School district budget forums showcase half-truths, contempt for the public

By Laurie H. Rogers

“As long as he keeps the bad people rich and the good people scared, no one'll touch him. ... What chance does Gotham have when good people do nothing?”

- The Rachel Dawes character in “Batman Begins”

How much does it cost to educate a child? Has anyone in education EVER answered this question? I’ve asked around, and nobody provides a number, but they’re all certain they need more money.

Districts keep saying K-12 education has suffered massive cuts. This stunning deceit is winning hearts and minds – largely because media lapdogs refuse to investigate. Repeat after me: There is no money shortage in K-12 public education. There are very few bottom-line cuts. Money has been shifted – away from classrooms and toward adults. Various groups complain about each other, but they’re all to blame.

Around $700 billion (from all sources) is now spent per year on K-12 education. About $15.6 billion in state appropriations is spent in Washington alone (in the link provided, select "Public Schools" for the "agency").  Spokane Public Schools spends about half-a-billion dollars in operating, capital projects, debt service and other costs for 28,000+ children. The per-student cost could easily pay for private schools for all. Yet, this financial largesse fails to properly educate most students. That’s because most districts refuse to do what needs to be done.

In January, 2012, a coalition sued the state, claiming that school districts weren’t being properly funded. Some districts used taxpayer dollars to help pay the legal fees. The coalition won the lawsuit, and a new committee (see page 26) will figure out how to squeeze taxpayers for more. The court retained jurisdiction over the case, further muddying the separation between judicial and legislative. And that new money is unlikely to help the children because districts will still refuse to do what needs to be done.

If you think education expenditures are ridiculous now, wait until the bill arrives for the federal government’s Common Core initiatives (the national standards, tests, and curricula in all subjects, plus a data system that’s designed to share student information across states and agencies without parent knowledge or consent). That money squeeze will be – to borrow from the president – unprecedented.

Last week, Spokane Public Schools (SPS) held two forums on its budget. They did do three things right.

1. They held the forums.
2. They answered some questions about district operations.
3. They stayed late at the June 7 forum because questions were still being asked.

That’s where the praise stops.

Of five board directors, only Bob Douthitt attended both forums. Directors Jeff Bierman and Rocky Treppiedi attended neither. No one in the Spokane TV/print media appears to have attended, and there has been zero media coverage of concerns expressed there. The president of the Spokane Education Association didn’t attend, and the only local legislator or candidate I saw was John Ahern.

This district is the city’s largest employer, the state’s second-largest district, manager of a half-a-billion-dollar budget, caretaker and (alleged) educator of 28,000+ children, and also is under investigation by the Public Disclosure Commission for possible violations of state law. The lack of interest in citizen concerns – coupled with the district’s defensive and combative responses to citizens – reflects a dismal level of caring about the public’s best interests. It appears that district leaders really don’t give a rip.

At these two forums on the budget, it was astounding to see the amount of information that the leadership didn’t appear to know about the budget, such as how much is spent on the classroom or on the Department of Teaching and Learning (T&L). They couldn’t say, didn’t have it with them, couldn’t find it, or would answer by diverting to what other districts do. There was little interest shown in the public’s inherent right to know details of expenditures. Had I jumped up and dissented every time I heard something I knew to be wrong; that didn’t answer the question; that was shaded in favor of looking better or worse than the truth, or that told just part of the truth, I would hardly have sat down at all.

The June 4, 2012 budget forum:

At the June 4 forum, Citizen A said SPS’s school board budget was nearly $1 million (a figure not provided in any district presentation I’ve ever seen). And still the board overspent it by more than $66,000. If the board can’t stay on budget, the citizen asked, “how are they ever going to balance the budget for the rest of us?”

The answer to that lies in the district’s F-195 reports on OSPI’s Web site. Increasingly, Spokane Public Schools’ budgets are higher than anticipated revenue. This year, the district expects to get $308 million in revenue. They said a “maintenance” budget will cost $310 million. Yet, they’re proposing to spend $317 million, taking the extra from their Fund Balance.

About that million-dollar board budget, Associate Superintendent Mark Anderson said the state requires districts to charge legal services, elections, and auditing costs to the board budget. Who knew? The district doesn’t note those sub-categories in its Financial Report or itemize them separately.

