Governor Fallin (executive in charge of consolidating schools) just ordered the State Department of Education (SDE) to ... compile a naughty list of every public school district that spends less than sixty percent (60%) of their budget on instructional expenditures. The State Board of Education (SBE)... shall consider and make recommendations for administrative consolidation or annexation of school districts described in paragraph one. (The SBE shall force all schools on the naughty list to consolidate with good schools or disappear altogether.)...
In order to strengthen public confidence in the efficient use of state education dollars, ... school districts designated for ... consolidation or annexation (dissolution) shall submit a plan for consolidation or dissolution to the Superintendent and SBE. If a plan is not submitted by the school district, the SBE and State Superintendent... shall determine a plan (force) ...consolidation or annexation.
Those schools spending less than 60% of their budget on instructional expenditures can be identified on the Office of Educational Quality and Accountability (OEQA) website www.ok.gov/oeqa/.
Approximately 350 Oklahoma public schools currently spend less than 60% on "Instruction", which leaves approximately 150 schools which spend more than 60% on "Instruction".
As is usually the case, when the sheer number of schools which fit any particular category, such as naughty or nice, becomes too burdensome to analyze - I only analyze the schools in my home area. In this case, the schools located in Garvin and McClain Counties.. or House District 42 are analyzed. According to the OEQA, the schools in Garvin County which spend less than 60% of all expenditures on "Instruction" are Elmore City-Pernell - 54.7%, Maysville - 40.1%, Paoli - 57.1%, Pauls Valley - 59.1%, Stratford - 54.6%, and Wynnewood - 57.8%. These Garvin County schools have made the naughty list, and are in danger of being annexed or consolidated. The nice list for Garvin County schools is short and only includes Whitebead, with 60.4% spent on instruction and Lindsay , with 60.0% spent on instruction.
(Update: Student Instructional Support expenditures have been added to Instruction expenditures by Dr. Rick Cobb, Superintendent of Mid-Del Schools, which has resulted in several Garvin County schools being added to the "Nice List". Those new "nice" schools are Pauls Valley (60.5%) and Paoli (60.5%).
In applying the "60% model" of school consolidation or annexation to Garvin County schools: Elmore City-Pernell, Wynnewood, and Maysville would be forced to consolidate or annex to Lindsay - and Paoli, Stratford, and Pauls Valley could be forced to consolidate or annex to Whitebead. Of course, for this model to be successful in Garvin County - the House District 42 Representative would have to be on board, and he surely would be since he has stated in the past that he's in favor of forced consolidation.
In analyzing expenditures for McClain County schools, we determine those that currently spend (2016 data) less than 60% on instruction are Dibble - 56%, Newcastle - 54%, Purcell - 57.9%, Washington - 52.8%, and Wayne - 46.4%. The list of McClain County schools which spend more than 60% is also short, as only Blanchard (60.7%) made the nice list. (Disclaimer: The author of this post is superintendent of Blanchard, so knows very well it's just a crap shoot, and Blanchard could fall below that 60% threshold in an instant.)
(Update: Purcell has been added to the "nice" list with 63.7% spent on Instruction.)
I think one can see how truly absurd this consolidation model is, especially for the supporters of all the rural schools, large and small, in Oklahoma. I really don't think Governor Fallin is serious about this executive order, for a multitude of reasons. And I don't believe it will ever be implemented, and neither does Governor Fallin. We'll examine and analyze those reasons this order will fail and the political reasons it was even mentioned - in an update of this post...
Literally hundreds of public school consolidation or annexation studies (research) have been conducted in most U.S. states over the past 20 years. Almost all research has been conducted after a state financial crisis, as a way to prove that schools are not efficient in their use of taxpayer dollars. Unfortunately (for corporate politicians), if the research is thoroughly examined and analyzed, no evidence exists which indicates that more tax dollars can be directed back to "instruction" after consolidation or annexation (see "Capacity for Efficiency" study, 2010, by the Office of Educational QualityandAccountability;okhouse.gov/Documents/InterimStudies/2012/12-024%20presentation%20h.pdf; nepc.colorado.edu/publication/consolidation-schools-districts).
In the interest of brevity, I'll only post anecdotal evidence which indicates that no tax dollars can be directed back to the "classroom" or "instruction" after consolidation or annexation of school districts, and... I'll only post data and analyses from Garvin and McClain County school districts, since these are my local school districts.
