These past few months have been a head spinning cluster of mixed messages about the state of public education. If we were to listen to all of the Teacher Appreciation Week rhetoric, we would naturally assume that we honor and value teachers, despite undercutting them at every turn.
Added into this hot mess of mixed messages is the slap in the face to public school teachers by President Obama, who chose to celebrate National Charter Schools Week during Teacher Appreciation Week. In yet another smack down for public education, Indiana Governor Mike Pence chose to sign voucher expansion into law at Calvary Christian School. If we were to listen to our Indiana state legislators, we would see that schools and teachers are failing and that the only thing that will save our children is to defund public schools and to have those tax dollars follow the child to a parochial school.
Despite all of these mixed messages and despite the fact the our state legislature cannot get beyond their own talking to points to listen to facts and passed the largest voucher expansion in these United States. Those of us in Indiana may have lost the battle in this legislative session, but we are more determined than ever to fight back in whatever way we can. Since Plan A didn't work, we are now working on Plan B.So far, Plan B consists of trying to inform business people who have not been involved. We plan to take our information to Rotary, Lions, Kiwanis, and any service group we can find. We are planning to create graphics to illustrate the abuse and misuse of our tax dollars. We are planning to search for both local and state candidates who support public education. We are planning to write op-ed pieces for our newspapers. We are going to channel Norma Rae, to tell our stories, and to let people know that public education is a public value.
Even though we are fighting mad and ready to take prisoners, art teacher, Jenny Sanders, put why what we are doing is so important when she wrote this:
"Our Kindergarten kids have LITTLE time for 'spontaneous' play although of course, we do have some 'prescriptive' play - which simply means we sort of PLAN their play. Still, now and then we REALLY get to have opportunities to watch, listen, and value the kids' thoughts and words. Yesterday one little guy used lots of odds and ends of scrap wood (few definitive squares or rectangles) to construct just a wonderful 'surround' for some jungle animals. It had complex bridge structures, small and large 'rooms' and was simply breathtaking in the way he had used the pieces for his purpose. Another little guy came up with a giraffe, gently placed him in the center of one of the rooms and said to him, 'You have made a place of joy for this giraffe!' You simply cannot quantify that experience - for the boys, or for the adults that witnessed that life and goodness-affirming moment."
After reading this anecdote, it seems important that we change the narrative to stress that education should be about learning, creativity, discovery, and joy. Teachers need to tell their stories from their classrooms and from their hearts. We all need to come together to change the narrative from those things that are being measured to those more important things which cannot be measured.
While only one week per year is designated as Teacher Appreciation week where teachers are honored and given an extra donut, here is our message that is neither mixed nor misinformed: we value and honor teachers every day.
Friday, May 17, 2013
Teacher Appreciation Week Brings Mixed Messages
The Network for Public Education note of the week comes from Phyllis Bush, who serves on the NPE's Board of Directors, and is one of the founders of the Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education.
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Vic’s Statehouse Notes #144 – May 7, 2013
Dear Friends,
The budget increases for tuition support, when viewed in the context of the past eight budgets, were truly anemic. This is the first time in the eight budgets (16 years) when funding increases did not exceed 2%, except for the budgets of 2009 and 2011 when the Great Recession controlled the agenda. The strong push to expand vouchers appears to have been accompanied by a lower priority and diminished interest in funding public schools.
Summary of Budgets since 1999
Attached is a summary of the past eight school funding formulas. Every time a budget is written, the cover page on the funding formula clearly shows the percentage increase for total funding for each of the two years of the biennium. This figure is well publicized in the media. The attached chart focuses just on that percentage increase, showing what the increases have been for the past 16 years. I have personally observed the budget process in all of these years.
The increase in “total funding” this year was 2% in the first year and 1% in the second year. The Governor’s budget in January had a 1% increase in both years, but the House budget in February and the Senate budget in April both raised the first year to 2%, and that is where the final budget ended up.
As the 16-year chart shows, 2% and 1% are very low increases, lower than all budgets except the Great Recession budgets of 2009 and 2011.
In actual dollars, the 2% increase in FY2014 from the previous year (FY2013) required $132 million in new dollars. Then to repeat that 2% increase and raise it by an additional 1% in FY2015 required an increase of $201 million. To calculate these numbers, you need to know that budget makers raised the previous year (FY2013) base to $6.49 billion because full day kindergarten funding, which was a separate line item in previous budgets, was added to the tuition support budget this year.
Legislators like to add these two figures together ($132 M + $201M) to say that they raised tuition support by $333 million. It should be remembered that such figures are totals for two years.