Also according to the Financial Report, the budget category of “Instruction” includes the sub-categories of the Department of Teaching and Learning (T&L), with its $100,000+ salaries; the principals, with their $100,000+ salaries; counseling and health services; and other categories. The district's budget presentations don’t mention these, so the public has little idea of how “Instruction” is calculated or how it’s enlarged by administrative bloat. Other categories also have their own unmentioned sub-categories.

Anderson, Douthitt and Director of Finance Linda McDermott said they “can’t” report these details about expenditures because the format of the F-195 report is “prescribed.” They said this earnestly and emphatically (and with an air of finality), as if a) OSPI’s prescribed format means citizens can’t get something more expansive; b) that’s the end of the discussion; and c) taxpayers should just accept not being able to know how our dollars are spent.

If it did occur to administrators that they could build a different, more-detailed report for taxpayers, they’ve obviously rejected that idea. McDermott invited Citizen A downtown to talk about the budget – a seemingly helpful, friendly idea – but actually an inefficient, ineffective, and expensive way to handle public disclosure. How does that inform anyone else?

How absurd that at a budget forum, administrators and the board president refused to entertain the concept of providing taxpayers and voters with easy access to critical pieces of budget information.

On June 5, I emailed McDermott to ask for a breakdown of the sub-categories. Citizen A had been offered budget details if she went downtown and got them, but McDermott said I would have to file a Public Records Request (PRR) for the same information. (Please recall the district’s public and legislative attacks on certain public records requestors, including yours truly.)

I questioned this, and McDermott sent an email on June 6 saying she would need time to pull records and that I had the option to file a PRR. I didn’t realize from her email that she had changed her position. I decided to ask about this at the June 7 forum the next evening.

Also at the June 4 forum, McDermott said there would be “pretty significant curriculum adoptions that we will be purchasing in the next few years. You may or may not have heard about the Common Core State Standards initiatives.” She said the first phase “will start in the 2012-13 school year.”

Clearly they’re planning to buy Common Core curricula. I asked Superintendent Nancy Stowell why they would set aside millions of taxpayer dollars for curricula that are untested, unproved, unfunded, and unseen. (Stowell said T&L director Tammy Campbell did go to DC to view some part of it. But Campbell doesn’t have a math background.) Stowell said they’re just setting aside money and aren’t yet ready to buy, thus contradicting what the budget presentation, the school board and her own administrators already indicated.

I asked if we would at least get rid of reform math and excessive constructivism, and Stowell did not say “yes.” She said, “None of those materials will go away, but there needed to be some additional materials.” Not only will Spokane taxpayers have to pay for the unproved CCSS, we won’t even get rid of Investigations in Number, Data, and Space and the even-worse Connected Mathematics – two of the worst math programs on the face of this planet.

That pretty much reflects the trend across the country. Districts that had escaped reform hell are facing a new round of it because of the Common Core, while Spokane students never even got a breather.

The June 7, 2012 forum:

Before the June 7 forum began, McDermott handed me a list of sub-categories containing sparse financial data. I didn’t know what to make of it. During the forum, I asked why I had to file a records request to obtain information that every taxpayer and voter should have. I was astonished when she said she’d already told me I didn’t need to file a records request (that was news to me), claimed she’d already provided the information I requested (obviously not, since I don’t have all of it), and appeared to excuse herself by telling the room that I didn’t answer her June 6 email.

Other citizens argued for their need and right to have budget details, but the leadership didn’t budge. Douthitt said the district doesn’t have time for this kind of disclosure, that expenditure detail was just a “quirky little thing” that Laurie Rogers wanted, and that if I got it, it would only make four or five of my friends happy. “It isn’t going to happen,” he stated. At some point, the superintendent cut off the discussion.

I asked how much is spent on the Department of T&L. There was a moment of silence. They looked at each other. Director of the Budget Craig Skillestad began rifling through his briefcase. I waited – staring at Stowell, Anderson, McDermott, Campbell, Douthitt and Skillestad – while noting another absurdity. At this budget forum – with about a million dollars worth of salary, standing right there – no one seemed to know how many taxpayer dollars are spent on Teaching and Learning. The forum eventually ended, and they all left without ever giving me an answer.

Stowell claimed on June 7 that 62 cents of every dollar goes directly to the classroom. But on June 4, McDermott said it was 60 cents. I doubt it’s even that high. It all depends on what they stick in their definition of “classroom.” I’d like to see them prove either number. Hey, if citizens had a breakdown of the budget by sub-category, we’d all know how much it is. (Perhaps that’s why they don’t provide it.)

