Q & A: State Schools Funding

California’s public schools, once a model for the rest of the nation, now typically rank at the low end of most education surveys of per-pupil funding, teacher salaries and test scores.

As the Legislature faces a constitutional deadline today to approve a budget, Times education editor Beth Shuster asked five education experts about the state of schools.

WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GET SCHOOL FUNDING WHERE IT SHOULD BE?

James A. Fleming, Capistrano Unified School District chief

With California the sixth-largest economy in the world, state leaders should bring us to the national median of states when it comes to per-pupil spending. We would then rank 25th among states. Now we rank 44th. California’s educational community should come together with state government leaders and determine the basic per-pupil level required to run a ... public school with high standards and high expectations.

WHAT SPECIFICALLY SHOULD THE STATE DO TO GET THE MONEY?

Foremost, California must revamp the way we now fund public schools. Secondly, it must also provide greater equity across the state. For example, my district last year received a $4,750 per-pupil basic allocation, plus an additional $1,782 restricted to specific programs as dictated by the state. Our total allotment of $6,532 is $2,970 per student less than the $9,502 allocated to our neighboring district.

OUR SCHOOLS WERE ONCE NATIONAL LEADERS. WHAT HAPPENED?

I don’t accept the notion that achievement levels have plummeted. We educate more children today than in previous generations when whole segments of the student populations were benignly ignored. Yes, there are pockets within the state where educators do a poor job. But state and national educational accountability requirements no longer let problems be ignored.... The key issue remains, however, the adequacy of basic funding.... The state and federal governments have mandated, correctly, that all children be educated, but both state and federal governments have declined to provide the money needed to do so fairly.

*

Barbara E. Kerr, California Teachers Assn. president

WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GET SCHOOL FUNDING WHERE IT SHOULD BE?

We need a whole new approach to the question of school funding. We have some of the highest student achievement in the country, and our expectations for school funding must match our expectations for student achievement. We know the state can’t catch up all at once, but something must be done.... Getting to the national average in per-pupil funding certainly would be a start.

WHAT SPECIFICALLY SHOULD THE STATE DO TO GET THE MONEY?

School funding should not be part of a zero-sum game. For instance, if we want our children to achieve, they also need decent healthcare. The governor needs to stop his political posturing and work with legislators to adopt a budget that protects our schools. Leading the state is not about pitting schools against healthcare. He should keep his promise to fully fund public education.

OUR SCHOOLS WERE ONCE NATIONAL LEADERS. WHAT HAPPENED?

By 2000, we were in the neighborhood of $700 below the national average. As a result, in a classroom of 20 students to one teacher, we are spending $14,000 less than the national average; for classrooms with more students, that range is between $21,000 at 30 students to one teacher and $28,000 per classroom with 40 students. In addition, California currently ranks 49th in student class sizes, 47th in the number of computers per student, and dead last in the number of librarians and counselors per student.

*

Jack O’Connell, California chief of public instruction

WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GET SCHOOL FUNDING WHERE IT SHOULD BE?

Currently, we look at state revenues and simply divide up the pie between education, health services, transportation and other state services. Education gets its lump sum and then is told to go educate our children. Instead of this model, shouldn’t California do the research to know what it would take to educate all California students to reach academic proficiency?

WHAT SPECIFICALLY SHOULD THE STATE DO TO GET THE MONEY?

Once we have an idea -- based on research rather than conjecture -- of what it would take to adequately fund our schools, we will, undoubtedly, need to have a statewide conversation about education funding levels.

OUR SCHOOLS WERE ONCE NATIONAL LEADERS. WHAT HAPPENED?

In the same period that school funding levels have declined in California, demographic changes have produced a student population that is more complex, challenging and costly to educate.... It will require significant new investments in our education system to meet the challenge of preparing California’s student population to [meet] the demands of the 21st century.

*

Mary Perry, EdSource deputy director

WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GET SCHOOL FUNDING WHERE IT SHOULD BE?

Improving student achievement is not just a question of how much money schools receive, but how effectively funds are used to provide educational services that make a difference in how well students learn. That is an important facet of any discussion about how much schools need.

WHAT SPECIFICALLY SHOULD THE STATE DO TO GET THE MONEY?

Any meaningful financial investment represents a very large amount of money. It is unclear where funding of that magnitude could reasonably come from within the current budget without hurting other social service programs that support the very same children the state is trying to educate. That leaves the option of increasing revenues -- or to put it plainly -- raising taxes.

OUR SCHOOLS WERE ONCE NATIONAL LEADERS. WHAT HAPPENED?

What happened is that academic expectations have changed; today the goal is “no child left behind.” That is a very different charge to schools, especially in California, which has adopted some of the most rigorous academic content standards in the nation. At the same time, the proportion of California students who need extra help has grown because a greater percentage of children live in poverty today in our state than was true 40 years ago, and more children come to school with their primary language something other than English.

*

Lawrence O. Picus, USC School of Education professor

WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GET SCHOOL FUNDING WHERE IT SHOULD BE?

The governor’s budget calls for per-pupil spending of $7,402 next year. I am reluctant to speculate as to what an adequate level of funding would be to sustain high student performance, which should always be our goal. However, studies in New York and other states have called for funding levels as high as $14,000 per pupil ... it is clear that considerably more money will be required.

WHAT SPECIFICALLY SHOULD THE STATE DO TO GET THE MONEY?

While the level of funding suggested above is staggering, it probably does not need to be found in one or two years. It is unlikely that a sum that large could be found in spending reductions in other parts of the budget. Instead, the state needs to look at modifications to Proposition 13 and increasing income taxes on the highest earners in the state.

OUR SCHOOLS WERE ONCE NATIONAL LEADERS. WHAT HAPPENED?

It is clear that growth in funding for schools in California has lagged substantially behind funding growth in almost all other states. Moreover, the difficulty of raising any kind of taxes in California since Proposition 13 has made it virtually impossible to reverse that trend. At the same time, the expectations of our schools have increased, both in terms of expectations for student performance and the need to provide other services for children. The result has been very high class sizes ... and dramatic reductions in the number of teachers available for programs like art and music. All of these factors have hindered the education of our children.

*

Los Angeles Times