urging school districts and states to utilize existing Title I funding to address priority areas, such as those for effective teachers and leaders (Title II), tutoring, and extended day learning opportunities (Title IV). While the budget request calls for a record increase of $1 billion to Title I grants for disadvantaged students, the increase in funding would be targeted to school choice.
Please note that there may be discrepancies in budget documents, as some were prepared before the enactment of the FY2017 Consolidated Appropriations Act earlier this month. Therefore, when comparing final budget allocations with those proposed for FY2018, not all program levels may reflect the final enacted allocation. For example, the Appendix for the budget request shows Title II (Supporting effective instruction state grants) receiving funding, but the Major Savings and Reforms document confirms the program is deleted.
An analysis of the proposed budget follows:
Title I Grants for Disadvantaged Students: Overall funding for Title I grants would be increased by $334 million, compared to the current funding level of about $16.1 billion. The composition of Title I grants, however, would be changed to accommodate new “Furthering Options for Children to Unlock Success (FOCUS) grants to local educational agencies to implement weighted student funding formulas combined with open enrollment systems.”
School Choice: The new FOCUS grants would be funded at $1 billion to promote school choice and would represent a “down payment” on the President’s goal of investing $20 billion annually in public and private school choice. The proposed FOCUS grants would provide supplemental awards to school districts that agree to adopt weighted student funding combined with open enrollment systems that allow Federal, State, and local funds to follow students to the public school of their choice. According to Department budget documents, the proposal “would support LEAs in establishing or expanding student-centered systems that: (1) differentiate funding based on student characteristics, providing disadvantaged students more funding on a per-pupil basis than other students; (2) offer a range of viable school options and enable the Federal, State, and local funds to follow students to the public school of their choice; (3) make school performance and funding data easily accessible to parents; and (4) empower school leaders to use funds flexibly to address student and community needs. Under the Administration’s proposal, LEAs (including consortia of LEAs) that commit to developing and implementing these funding and open enrollment systems would be eligible for grants, which the Department would administer under the Flexibility for Equitable Per-Pupil Funding (Flexibility) authority in Title I, Part E of the ESEA.”
Additionally, the Administration is proposing a $250 million increase for the Education Innovation and Research program to establish competitive awards for applicants to provide scholarships for students from low-income families to attend the private school of their choice and to build the evidence base around private school choice. The proposal includes an increase in charter school funding; $167 million for the Charter Schools program to strengthen significant State efforts to start new charter schools or expand and replicate existing high-performing charter schools. The program also provides up to $100 million to meet the growing demand for charter school facilities. The proposed increase in charter school funding brings the total charter school funding request to $500 million.
Special Education Grants to States: The Administration requests $11.9 billion for the Grants to States program (roughly level funding compared to Fiscal Year 2017) to assist States and schools in covering the costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities ages 3 through 21. The request would provide an average of $1,742 for each of the 6.8 million children with disabilities who are estimated to be served in 2018. The Federal contribution toward meeting the excess cost of special education and related services would be approximately 15 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure (APPE) under this request.
Level funding proposed for special education grants under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) would equate to a reduction nationwide. For example, the average federal share of funding per pupil in FY2017 was $1,777 and approximately 16 percent of APPE. The FY2018 proposal would represent a reduction averaging about $35 per pupil.
Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which provides the major source of federal funding to help school districts fund educational services to students with disabilities, the federal share of funding that Congress initially promised in 1975 is up to 40 percent of the average per pupil expenditure. However, the 40 percent promise has not been fulfilled; and, the
federal share of special education funding would decline further under this request. Increasing the federal share of funding for special education is paramount, and should be addressed before considering future funding for newly created programs that may not have proven results for program effectiveness.
Impact Aid: The Administration is requesting roughly $1.2 billion for Impact Aid payment programs, including $1.16 billion for Basic Support Payments on behalf of federally connected children; $48.2 million for Payments for Children with Disabilities; $4.8 million for Facilities Maintenance for nine school facilities that originally were built to enable school districts and the U.S. Department of Defense to educate federally connected students; and, $17.4 million for competitive school construction grants to eligible districts for emergency repairs and modernization projects.
The Impact Aid program provides a vital source of support for 1,400 school districts across the nation that have a federal presence within their boundaries. These resources help districts provide educational services to students whose parents/guardians are enlisted in our Armed Forces, as well as those who reside on tribal trust lands.
The Administration has proposed the elimination of $68 million in Impact Aid federal properties payments to school districts, per the summary on page four. Along with the National Association of Federally Impacted Schools (NAFIS), NSBA opposes this proposed elimination.
Career and Technical Education (CTE): The Administration is requesting a reduction of approximately $166 million in Career and Technical Education State Grants (currently funded at about $950 million). According to the Department, the requested 15 percent reduction would “provide significant resources to support CTE programs while also maintaining the fiscal discipline necessary to support the President’s goal of increasing support for national security and public safety without adding to the Federal budget deficit.”
The request includes a $20 million increase for Career and Technical Education National Programs to promote the development, enhancement, implementation, or expansion of innovative CTE programs in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).
As Congress moves forward in reauthorizing the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act through bipartisan legislation reported by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on May 17, NSBA urges Congress to sustain investments in CTE that support college and career readiness for our students through the integration of stronger academic components, facilitation of greater career pathways, and stronger public-private partnerships.