From an earlier post: In 2010, the Office of Accountability conducted a "Capacity for Efficiency" study, at the request of Governor Fallin, which analyzed a "county consolidation model" for school efficiency when all public schools were consolidated or annexed to only one county school district... The methodology for the study compared the total administrative expenditures for all school districts in any particular county - to only one school district outside the county with a similar number of students. For example, the total administrative expenditures for all six (6) schools in McClain County (including superintendent salaries) was compared to the administrative expenditures in two separate school districts, Mustang and Yukon. The total number of students for all six McClain County schools combined was approximately 8,000, and both Mustang and Yukon had approximately 8,000 students. The Office of Educational Quality and Accountability determined that the McClain County schools had No Capacity for Efficiency if consolidated or annexed when compared to the Yukon or Mustang school districts. In other words, the total administrative expenditures for all schools in McClain County < (is less than) the administrative expenditures in either Mustang or Yukon schools. This fact must come as a shock to corporate legislators such as Tim Downing (McClain County) who believe that consolidating all schools to only one county school will save $millions in tax dollars, and send $millions in administrative expenses back to the classroom (instruction).
Anecdotal data does exist that consolidation or annexation does not save taxpayer dollars or send more money to instruction. In McClain County, at the conclusion of the 2014-2015 school year, Byars annexed to Wayne Public Schools. At the start of the 2015-2016 school year, Byars public schools no longer existed, so an analysis may be provided which compares administrative expenditures both before and after annexation. The administrative expenditures for Byars and Wayne combined for the 14-15 school year was 5.99% of total expenditures. After annexation of Byars to Wayne in '15-'16, administrative expenditures were 6.21% of total expenditures, an increase of .22%. This particular anecdotal example of annexation did not result in lower administrative costs, nor did it result in more money to the classroom.
Update: In examining the Wayne/Byars annexation in light of Governor Fallin's new "60% consolidation or annexation model" we determine that Byars was on the naughty list in 2015, spending only 48.5% of its total expenditures on "instruction". Also in 2015, Wayne spent 52.9% for "instruction" so landed on the naughty list as well. After annexation in 2016, the new consolidated Wayne/Byars spent only 46.4% for "instruction", landing it on the really naughty list. As this example is anecdotal, it is unclear whether or not all annexations would result in a reduced percentage of expenditures going to student "instruction"... but this lone example certainly indicates that fact. Instead of a long naughty list of almost 500 schools, we could have a long really naughty list of schools.
If the "60% model of annexation" proves out that administrative consolidation or annexation does not save taxpayer dollars or send more money to classroom instruction, then it cannot be "the right thing" as Governor Fallin so eloquently stated. I urge everyone who truly cares about our public school students to please review the research concerning "school consolidation" that proves it just doesn't save tax dollars, nor provide better instruction. The facts should be important to Governor Fallin and her corporate cronies in the State Legislature...
Update: Technical Aspects of Fallin's Naughty list - Although asking me to describe the "Mr. Science" technical aspects of Governor Fallin's naughty list or Flunk List (The "Flunk List" was how athlete eligibility was determined for Lindsay High School Football, back in the day.) without using "colorful rhetoric", I'll give it a try. Fallin's Flunk List (FFL) of public schools is composed of all Oklahoma public schools spending less than 60% of all expenditures for "Instruction" (the Function 1000 Series in the Oklahoma Cost Accounting System manual). According to OCAS - Instruction includes the activities dealing directly with the interaction between teachers and students. Teaching may be provided for students in a school classroom, in another location such as a home or hospital, and in other learning situations such as those involving co-curricular activities. It may also be provided through some other approved medium such as television, radio, telephone, correspondence, and other educational or assistive technology devices. Included here are the activities of teacher assistants of any type (clerks, graders, teaching machines, etc.) which assist in the instructional process. The activities of tutors, translators, and interpreters would be recorded here. Also, include department chairpersons who teach for any portion of time. Tuition/transfer fees paid to other LEAs would be included here. At this point I have several questions that I hope Professor Fallin can answer: What is a teaching machine? I assume it is a "teacher". Secondly - If counselors, librarians, school nurses, principals, resource officers, etc. teach students for a portion of the school day, can that portion of student support be coded to the 1000 series? For instance, Governor Fallin, if a school couselor teaches one class period during the school day, may one sixth of the counselor's salary be coded to Instruction?