The self-congratulations some legislators have displayed over this $333 million increase should be viewed in the context of previous school funding increases, which ranged from 2.4% to 4.7% from 1999 to until the Great Recession started. In Gov. Daniels first budget in 2005 during a rough economic time when Sen. Meeks kept saying “There is no money,” an increase of $220 million was added to tuition support for the biennium. Then in Gov. Daniels second budget in 2007, when the economy was better again, an increase of $710 million was added to the budget as the state took over full funding of the general fund. The 2011 budget showed a biennial decrease of $520 million from the previous budget for FY2011.
By now, eyes have glazed over from too many numbers.
Here is the bottom line:
The figures of 2% and 1% are very low increases for times when we are not in recession, as the chart shows. Only the Great Recession school formulas of 2009 and 2011 are lower. Testimony provided during the revenue forecast indicated to legislators that the cost of living in Indiana was going up at a rate of 1.6%, so the second year of the biennium did not even reach a cost of living increase. Considering that revenue forecasts in the 2013 session were all positive and the legislature found $500 million for tax cuts, part of a promise to cut taxes by $1.1 billion over four years, the conclusion seems obvious that limiting the school formula increase to 2% and 1% reflected a low priority for funding public education.
Vouchers and the Diminishing Motivation for Adequate Public School Funding
I have believed for a long time that funding a voucher program in Indiana would dampen the motivation to adequately fund public schools. Instead of pressing for world class educational programs, vouchers give legislators a clear response to use with parents who are pressuring legislators for more public school funding: If you don’t like your public school, you can switch to a private school with a voucher. The legislative drive to maximize support for public schools within the budgetary revenues available is now gone. In the midst of big surpluses, legislators now consider a token increase to be just fine.
Throughout testimony on HB 1003, parents who came to support the voucher bill said that what attracted them to the private school was a lower class size. Public school leaders would love to offer lower class sizes as well, but inadequate funding in recent years has forced districts to hire fewer teachers and to raise class sizes. This new budget gives little hope that future class sizes will improve.
School Choice: A Norm-Referenced Decision
School choice is essentially a comparative choice asking which school is better. Over time, no one has guaranteed that all of the choices will get better and better, meeting higher and higher standards. Over time, parents may be choosing the school that has lost the fewest art and music programs or has lost the fewest teachers in the budget cuts.
The task of each school in a choice marketplace is to look better than the other schools. Most of the marketing is based on math and language arts test scores. Over time, schools will shed their expensive comprehensive programs and zero in on producing dazzling math and language arts results. If parents complain to legislators about inadequate funding for popular programs which are being jettisoned, the refrain will become a mantra: If you don’t like your school, you can pick another one.
In this sense, vouchers have become a cover for low funding levels of public schools, levels that we are already seeing in this new budget. Raising the funding by merely 2% and 1% when Indiana was looking at a $2 billion surplus is just an omen of the policies to come in this era of ever-expanding vouchers.
Thanks for supporting public education in the 2013 session of the Indiana General Assembly!
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
INDIANA SCHOOL FUNDING IN THE PAST 16 YEARS
Source: The Summary Cover Page for School Formulas from 1999 through 2013
Prepared by Dr. Victor Smith, May 7, 2013
When the school funding formulas are passed every two years by the General Assembly, legislators see the bottom line percentage increases on a summary page. Figures that have appeared on this summary in the years that I have personally observed Indiana school budgets are listed below.
“STATE REGULAR DOLLARS” are the dollars for basic tuition support from state taxes. There was once a time when “state regular dollar” increases could vary widely from “total funding” increases due to including local property taxes in the school funding formula. Those days are now over.
“TOTAL FUNDING” includes support from local property taxes and additional state categorical funding, for example, special education funding and career & tech education.
