The Cost of Failing to Educate our Kids

Franklin Schargel* was interviewed on Eye on New Mexico on Sunday, February 20th, 2011. The show was broadcasted all over the state and in El Paso, Texas.  The interview touched upon legislation and Franklin's personal opinions and ideas, but focused on real data in light of New Mexico's new educational and political landscape. At the end of the segment, Franklin made this summarizing point:

"But the reality is education, even though it's taking over 50% of the state budget or close to 50%, is not expensive. Ignorance is very expensive. The U.S. Department of Justice says that 82% of all of our prisoners are school dropouts. Well, as a society, we can either pay for education upstream or the lack of education downstream. As a society, not just here in New Mexico, we are more willing to spend money downstream in incarceration. The average cost of incarceration in the country is $41,000 a year. Per inmate, per year. I don't know of any school system that is willing to spend or capable of spending that much money on education."

Schargel recently spoke at a graduation workshop held by the United Way of Cass-Clay in Fargo, ND. Over 100 community leaders listened as the author identified the top reasons students quit school: alcohol or drug use, poor teacher quality and curriculum planning, and low parental involvement. His advice was for policymakers to "recognize that we have a very severe problem," adding that teachers should make an effort to get to know their students.

Schargel is the author of many books on dropout prevention, including 152 Ways to Keep Students in School: Effective, Easy-to-Implement Tips for Teachers and co-author of titles such as Creating School Cultures that Embrace Learning:  What Successful Leaders Do.

*Franklin P. Schargel

Educator, Author, Motivational Speaker, Trainer, Consultant

Franklin Schargel, a native of Brooklyn, New York now residing in Albuquerque, NM, is a graduate of the University of the City of New York. Franklin holds two Masters Degrees: one in Secondary Education from City University and a degree from Pace University in School Administration and Supervision. His career spans thirty-three years of classroom teaching, school counseling and eight years of school supervision and administration.

Governor Sends Budget Back to House - Action Could Cause Problem for Southwest Learning Center

On Tuesday, Governor Martinez met with legislative leaders and asked them to re-look at the proposed state budget. It is reported that Governor Martinez is unhappy with the depth of cuts to education, medicare, and the corrections department.  The legislative leadership agreed to evaluate some of her concerns and sent the bill back to the House Appropriations Committee for further review.

The Governor would like to see the state lower the subsidy provided to the film industry when they film in New Mexico.  Currently the state reimburses film producers 25% of the money they spend in New Mexico while shooting a film.  The Governor would like to see this reduced to 15%.  The Albuquerque Journal reported today that in 2010, the state reimbursed $65 million dollars to film companies.  The proposed reduction would have presumably saved the state $6.5 million last year.  However, opponents argue that reducing the film credit will drive producers out of New Mexico.  Thus, the actual savings will be considerably less and more New Mexicans will be out of work as a result of the industry moving to other states.

This is important to the Southwest Learning Center because the original budget bill approved by the House Appropriations Committee did not contain any provisions to eliminate the small school size funding for charter schools and districts that house multiple schools in a building.  In order to meet the Governor’s request to limit cuts to education, corrections, and medicare, the funds will need to come from somewhere.  This puts the elimination of the small school size funding back in play.  We are asking all parents, grandparents, friends, and supporters to watch the proposals coming out of the House Appropriations Committee carefully.  If the small school size adjustment is brought back into play and eliminated, the three schools that make up the Southwest Learning Center (Southwest Primary, Southwest Intermediate, and Southwest Secondary) will be forced to either move or close. 

Neither option is a good one.  Moving will cost the taxpayers of New Mexico more money in the long run as facility, administration, insurance, transportation, utility costs, etc are all triplicated.  It will disrupt the educational process significantly.  Closing is even less appealing as 500+ students will be forced to change schools, 40+ people will be out of work and many families will be negatively impacted.  Furthermore, the results the Southwest Learning Center achieve continue to break the mold with no achievement gap and the highest test scores in the state on the standards based assessment.  We will continue to monitor this budget situation carefully and keep parents informed of any changes.

Finally, we want to also alert you to a rumor that has begun to spread.  It is believed that once the budget is passed from the House to the Senate, budget leaders in the Senate will move to add language to “correct inefficiencies in the funding formula”.  This is legislative language to remove the small school funding for schools that share facilities and to limit charter schools from receiving growth units when their populations increase significantly.  Charters continue to experience large growth as more parents become aware of their successes and apply to charters.  The Southwest Learning Center currently has more than 3700 students on the waiting list to get in!  Rumor has it that the most likely places this language will be inserted are in the Senate Finance Committee or when the two chambers meet in conference committee to resolve discrepancies in the budgets. 