In response to a question about the children’s free-meals program, Stowell said only children are fed with it. However, the evidence suggests that the district purposefully solicited adults to eat for free so they could reach a 70% level of participation.

Rep. Ahern asked why the district needs 110 people each making more than $100,000 per year, and Anderson answered by saying the district spends less than other districts and so “we’re efficient.” (This is neither a logical argument nor an answer to Ahern’s question.) I repeated Ahern’s question, and Stowell answered by saying the district needs to spend that kind of money to get the best people. (This argument is not well supported by the evidence, nor does it answer the question of “why so many?”)

At both forums, administrators continually responded like this – by diverting or by pointing to what other districts and other states do – instead of actually answering the question.

In their presentations, Anderson and McDermott said SPS has extra money and is figuring out new ways to spend it. I asked why they wouldn’t just give that money back to taxpayers, but no one answered that. When another citizen persisted in his line of questioning, the superintendent openly laughed at him. Anderson also told that citizen, “No, you’re not thinkin’ right.” “I’m not thinking right?” the citizen asked. “No, you’re not,” Anderson replied. “We can sit down and explain it to you. I’m not taking ... You’re not gettin’ it,” and he pointed to his own head, perhaps to show the citizen where a brain might be.

It was a shocking display of obstruction, weak arguments, unsupported claims, mocking disrespect for the audience, lack of concern for transparency, and willful non-disclosure.

The Spokesman-Review, which seems not to have sent anyone to either forum, has printed PR pieces before and after the forums to assure us all that Spokane Public Schools is spending our money wisely. I’m loath to call this “media coverage.”

So, this is what we have. A stunning abdication of responsibility for informing the public, insufficient transparency or accountability, little substance or logic, zero media investigation, no consequences, barriers against the public, and no apparent shame for a refusal to properly educate the children.

We aren’t losing control of this school district; we’ve already lost it. Please care about that, folks. The future of your children and grandchildren is on the line.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is
Rogers, L. (June 2012). "School district budget forums showcase half-truths, contempt for the public." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was republished June 12, 2012 on Education Views at: http://educationviews.org/school-district-budget-forums-showcase-half-truths-contempt-for-the-public/

This article was republished June 19, 2012 on Education News at: http://www.educationnews.org/k-12-schools/laurie-rogers-school-district-budget-forums-show-contempt-for-public/

Your choice is Accountability with Fullmer --- or more of the same with Brower

By Laurie H. Rogers


Do you think the school district is being run well? Do you want it to remain as is? When a board candidate says "we" -- should that refer to "we, the people," or "we, the district leadership"? Your answers to these questions will bear on how you'll vote this week for the District 81 school director position. I hope a majority of voters clearly sees that serious change is needed and that the candidate who will work for that change is Sally Fullmer. Her commitment to the voters was apparent beyond a shadow of a doubt last night in Spokane at "Face Off at Ferris."

The Leadership Class at Ferris High School has much to be proud of today. That class again gave city residents a good look at how journalism could be done in Spokane. The first half of the "Face Off" dealt with the school director race, and the questions chosen by the Leadership Class were relevant, hard-hitting, and fair. I said - and I heard people around me saying - "Those are great questions!" If we had print reporters in this town asking similar questions, we might actually get somewhere.

Well done, folks. I'm immensely proud of all of you.

Immediately below is a table indicating the topics of last night's questions, and whether the candidate's answers appeared to me to align with the district and/or union leadership's positions. If you doubt my interpretation of the candidates' comments, following the table is a transcript of the school director portion of "Face Off" - minus the candidates' opening and closing statements.

Candidate's Comments Align with the Interests, Positions or Plans of the District Leadership and/or Union Leadership?