YEAR..... ..STATE REGULAR DOLLARS... ..TOTAL FUNDING
1999 BUDGET:
.....FY 2000............+5.4%.....................+4.7%
.....FY 2001............+5.4%.....................+4.7%
2001 BUDGET:
.....FY 2002............+2.5%.....................+3.5%
.....FY 2003............+3.1%.....................+3.5%
2003 BUDGET:
.....FY 2004............+3.6%.....................+3.3%
.....FY 2005............+0.0%.($5.24B)............+2.9%.($5.87B)
2005 BUDGET:
.....FY 2006............+0.6%.($5.29B)............+2.6%.($5.94B)
.....FY 2007............-0.8%.($5.35B)............+2.4%.($6.02B)
2007 BUDGET:
.....FY 2008............+4.1%.($5.59B)............+4.1%.($6.27B)
.....FY 2009............+4.2%.($5.76B)............+3.6%.($6.48B)*
2009 BUDGET:
.....FY 2010...[actual].-0.3%.($5.74B)............+1.1%.($6.55B)**
.............[printed].+11.6%.[due to reduced base]
.....FY 2011............-1.1%.($5.67B)............+0.3%.($6.57B)**
2011 BUDGET:
.....FY 2012............-2.1%.($5.54B)...[actual].-4.5%.($6.28B)
........................................[printed].+0.5%
..................................................[due to reduced base]
.....FY 2013............+1.2%.($5.60B)............+1.0%.($6.34B)***
2013 BUDGET:
.....FY 2014............+2.0%.($5.99B)............+2.0%.($6.62B)
.....FY 2015............+1.0%.($6.05B)............+1.0%.($6.69B)
CONCLUSIONS:
*included Federal stimulus/stabilization funding of $.61 Billion
**reduced by $.30 Billion in Dec. 2009 due to revenue shortfall and by $.327 Billion during 2010-11
***adding the full day kindergarten line item to the formula during the 2013 General Assembly raised the actual FY2013 base expenditures to $6.49B.
ICPE is working to promote public education and oppose privatization of schools in the Statehouse. I keep hearing reports that some public school supporters read these “Notes” with great interest but don’t translate that interest into joining ICPE. We had an outstanding lobbyist Joel Hand working hard to support public education throughout the session. We need additional memberships and donations to make the final payment on his contract for the session. We need your help! Please join us! Thanks to all who have joined or sent extra donations recently!
Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information.
Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:
I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.
The budget increases for tuition support, when viewed in the context of the past eight budgets, were truly anemic. This is the first time in the eight budgets (16 years) when funding increases did not exceed 2%, except for the budgets of 2009 and 2011 when the Great Recession controlled the agenda. The strong push to expand vouchers appears to have been accompanied by a lower priority and diminished interest in funding public schools.
Summary of Budgets since 1999
Attached is a summary of the past eight school funding formulas. Every time a budget is written, the cover page on the funding formula clearly shows the percentage increase for total funding for each of the two years of the biennium. This figure is well publicized in the media. The attached chart focuses just on that percentage increase, showing what the increases have been for the past 16 years. I have personally observed the budget process in all of these years.
The increase in “total funding” this year was 2% in the first year and 1% in the second year. The Governor’s budget in January had a 1% increase in both years, but the House budget in February and the Senate budget in April both raised the first year to 2%, and that is where the final budget ended up.
As the 16-year chart shows, 2% and 1% are very low increases, lower than all budgets except the Great Recession budgets of 2009 and 2011.
In actual dollars, the 2% increase in FY2014 from the previous year (FY2013) required $132 million in new dollars. Then to repeat that 2% increase and raise it by an additional 1% in FY2015 required an increase of $201 million. To calculate these numbers, you need to know that budget makers raised the previous year (FY2013) base to $6.49 billion because full day kindergarten funding, which was a separate line item in previous budgets, was added to the tuition support budget this year.
Legislators like to add these two figures together ($132 M + $201M) to say that they raised tuition support by $333 million. It should be remembered that such figures are totals for two years.
The self-congratulations some legislators have displayed over this $333 million increase should be viewed in the context of previous school funding increases, which ranged from 2.4% to 4.7% from 1999 to until the Great Recession started. In Gov. Daniels first budget in 2005 during a rough economic time when Sen. Meeks kept saying “There is no money,” an increase of $220 million was added to tuition support for the biennium. Then in Gov. Daniels second budget in 2007, when the economy was better again, an increase of $710 million was added to the budget as the state took over full funding of the general fund. The 2011 budget showed a biennial decrease of $520 million from the previous budget for FY2011.
By now, eyes have glazed over from too many numbers.
Here is the bottom line:
The figures of 2% and 1% are very low increases for times when we are not in recession, as the chart shows. Only the Great Recession school formulas of 2009 and 2011 are lower. Testimony provided during the revenue forecast indicated to legislators that the cost of living in Indiana was going up at a rate of 1.6%, so the second year of the biennium did not even reach a cost of living increase. Considering that revenue forecasts in the 2013 session were all positive and the legislature found $500 million for tax cuts, part of a promise to cut taxes by $1.1 billion over four years, the conclusion seems obvious that limiting the school formula increase to 2% and 1% reflected a low priority for funding public education.