National School Lunch Program: The 2018 budget request would support approximately 5.4 billion lunches and snacks served to 31 million children in the National School Lunch Program. The total FY18 request for the National School Lunch Program is $13 billion, up from $12.4 billion in FY17. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the current maximum reimbursement rate for free and reduced priced school lunches is $3.39 and $2.99 respectively.
School-based Medicaid: Proposed cuts to Medicaid are around $610 billion over 10 years. (This is separate from proposed cuts in the American Health Care Act [AHCA], which includes $839 billion in Medicaid cuts.) Combined, those Medicaid cuts would result in slashing the program by an astonishing $1.5 trillion over a decade.
Medicaid is a cost-effective and efficient provider of essential health care services for children. School-based Medicaid programs serve as a lifeline to children who can’t access critical health care and health services outside of their schools. Under this bill, the bulk of the mandated costs of providing health care coverage would be shifted to the States, even though health needs and costs of care for children will remain the same or increase. Most analyses of the budget request, as well as ACHA, project that the Medicaid funding shortfall in support of these mandated services will increase, placing states at greater risk year after year. The proposed federal disinvestment in Medicaid could force States and local communities to increase taxes and reduce or eliminate various programs and services, including other non-Medicaid services. The unintended consequences could force states to cut eligibility, services, and benefits for children, which impact school readiness and student achievement.
Programs proposed for elimination in FY2018
- The Administration has proposed the elimination of 21st Century Community Learning Centers ($1.164 billion), stating that, “While limited evaluation and survey data from certain States and individual centers highlights benefits from participation, such as improved behavior and classroom grades, overall program performance data show that the 21st CCLC is not achieving its goal of helping students, particularly those who attend low-performing schools, meet challenging State academic standards. For example, on average from 2013 to 2015, less than 20 percent of program participants improved from not proficient to proficient or above on State assessments in reading and mathematics.” The budget request also suggests that, “the provision of before- and after-school academic enrichment opportunities may be better supported with other Federal, State, local or private funds, including the $15 billion Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies program.”
Along with the National Association of Federally Impacted Schools (NAFIS), NSBA asserts that Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property must be maintained for the benefit of all students in these districts. Cuts would cause financial harm as Impact Aid supports personnel and professional development, academic materials, transportation, technology, and other general operating expenses. Elimination of this funding stream would be a reversal on a 68-year commitment to federally impacted communities.
- The budget request to Congress proposes eliminating Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property ($68 million). These payments compensate school districts for the presence of non-taxable federal properties within their boundaries. The Administration contends that this program is not applicable to the presence of federally-connected students (such as those whose parents/guardians are enlisted in the Armed Forces), and therefore does not necessarily support the education of federally-connected students.
- Under the budget request, the new Title IV Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants program ($400 million) that was authorized under the Every Student Succeeds Act would be eliminated. The grant program was authorized to help support activities that provide students with a well-rounded education, ensure safe and supportive learning environments, and use technology to improve instruction. Under this new grant program, four previously authorized programs were consolidated: Mathematics and Science Partnerships, Advanced Placement, Elementary and Secondary School Counseling, and Physical Education. The Administration contends that any subgrants that would be awarded “would result in award amounts of less than $30,000 for the vast majority of school districts. The Administration does not believe limited Federal resources should be allocated to a program where many of its grants will likely be too small to have a meaningful impact.”
- The budget request would eliminate Title II Supporting Effective Instruction (SEI) State Grants ($2.3 billion). Under ESSA, Title II programs for “Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High-Quality Teachers, Principals, or Other School Leaders” support class-size reduction initiatives, professional development and in-service training for teachers, technology integration into curricula, training on data usage to improve student achievement and student data privacy, parental/community engagement, development of STEM master teacher corps, civics, and implementation of performance-based compensation systems. In its explanatory statement, the Administration states that, “While the SEI State Grants program authorizes a wide range of activities, in school year 2015-2016, 52 percent of funds were used for professional development (PD) and 25 percent were used for class-size reduction. An LEA that identifies either activity as a key strategy for responding to a comprehensive needs assessment may use Title I, Part A funds for the same purpose.” With ESSA implementation efforts underway that emphasize the role of effective teachers, principals and school leaders, the loss of Title II investments could impact state and local efforts to develop tools and incentives focused on strengthening instruction, improving student academic outcomes, and retaining effective educators, especially for schools in underserved communities.
VIDEO: Five startling things Betsy DeVos just told Congress
By Valerie Strauss
washingtonpost.com — Does this sound familiar? Betsy DeVos went to Capitol Hill to testify before U.S. lawmakers. She didn’t answer a lot of direct questions and engaged in some contentious debates with some members.
That happened in January when she went before the Senate education committee for her confirmation hearing, during which she said schools needed guns to protect against grizzly bears. This time, the education secretary didn’t talk about guns, but she did say that states should have the right to decide whether private schools that accept publicly funded voucher students should be allowed to discriminate against students for whatever reason they want.
DeVos testified before the House subcommittee on labor, health and human services, education and related agencies about the Trump administration’s 2018 budget proposal, which would cut $10.6 billion — or more than 13 percent — from education programs and re-invest $1.4 billion of the savings into promoting school choice.
Both DeVos and President Trump have said expanding alternatives to traditional public schools are their top priority, and during tough questioning from some committee members, DeVos doubled down on that as well as on giving states and local communities flexibility to do what they want with their education programs. It is worth noting, however, that she said recently that people who don’t agree with expanding school choice are “flat Earthers,” people who refuse to face the facts.
Read the full article here.