Increased Education Spending in Federal Budget

by the American Association of Educators

This week President Obama outlined the federal budget at a middle school in Baltimore. While he discussed the scope of the entire federal budget, education was a major focus. Obama called for increased spending for education programs despite the call for cuts from congressional Republicans.

If approved, federal spending for public schools will increase, and the maximum federal Pell grant will remain constant at $5,550 per college student. Obama's education proposal asks for $77.4 billion, a 4 percent increase from the 2010 budget.

The cornerstone of the spending centers around the Race to the Top campaign that last year gave $4 billion worth of stimulus funding to various states for enacting school reforms. The 2012 budget proposal includes $900 million for Race to the Top, which the administration says would be awarded this time not to states but to school districts.

The administration's education proposal also includes $600 million for School Turnaround Grants, a $54 million increase above 2010 levels. The turnaround program, which the Department of Education hopes will finance overalls of thousands of the country's poor performing schools, was also financed with billions in economic stimulus money.

Another program that will see increased funding under the proposed budget is Title I, which channels money to school districts to help them educate disadvantaged children, would receive $14.8 billion, an increase of $300 million over 2010.

The proposed spending comes on the heels of recent education rhetoric, culminating at the State of the Union with a call to increase our "investment" in education. Obama has pushed to take advantage of this "Sputnik moment" to increase our college graduation rate and renew our commitment to the STEM subjects to ensure American success in a changing global economy.

Obama and his administration are experiencing significant push-back from congressional Republicans who warn that we cannot afford to increase spending for any department.

Among the many cuts proposed, is a $1.1 billion cut from the Head Start program, which, according to estimates by the National Head Start Association, would eliminate services for children and eliminate positions within the Head Start organization.

SLC Students Honored by the State of New Mexico

On Monday, the Math and Science Bureau at the New Mexico Public Education Department released their annual awards for the top achieving schools and teachers in New Mexico.  For the 5th consecutive year, the Southwest Learning Center captured many top honors.

In Southwest Secondary, last year's 7th grade students (current 8th graders) had the highest year-over-year gains in the state.  Congratulations to teacher Mike Weber and all of the SSLC 8th grade students for this accomplishment.

In Southwest Primary, last year's 5th graders (current 6th graders) had the highest percentage of students performing at "proficient" or "advanced" in mathematics in the state.  Congratulations to teacher Coreen Carrillo and all of the current 6th graders!

Also in Southwest Primary, last year's 4th graders (current 5th graders) had the highest percentage of students performing at "proficient" or "advanced" in both mathematics and science in the state.  Congratulations to teacher Debbie Doxtator and all of this year's 5th grade students.  We want to issue a special congratulations to teacher Debbie Doxtator.  2011 marks the 5th consecutive year that her students have earned the top spot in math and science for the state of New Mexico!

Congratulations to all of the students and all of the teachers!  The state legislature plans a one-hour ceremony  in honor of SLC students and teachers on Friday, March 11, 2011 at 12:00 noon in the State Capitol Building Rotunda.  Students and teachers will meet their legislators, the school's representatives and have an opportunity to talk about what makes SLC special.  Please plan to attend and support the students and SLC teachers as they are honored for their accomplishments!

Merit Pay: A great idea but an implementation dilema

This is the third of four blogs evaluating Governor Martinez's educational reform plan from a practicioner's point of view.

The third component in Governor Martinez’s educational reform plan “Kids First, New Mexico Wins,” calls for rewarding teachers based on their performance.  This yet to be specified component of the Governor’s plan, like other merit pay proposals, will be extremely difficult for educators, politicians and stakeholders to reach a consensus on.  Close examination of the merit pay debate often leaves more questions than answers.  Implementation of Governor Martinez’s plan must be examined holistically and implementation will be difficult without a firm moral and monetary commitment from all New Mexico citizens.

The desire to monetarily reward top flight educators and schools and to motivate those deemed to be performing subpar has proven to be difficult to implement.  Aside from the commitment of more public revenue in these difficult economic times, a complex problem lies in determining which teachers and institutions are really best serving their constituents.  Some would contend that paying exemplary teachers more really amounts to paying more for student outcomes, which in practice means paying for standardized-test-score gains.  This standard of success will often reward communities with a desirable zip code and higher social economic level.  Solely basing teachers’ pay on standardized test scores minimizes the teaching craft and is ineffectual in any short term evaluation.  Other problems are inherent with this narrow scope evaluation: how do we reward teachers of grade levels where standardized tests are not given; what about educators of elective classes, music, drama and physical education.  With these considerations it becomes clear that evaluations of teachers and schools must be multifaceted and based on an extended period of time instead of a single year’s standardized test score.  Educators and institutions should be graded and rewarded on their body of work for multi-year gains in student learning.