Vouchers and the Diminishing Motivation for Adequate Public School Funding
I have believed for a long time that funding a voucher program in Indiana would dampen the motivation to adequately fund public schools. Instead of pressing for world class educational programs, vouchers give legislators a clear response to use with parents who are pressuring legislators for more public school funding: If you don’t like your public school, you can switch to a private school with a voucher. The legislative drive to maximize support for public schools within the budgetary revenues available is now gone. In the midst of big surpluses, legislators now consider a token increase to be just fine.
Throughout testimony on HB 1003, parents who came to support the voucher bill said that what attracted them to the private school was a lower class size. Public school leaders would love to offer lower class sizes as well, but inadequate funding in recent years has forced districts to hire fewer teachers and to raise class sizes. This new budget gives little hope that future class sizes will improve.
School Choice: A Norm-Referenced Decision
School choice is essentially a comparative choice asking which school is better. Over time, no one has guaranteed that all of the choices will get better and better, meeting higher and higher standards. Over time, parents may be choosing the school that has lost the fewest art and music programs or has lost the fewest teachers in the budget cuts.
The task of each school in a choice marketplace is to look better than the other schools. Most of the marketing is based on math and language arts test scores. Over time, schools will shed their expensive comprehensive programs and zero in on producing dazzling math and language arts results. If parents complain to legislators about inadequate funding for popular programs which are being jettisoned, the refrain will become a mantra: If you don’t like your school, you can pick another one.
In this sense, vouchers have become a cover for low funding levels of public schools, levels that we are already seeing in this new budget. Raising the funding by merely 2% and 1% when Indiana was looking at a $2 billion surplus is just an omen of the policies to come in this era of ever-expanding vouchers.
Thanks for supporting public education in the 2013 session of the Indiana General Assembly!
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
INDIANA SCHOOL FUNDING IN THE PAST 16 YEARS
Source: The Summary Cover Page for School Formulas from 1999 through 2013
Prepared by Dr. Victor Smith, May 7, 2013
When the school funding formulas are passed every two years by the General Assembly, legislators see the bottom line percentage increases on a summary page. Figures that have appeared on this summary in the years that I have personally observed Indiana school budgets are listed below.
“STATE REGULAR DOLLARS” are the dollars for basic tuition support from state taxes. There was once a time when “state regular dollar” increases could vary widely from “total funding” increases due to including local property taxes in the school funding formula. Those days are now over.
“TOTAL FUNDING” includes support from local property taxes and additional state categorical funding, for example, special education funding and career & tech education.
YEAR..... ..STATE REGULAR DOLLARS... ..TOTAL FUNDING
1999 BUDGET:
.....FY 2000............+5.4%.....................+4.7%
.....FY 2001............+5.4%.....................+4.7%
2001 BUDGET:
.....FY 2002............+2.5%.....................+3.5%
.....FY 2003............+3.1%.....................+3.5%
2003 BUDGET:
.....FY 2004............+3.6%.....................+3.3%
.....FY 2005............+0.0%.($5.24B)............+2.9%.($5.87B)
2005 BUDGET:
.....FY 2006............+0.6%.($5.29B)............+2.6%.($5.94B)
.....FY 2007............-0.8%.($5.35B)............+2.4%.($6.02B)
2007 BUDGET:
.....FY 2008............+4.1%.($5.59B)............+4.1%.($6.27B)
.....FY 2009............+4.2%.($5.76B)............+3.6%.($6.48B)*
2009 BUDGET:
.....FY 2010...[actual].-0.3%.($5.74B)............+1.1%.($6.55B)**
.............[printed].+11.6%.[due to reduced base]
.....FY 2011............-1.1%.($5.67B)............+0.3%.($6.57B)**
2011 BUDGET:
.....FY 2012............-2.1%.($5.54B)...[actual].-4.5%.($6.28B)
........................................[printed].+0.5%
..................................................[due to reduced base]
.....FY 2013............+1.2%.($5.60B)............+1.0%.($6.34B)***
2013 BUDGET:
.....FY 2014............+2.0%.($5.99B)............+2.0%.($6.62B)
.....FY 2015............+1.0%.($6.05B)............+1.0%.($6.69B)
CONCLUSIONS:
- THE LOWEST STATE FUNDING INCREASES (1% OR LESS) WERE IN FY 2005, FY 2006&07, FY 2010&11, FY 2012&13 AND FY 2015.
- FOR THE FIRST TIME, STATE FUNDING ACTUALLY WENT DOWN IN BOTH COLUMNS FOR FY 2012, THE BUDGET YEAR STARTING JULY 1, 2011.