My last question for Professor Fallin (ok, I can't help but be a little colorful in describing this issue) provided a hint of what is not included for Instruction: Counselors, Librarians, School Nurses, School Resource Officers, Principals, Student Attendance Services, Student Social Work Services (such as activities designed to improve pupil attendance and to assess and improve the well-being of pupils), activities such as investigating and diagnosing pupil problems arising out of the home school or community, and all expenditures coded 2000. I hope Professor Fallin is not becoming too bogged down at this point (more colorful rhetoric), but we really do need some questions answered.
I know I'm beginning to bog down in describing the asinine and complicated executive order that all schools spending less than 60% on Instruction may be consolidated or annexed, so I'll speed it up a little. In examining Professor Fallin's school spending data, it appears her executive order has come directly from the federal government, as the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) has determined the formula used to calculate local public school expenditure percentages. Now, I have a last question for Professor Fallin - Is this executive order from a conservative perspective... or a corporate perspective? Public Schools are waiting for your answer...
And while we're waiting, a look at a hypothetical example of a school district's expenditure percentages may offer a clue as to what Professor Fallin (the federal government) expects:
Expenditures for (Instruction - 55%, Student and Staff Support - 15.1%, District administration - 2.9%, and Operations/Child nutrition - 27%). The percentages indicated represent the level of expenditures for a real school in each of four categories. This particular school will be on the FFL (Fallin's flunk list), because it spends less than 60% on Instruction (55<60, for those knowing your "gazintas"). The mathematical problem facing school districts is "moving expenditure percentages" from other areas to "instruction". Instruction should gain 5 percentage points just to reach the 'D' level (60%).
Another school district spends 67% in "instruction, 7% for student and staff support, 8.4% for administration, and 17.6% for operations/child nutrition. This school spends a higher percentage of expenditures for "instruction" and "administration" than the first example, and is considered an 'A' school by Professor Fallin (in no danger of being listed on the FFL).
Mathematical principles dictate that the first example school above must fire some of the school and student support employees (those in the 15.1% and 27% categories), and replace them with teachers... to get off the FFL. This would be yet another question for "the professor" - How many local counselors, librarians, bus drivers, nurses, principals,custodians, and others should the school fire to be an 'A' school? I know what many corporate legislators are thinking, since their minds aren't tuned for math - Why can't you just fire the school superintendent and reach that magical 60% level? For two reasons - 1) Each school district must have a superintendent, by order of law and 2) Since superintendent salaries typically cost each school district less than 1% of total expenditures, eliminating the superintendent could only possibly add 1% to "instruction", providing 56% instead of 55%. The school would remain on Fallin's Flunk List. As a matter of fact, even if the entire 2.9% for administrative costs was shifted to "instruction" - the school would still spend only 57.9% for instruction. I believe this 60% school consolidation executive order is built on corporate fuzzy math.
Update: Fallin's Flunk List - Ben Felder, blogger for NEWSOK, writes that "Oklahoma City mayor and gubernatorial candidate Mick Cornett said school consolidation is an idea he supports for some of the 24 schools that are located inside the city limits of Oklahoma City." The 24 schools are mostly large schools, of which all are on Professor Fallin's Flunk List. All 24 schools will be expected to provide a consolidation or annexation plan to the state board for approval, according to the FFL (60%) executive order. All 24 schools must provide a plan which will result in raising their "F" in "instructional spending" (less than 60%) to at least a "D" (60% to 69%). The most logical way to do this: Consolidate or annex to a school with a "passing grade", such as ... ... ... ... ... . Wait a minute! there are no schools in OKC which are not on the FFL, which probably means that all 24 schools will combine with the nearest passing school. The OKC FFL schools would probably have to ask the nearest "passing school" for permission to annex, and it is doubtful any near "D" schools would agree to take them on. (All Oklahoma schools have graded out "F" or "D".) By the way, Cornett never said anything about consolidating small, rural schools, so I think "he's our man" for governor. LOL! This is just one more example of the absurdity in the FFL consolidation model, and the "gazinta" math used to justify it...
Specifically where would I find Johnston County
ReplyDeletego into the office of ed. quality and accountabilty website, click on school district profiles, and check the financial information at the bottom of the page.It gives the percentage of expenditures in "instruction" etc...
Delete