The devil is in details as with all controversial paradigm shifts.  New Mexico educators will be the first to admit that student success is paramount and will join all stakeholders in a commitment to continue to improve our schools.  No one enters the teaching profession with the illusion of getting rich and not being held accountable for their efforts in the classroom.  Educators will support a compensation system that fairly rewards their efforts and does not punish them for factors impeding student success beyond their control.  Educators are not opposed to competition and understand the temptation of non-educators to compare schools to businesses.  Educators could in fact benefit from embracing the reality that our constituents really are our customers.  The stakes in this business venture require examination beyond the bottom line.  A commitment from all concerned will require a carefully crafted system that will reward education excellence and level the playing field for educational entrepreneurs.  Finally, it is imperative that we invite the best and brightest to enter the field and not force them from the profession before they master their craft. 

The Southwest Learning Centers’ highly dedicated and professional staff support Governor Martinez’s commitment to reward education excellence and embrace the opportunity to provide an innovative approach to education that empowers students and allows them to become self-motivated, resourceful, life-long learners as well as highly productive members of the workforce.

A New Paradigm for Education

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
—Albert Einstein

With all the discussion about New Mexico’s educational standing compared to the United States’ and the world’s standing, one would believe the powers that be would be seeking and embracing changes and solutions that could radically improve New Mexico’s public schools.  Einstein may not have been talking about the century-old educational model still operating in most of New Mexico’s school districts and serving as a guide for many state policies and regulations, but he certainly could have been.

Southwest Secondary Learning Center (SSLC) bases student progress and advancement on the concept of mastery of learning/content as opposed to the traditional measurement of seat time or the Carnegie Unit.  The vast majority of schools throughout the nation measure student advancement on the model developed by the State of Massachusetts in 1906 by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching for the purpose of establishing a retirement fund for elderly college professors.  The Carnegie Unit was created in order to establish a common teaching standard among various Massachusetts institutions of higher learning to determine professor’s eligibility to receive benefits from Carnegie’s $10 million endowment.  In order to keep students in high schools and from prematurely entering college and to provide colleges with uniform admissions standards, the Carnegie Unit (or credit) developed into the measurement tool for secondary schools nationwide.  The standard “unit” was further refined and defined by the amount of time spent in school for a year, week, day or class period or more simply put “seat time.”  This definition of a high school education as “time served” remains firmly entrenched in New Mexico’s schools.  Graduation, attendance, truancy, school calendars and many other state mandated requirements are all based on this antiquated measure of student achievement.  Southwest Secondary Learning Center, a state chartered charter school, is required to adhere to many state mandated requirements that inhibit moving education into the 21^st century. 

The SSLC founders acted on their belief that students’ advancement should be based on content mastery and not on “seat time” in front of a teacher.  The SSLC model uses computers as tools for instruction and teaches individual learners at the specific moment that the instruction is needed.  This model of teaching individual students instead of classes or periods should be embraced as an alternative to the traditional school paradigm that most New Mexico students and families have no choice but to accept.  SSLC students’ achievement and advancement is not constrained by the traditional classroom model; 4 walls, 35 desks and a “sage on stage.”  Students’ progress through the course outline is based on content mastery and demonstrated proficiency instead of teachers’ lesson plans.  Instruction is one-on-one and remediation is immediate, a rarity in the traditional classroom.  Students’ opportunity to self-direct their education and their parents’ ability to set individual proficiency standards and monitor progress on line is a model that should be examined by all who wish their children to reach their full potential.  Many critics of the education establishment contend that simply spending more money on the same century-old model will not improve education for New Mexico students.  To continue on the same path is truly insane.

LFC Downplaying Disaster

The following section was taken from the Legislative Finance Committee report Program Evaluation of New Mexico Charter Schools dated 7/23/10, Report # 10-09.

Despite charter schools’ position that they are dependent on the small school size adjustment, it is not clear that the purpose of size adjustments in the funding formula is to act as a subsidy for the diseconomies of scale that the small school site charter school education programs produce. There has been tacit recognition of these diseconomies; three out of the 16 charter schools LFC staff visited (La Luz Del Monte, La Resolana and Ralph J. Bunche Academy) are sharing facilities with one or more other charter schools that also receive small school size adjustment. Charter schools are envisioned as smaller school sites by choice, and are often located in urban areas where traditional public schools have available space. The purpose of the Charter Schools Act (Section 22-8B-1 NMSA 1978) is “to enable individual schools to structure their educational curriculum to encourage the use of different and innovative teaching methods that are based on reliable research and effective practices or have been replicated successfully in schools with diverse characteristics,” which to a reasonable person could be interpreted as a special program.