- THE “TOTAL FUNDING” INCREASES IN FY 2005, FY 2006 AND FY 2007 WERE PROVIDED BY RAISING LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES. THIS WAS ONE FACTOR LEADING TO THE PROPERTY TAX CRISIS WHICH HIT IN THE SUMMER OF 2007.
*included Federal stimulus/stabilization funding of $.61 Billion
**reduced by $.30 Billion in Dec. 2009 due to revenue shortfall and by $.327 Billion during 2010-11
***adding the full day kindergarten line item to the formula during the 2013 General Assembly raised the actual FY2013 base expenditures to $6.49B.
ICPE is working to promote public education and oppose privatization of schools in the Statehouse. I keep hearing reports that some public school supporters read these “Notes” with great interest but don’t translate that interest into joining ICPE. We had an outstanding lobbyist Joel Hand working hard to support public education throughout the session. We need additional memberships and donations to make the final payment on his contract for the session. We need your help! Please join us! Thanks to all who have joined or sent extra donations recently!
Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information.
Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:
I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.
Thursday, May 2, 2013
May 2, 2013: Question of the Day
Since we have been in ISTEP testing hell all week, here is a new question of the day. What are the most important things that kids learn in school that CANNOT be measured by tests?
Click the question mark below to see all our Questions of the Day or click the link in the sidebar.
~~~
Click the question mark below to see all our Questions of the Day or click the link in the sidebar.
~~~
Vic’s Statehouse Notes #142 REVISED AND CORRECTED – May 1, 2013
Please replace yesterday’s “Notes #142” with this revision which is now accurate and reflects the final budget, rather than the budget I mistakenly thought was final. I apologize for my error.
Vic’s Statehouse Notes #142 REVISED AND CORRECTED – May 1, 2013
Dear Friends,
It took last-minute changes and precisely-timed legislative maneuvering to complete passage of the voucher expansion bill on the last day of the session. As I left the Statehouse at 1am Saturday morning after both the voucher bill and the budget bill had passed, I was celebrating the small victory public school advocates had in stopping the inclusion of D schools in the voucher distribution plan.
The Final Day Story of House Bill 1003
I arrived at the Statehouse Friday on the final day to discover that the Conference Committee Report #2 for HB 1003 that I wrote about Thursday in “Notes #139” was not the final plan. They were still negotiating, I was told.
I thought, “Good, they don’t have the votes in the Senate to pass the D school plan.”
The Senate had narrowly passed the voucher bill 27-23. A shift of three votes on the final vote would kill the bill. Senator Waltz had told me directly last Monday that he had “drawn a line” and would not vote for any final version that went beyond the provisions of the Senate version. The D-school plan advocated by Rep. Behning clearly was an expansion of the Senate version, so I thought that including the D-school plan would jeopardize the final vote in the Senate.
As the afternoon wore on, no final version of the voucher bill emerged and the talk on the floor was that the voucher bill was somehow holding up the budget bill. There was even talk of coming back on Monday.
Then we heard that a new budget was coming out around 5:00pm. I thought, “This is going slower that the leadership wanted.”
Then about 6:30 pm, a Conference Committee Report #5 of the voucher bill was filed for final consideration. The final version omitted D schools from the voucher distribution plan.
I thought, “Good, they didn’t have the votes in the Senate to pass the D school plan.”
Then the sequence to final voting began. The House Rules Committee heard the bill about 7:00pm to officially shorten the time needed for a vote. Joel Hand had the opportunity to speak for ICPE against the bill one more time. It was clear that only F schools were in the plan. It passed House Rules on a party line vote.
The Senate Rules Committee heard HB 1003 about 9:30pm. Sen. Yoder clearly told the committee the bill affected “F schools only.” It passed Senate Rules on a party line vote.
The House took up HB 1003 for a final vote about 10:15. Rep. Behning introduced his bill by saying vouchers would go to failing schools, not D schools. Rep. Vernon Smith, Rep. Battles, Rep. Errington and Rep. Delaney spoke strongly against the voucher bill, and Rep. Huston and Rep. Tim Brown spoke for the bill. Rep. Delaney ridiculed the new plan for F schools, saying realtors would now put signs out saying “Good news! The neighborhood school just went F, so move here and you get a state voucher for the private school you are already going to.”
Then came the final vote: 55-44 with Rep. Turner not voting. Back in February, eight Republicans had opposed HB 1003, but in this final vote, 13 Republicans joined 31 Democrats in voting “no.” They should all be thanked:
Republicans voting “NO” to vouchers: Representatives Bacon, Baird, Dermody, Koch, Leonard, Mahan, McNamara, Neese, Niemeyer, Saunders, Soliday, Truitt and Wolkins.
Democrats voting “NO” to vouchers: Representatives Austin, Bartlett, Battles, Bauer, C. Brown, Candelaria Reardon, Delaney, Dvorak, Errington, Forestal, GiaQuinta, Goodin, Hale, Harris, Kersey, Klinker, Lawson, Macer, Moed, Moseley, Niezgodski, Pelath, Pierce, Porter, Pryor, Riecken, Shackleford, V. Smith, Stemler, Summers and VanDenburgh.
HB 1003 arrived for the final vote in the Senate about 11:30 pm. Senator Yoder presented the bill, saying the final version was “similar to the Senate version.” He said students in “failing schools” could go to the school of their choice. Senators Taylor and Stoops spoke against the bill. Then, in closing, Senator Yoder said we should “get kids out of failing schools,” schools that “can’t get their act together.”
I thought of William Bell School #60 and the injustice done to their brand new program which under arcane rules was labeled an “F” school. I thought of Nora Elementary doing a fantastic job of educating a student population that is 70% non-English speaking immigrants but catching no breaks when students who don’t speak English can’t pass the English portion of ISTEP+ for their age level.
Then came the vote. The Senate vote was 27-23, identical to the first Senate vote on April 10th. The leadership, by changing the bill to exclude the D schools, had held on to all of the key votes that many public school advocates had peppered with messages in the past week in hopes of a reversal, Senators Bray, Nugent, Paul, Steele and Waltz. All remained “Yes” votes.
All 23 Senators voting “No” should be thanked for their votes:
Ten Republicans voted no: Senators Alting, Becker, Head, Mishler, Tomes, Waterman, Charbonneau, Glick, Grooms, and Landske.
Thirteen Democrats voted no: Senators Arnold, Breaux, Broden, Hume, Lanane, Mrvan, Randolph, Rogers, Skinner, Stoops, Tallian, Taylor and Richard Young.
The Budget
Then about midnight the budget passed the House 70-30, followed by passage in the Senate 39-11 about 12:45am.
The budget bill had several provisions regarding vouchers.
Assessing the Damage Done to Public Education
It took me 24 hours to contemplate the deep damage done to public education on Friday, the final day of the 2013 legislative session. Then, my cold turned into bronchitis, which further delayed this depressing summary.
Just one year ago on the last day of the 2012 session, a happy surprise emerged as our efforts to kill the school scholarship expansion bill succeeded and other bad ideas disappeared.
This year was a completely different story. The last day was hard on public education.
It wasn’t just that the voucher expansion bill, opposed by so many with message after message, passed the House 55-44 and the Senate 27-23.
It wasn’t just that the budget gave a meager tuition support increase of $132 million (2%) in the first year and $201 million (an extra 1%) in the second year – less than the 1.6% cost of living rise reported in the revenue forecast -- in a year when Indiana had such a large surplus that tax give-backs of $1.1 billion were planned for the next four years.
It wasn’t just that the Indiana Chamber of Commerce’s language rewriting Public Law 221 was adopted in the A-F revision bill, along with putting the “A” through “F” labels in law in House Bill 1427, which passed the House 54-44 and the Senate 34-15.
It was the totality of these setbacks along with a totally unexpected “kick-in-the-teeth”: Without hearings or any debate, language was passed in the budget bill allowing anyone with a bachelor’s degree who passes a subject matter test to participate in the transition to teaching program. This language eliminates the need to meet a 2.5 GPA or a 3.0 GPA if the “recent college graduate” (with no definition of “recent”) can pass the “state approved content area examination in the subject area that the individual intends to teach.” This is apparently designed to give the new subject area tests created by Pearson more customers.
This left me thinking about the first supermajority I have observed in my 17 sessions of watching the General Assembly and crying “overreach!” The supermajority had the power to pass these controversial items in the fine print of the budget, and they did it. I learned about the teacher licensing gambit at noon on Friday, and by 1am Saturday when the budget bill passed the Senate, it was law. I am wondering how many legislators knew about these items when they voted on the 279 page budget.
Incredible.
Can public school advocates do anything about it?
Yes.
They can resolve to get active in the next election. Really active.
I must defer further analysis of the budget and the historic HB 1427 to another day to avoid my friend Bob Pychinka’s claim that he feels like he’s reading War and Peace when he reads my “Notes.”