It is clear that the Legislative Finance Committee fashioned the language in their report with the intent to eliminate only those small schools that have the leadership and common sense to share facilities in order to achieve a small economy of scale that reduces the building lease costs and serves to increase the operational fund for students. The report cites the Public School Finance Act (Section 22-8-23 (A) NMSA 1978) cites “separate schools established to provide special programs, including but not limited to vocational and alternative education, shall not be classified as public schools for purposes of generating size adjustment program units” as the rationale for deciding that charter schools sharing facilities should be considered as less than public schools, rather they choose to view them as mere special programs.  The concept is laughable if it weren’t being used as a reason for cutting the heart of the funding for charter and other small schools. No reasonable or rational person could conclude that the rigor of beginning and sustaining successful charter schools is a program level endeavor.  The accountability and responsibilities for charter schools is grounded in statute and delineated by the state PEC (Public Education Commission) advised by the PED (Public Education Department) or a local school district as an authorizer.  The Charter School statues clearly identify charter schools as public schools and as such they should be treated like all other public schools in New Mexico.

By carving charters out in carefully worded statutory language, the charters join a number of small schools in tiny districts who will lose growth units or small district support.  The Legislative Finance Committee claims that innovative charters and districts do not deserve small school funding because they choose to share viable  facilities with gymnasiums, libraries, and handicapped accessible bathrooms. 

Instead, they continue to view schools in through an old, outdated paradigm and would opt instead (during a budget crisis) to require taxpayers to incur the costs of separate facilities.  As a comical counterpoint to this rationale, there is also recommended legislation to consolidate small school districts in order to save money (see SB 90). That is exactly what these schools and districts have done …consolidate, following the successful models used by the Albuquerque Academy, Bosque Prep, and the New Mexico Military Institute.

Further, the LFC admitted that, “Exempting charter schools from small school size adjustments will make it more difficult for small charter schools to generate enough money to be self-sufficient and provide educational services to students.”  Here the LFC report is accurate.  The reality is grim because a 30% reduction in a small school budget for these schools and they will be unable to support the legislatively-mandated highly qualified teachers and the program and facility requirements. If legislation is crafted to eliminate the small school adjustment, these exemplary schools will be destroyed and the small school funding will continue to be provided to other small schools that are carved out because they are in separate buildings. A true travesty to taxpayers: lose the highest performing schools and in their place incur additional high cost schools.

New Mexico Charter Schools are underfunded when compared to traditional district public schools.  In an analysis of  charter school funding completed in 2010 by Ball State University, (Titled: CHARTER SCHOOL FUNDING: Inequity Persists) it was found that charter schools in New Mexico receive nine percent less per pupil than do school districts. This is prior to factoring in facility funds which districts have access to and charters do not.  These conclusions are based on a methodology that accurately reflects the true disparity that exists between charter school funding and traditional school funding.  The current funding formula adjustments exist based on the Legislature’s recognition of the unique needs of charter schools and small districts. Further, growth factors for charter schools are limited based on the enrollment cap for the charter school while districts have no such cap on enrollment and can receive the benefit of growth calculations ad infinitum. In smaller schools, fixed operational costs like curriculum development and administration must be distributed among fewer students.  See Lewis D. Solomon, Edison Schools and the Privatization of K-12 Public Education:  A Legal and Policy Analysis, 30 Fordham Urb. L.J. 1281, 1299 (2003) (describing economies of scale in school operation).  Because the cost differential factor used to calculate basic program units is based on estimated operational costs per student, the size adjustment factor addresses the issue that it is essentially more expensive to educate a child in a small school than in a larger one.  It does so by giving additional program units to "approved public school[s]" with small student bodies.  Section22-8-23.  For elementary and junior high schools, a school must have fewer than 200 total enrolled, qualified students to be eligible.  Id.; ' 22-8-2 (definitions).  “Public school” is defined in the "General Provisions" section of the Public School Code as:

“that part of a school district that is a single attendance center in which instruction is offered by one or more teachers and is discernible as a building or group of buildings generally recognized as either an elementary, middle, junior high or high school or any combination of those and includes a charter school.”

While this explanation is long and really difficult to understand, we must remain steadfast in our desire to change legislative minds and have a positive outcome that keeps our kids and our schools safe from seemingly small legislative tweaks that erase us from the educational horizon.