Thanks for supporting public education in the 2013 session of the Indiana General Assembly!
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
ICPE is working to promote public education and oppose privatization of schools in the Statehouse. I keep hearing reports that some public school supporters read these “Notes” with great interest but don’t translate that interest into joining ICPE. We had an outstanding lobbyist Joel Hand working hard to support public education throughout the session. We need additional memberships and donations to make the final payment on his contract for the session. We need your help! Please join us! Thanks to all who have joined or sent extra donations recently!
Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information.
Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:
I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.
Vic’s Statehouse Notes #142 REVISED AND CORRECTED – May 1, 2013
Dear Friends,
It took last-minute changes and precisely-timed legislative maneuvering to complete passage of the voucher expansion bill on the last day of the session. As I left the Statehouse at 1am Saturday morning after both the voucher bill and the budget bill had passed, I was celebrating the small victory public school advocates had in stopping the inclusion of D schools in the voucher distribution plan.
The Final Day Story of House Bill 1003
I arrived at the Statehouse Friday on the final day to discover that the Conference Committee Report #2 for HB 1003 that I wrote about Thursday in “Notes #139” was not the final plan. They were still negotiating, I was told.
I thought, “Good, they don’t have the votes in the Senate to pass the D school plan.”
The Senate had narrowly passed the voucher bill 27-23. A shift of three votes on the final vote would kill the bill. Senator Waltz had told me directly last Monday that he had “drawn a line” and would not vote for any final version that went beyond the provisions of the Senate version. The D-school plan advocated by Rep. Behning clearly was an expansion of the Senate version, so I thought that including the D-school plan would jeopardize the final vote in the Senate.
As the afternoon wore on, no final version of the voucher bill emerged and the talk on the floor was that the voucher bill was somehow holding up the budget bill. There was even talk of coming back on Monday.
Then we heard that a new budget was coming out around 5:00pm. I thought, “This is going slower that the leadership wanted.”
Then about 6:30 pm, a Conference Committee Report #5 of the voucher bill was filed for final consideration. The final version omitted D schools from the voucher distribution plan.
I thought, “Good, they didn’t have the votes in the Senate to pass the D school plan.”
Then the sequence to final voting began. The House Rules Committee heard the bill about 7:00pm to officially shorten the time needed for a vote. Joel Hand had the opportunity to speak for ICPE against the bill one more time. It was clear that only F schools were in the plan. It passed House Rules on a party line vote.
The Senate Rules Committee heard HB 1003 about 9:30pm. Sen. Yoder clearly told the committee the bill affected “F schools only.” It passed Senate Rules on a party line vote.
The House took up HB 1003 for a final vote about 10:15. Rep. Behning introduced his bill by saying vouchers would go to failing schools, not D schools. Rep. Vernon Smith, Rep. Battles, Rep. Errington and Rep. Delaney spoke strongly against the voucher bill, and Rep. Huston and Rep. Tim Brown spoke for the bill. Rep. Delaney ridiculed the new plan for F schools, saying realtors would now put signs out saying “Good news! The neighborhood school just went F, so move here and you get a state voucher for the private school you are already going to.”
Then came the final vote: 55-44 with Rep. Turner not voting. Back in February, eight Republicans had opposed HB 1003, but in this final vote, 13 Republicans joined 31 Democrats in voting “no.” They should all be thanked:
Republicans voting “NO” to vouchers: Representatives Bacon, Baird, Dermody, Koch, Leonard, Mahan, McNamara, Neese, Niemeyer, Saunders, Soliday, Truitt and Wolkins.
Democrats voting “NO” to vouchers: Representatives Austin, Bartlett, Battles, Bauer, C. Brown, Candelaria Reardon, Delaney, Dvorak, Errington, Forestal, GiaQuinta, Goodin, Hale, Harris, Kersey, Klinker, Lawson, Macer, Moed, Moseley, Niezgodski, Pelath, Pierce, Porter, Pryor, Riecken, Shackleford, V. Smith, Stemler, Summers and VanDenburgh.
HB 1003 arrived for the final vote in the Senate about 11:30 pm. Senator Yoder presented the bill, saying the final version was “similar to the Senate version.” He said students in “failing schools” could go to the school of their choice. Senators Taylor and Stoops spoke against the bill. Then, in closing, Senator Yoder said we should “get kids out of failing schools,” schools that “can’t get their act together.”
I thought of William Bell School #60 and the injustice done to their brand new program which under arcane rules was labeled an “F” school. I thought of Nora Elementary doing a fantastic job of educating a student population that is 70% non-English speaking immigrants but catching no breaks when students who don’t speak English can’t pass the English portion of ISTEP+ for their age level.
Then came the vote. The Senate vote was 27-23, identical to the first Senate vote on April 10th. The leadership, by changing the bill to exclude the D schools, had held on to all of the key votes that many public school advocates had peppered with messages in the past week in hopes of a reversal, Senators Bray, Nugent, Paul, Steele and Waltz. All remained “Yes” votes.
All 23 Senators voting “No” should be thanked for their votes:
Ten Republicans voted no: Senators Alting, Becker, Head, Mishler, Tomes, Waterman, Charbonneau, Glick, Grooms, and Landske.
Thirteen Democrats voted no: Senators Arnold, Breaux, Broden, Hume, Lanane, Mrvan, Randolph, Rogers, Skinner, Stoops, Tallian, Taylor and Richard Young.
The Budget
Then about midnight the budget passed the House 70-30, followed by passage in the Senate 39-11 about 12:45am.
The budget bill had several provisions regarding vouchers.
- The voucher minimums went up from $4500 to $4700 in the first year of the budget and $4800 in the second year. That added $800,000 to the cost of the bill but this apparently didn’t bother Senator Waltz’s “line” since it was in the budget bill.
- The $1000 school scholarship from an SGO required to get a voucher the following year was dropped to $500 to ease the path to a voucher.
- $25 million each year was made available at the discretion of the Budget Committee to protect the promised amounts for public schools if the number of vouchers siphons off unexpected amounts. This was perhaps the biggest victory in ICPE’s efforts to point out the fiscal damage to public schools that would come with voucher expansion. ICPE’s claim that the first year damage would be $23 million was verified by the decision to put $25 million in this augmentation fund.
Assessing the Damage Done to Public Education
It took me 24 hours to contemplate the deep damage done to public education on Friday, the final day of the 2013 legislative session. Then, my cold turned into bronchitis, which further delayed this depressing summary.
Just one year ago on the last day of the 2012 session, a happy surprise emerged as our efforts to kill the school scholarship expansion bill succeeded and other bad ideas disappeared.
This year was a completely different story. The last day was hard on public education.
It wasn’t just that the voucher expansion bill, opposed by so many with message after message, passed the House 55-44 and the Senate 27-23.
It wasn’t just that the budget gave a meager tuition support increase of $132 million (2%) in the first year and $201 million (an extra 1%) in the second year – less than the 1.6% cost of living rise reported in the revenue forecast -- in a year when Indiana had such a large surplus that tax give-backs of $1.1 billion were planned for the next four years.
It wasn’t just that the Indiana Chamber of Commerce’s language rewriting Public Law 221 was adopted in the A-F revision bill, along with putting the “A” through “F” labels in law in House Bill 1427, which passed the House 54-44 and the Senate 34-15.
It was the totality of these setbacks along with a totally unexpected “kick-in-the-teeth”: Without hearings or any debate, language was passed in the budget bill allowing anyone with a bachelor’s degree who passes a subject matter test to participate in the transition to teaching program. This language eliminates the need to meet a 2.5 GPA or a 3.0 GPA if the “recent college graduate” (with no definition of “recent”) can pass the “state approved content area examination in the subject area that the individual intends to teach.” This is apparently designed to give the new subject area tests created by Pearson more customers.
This left me thinking about the first supermajority I have observed in my 17 sessions of watching the General Assembly and crying “overreach!” The supermajority had the power to pass these controversial items in the fine print of the budget, and they did it. I learned about the teacher licensing gambit at noon on Friday, and by 1am Saturday when the budget bill passed the Senate, it was law. I am wondering how many legislators knew about these items when they voted on the 279 page budget.
Incredible.
Can public school advocates do anything about it?
Yes.
They can resolve to get active in the next election. Really active.
I must defer further analysis of the budget and the historic HB 1427 to another day to avoid my friend Bob Pychinka’s claim that he feels like he’s reading War and Peace when he reads my “Notes.”
Thanks for supporting public education in the 2013 session of the Indiana General Assembly!
Best wishes,
Vic Smith
ICPE is working to promote public education and oppose privatization of schools in the Statehouse. I keep hearing reports that some public school supporters read these “Notes” with great interest but don’t translate that interest into joining ICPE. We had an outstanding lobbyist Joel Hand working hard to support public education throughout the session. We need additional memberships and donations to make the final payment on his contract for the session. We need your help! Please join us! Thanks to all who have joined or sent extra donations recently!
Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information.
Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:
I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)