	Comments align with district/union	Comments align with district/union
	Brower	Fullmer
1. Where is the district money going?	yes
2. How is mathematics being taught?	yes
3. What is the state/federal role in education?	yes
4. Why were no Spokane schools graded as exemplary?	yes
5. What is your top priority?	yes
6. Explain your approach to transparency.	yes
7. Is Sally Fullmer a one-issue candidate?	yes
8. What do you think about the Tacoma teacher strike?	yes
9. Do you support assessing teachers on other than seniority?	yes
10. How will you assure taxpayers you answer to them?	yes
11. What's your view of federal mandates?	yes
12. What's your view of "green" schools?	yes
13. Do you think the superintendent is paid too much?	yes
14. Why do private schools cost less and achieve more?	yes
15. Who benefits from unions?	yes

Transcript of questions asked of school-director candidates at the Oct. 17, 2011, "Face Off at Ferris"

Question 1: Spokane Public Schools is spending more than it ever has, and yet, since the year 2000, the number of students has decreased by nearly 3,000. If the money is not going to the students, where is it going?

Sally Fullmer: That is an excellent question, and that’s one of the things I think needs to be looked into. No administrator is left behind when it comes to pay in the Spokane Public Schools. We have 110 administrators who make more than $100,000. These are people that are not directly teaching the children. So I think we need fewer administrators. We need to look at what they’re doing and if that’s necessary. Our teachers are professionals; they don’t need to be micromanaged by instructional coaches. We also don’t need to be paying our superintendent more than the governor. The administrator salaries would be a good place to start. We need to spend the money as close to the classroom as possible so that the money is going to education of the students. The money per student is around $12,000 per student; that’s if you don’t include capital projects and debt service. I think we need to demand results for the money we’re putting into the public schools.

Deana Brower: I agree we need to have high expectations and look for results for our students. The cost structures in education are very interesting right now. I think we have to look at where the money goes, education, certainly goes towards teacher salaries and books and things of that nature. But we also have buildings to maintain, heat and light, and these expenses have gone up significantly in the last couple years. I know I’m paying more for gasoline and food in my family’s budget and I know the school district is doing the same. This topic has come up and I wanted to get some concrete numbers. One of the areas I find interesting is insurance. In 2005, our district paid on average per employee, paid about $650 per employee. And it’s gone up to $1,100, almost double.

Question 2: Is it true that District 81’s math program fails to adequately prepare a majority of students for college-level math? An example of this is that 98% of the Running Start students must take remedial math at the college level. What is the problem, and what specifically would you do to alleviate this math crisis?

Deana Brower: I think math is an interesting topic and one that we – our district is taking a very close look at. I was fortunate enough to attend a math summit late last spring where the math curriculum was discussed in great detail, and I was encouraged by what I was hearing. There is a call, definitely an interest in a return to procedural proficiency, and I appreciate that as a parent and as a volunteer in our school district. But then I also heard that we need balance, we need good solid practice in our math classes, we need application that gives students an opportunity to apply what they’ve learned in more abstract situations. So I appreciated that. What you have shared, goes against a little bit of some data my opponent and I received (at the) Citizens Advisory Committee last Monday, a week ago. We have some information to share. Those numbers for community college students going into math were much lower. So I would like to know where those numbers are coming from. We saw with our dropout rate not long ago that there was some discrepancy between how things were calculated. I’d like to know how they were calculated so that we can make sure we’re directing the proper services where they need to go, and not giving them to a number that’s more, maybe, “inflated or exaggerated.” All that aside, we need solid curriculum, we need our students to be college and career ready, and I feel that we’re moving in that direction. I’m very pleased with the direction we’re going.

Sally Fullmer: I think we need some major changes in our math program. It’s very important for people to understand statistics, and how studies are done, and how statistics can be used to say whatever a person wants to have them say. Right now, our board has refused to put a better math curriculum in place, especially in junior high. They started to put it in place in the high schools, and yet they’re micromanaging the teachers and not allowing them to teach from the book. Our kids have got to be taught the basics in math and given the tools with which to move forward in math. So, basics in arithmetic, then they can be given the problem solving and taught the concepts. This has become a big issue for all of you parents who have ever tried to help your kids with their math homework or have been shocked when your kids go to college after getting As in honors classes and have to go take remedial classes that you have to pay for. To me, this is a very core issue that must be addressed immediately. We can’t wait.

Question 3: Do you believe state and federal government has too much input in our schools? Critics say we should reduce the role of government and return control of our schools to our elected school boards. What do you say?

Sally Fullmer: I believe it is certainly moving in the wrong direction. Our governor and state superintendent of public instruction, as well as our state legislature, have already signed us over to national core curriculum, standards, where basically the federal government will have more control. Corporations will get in on the act. Pearson Corporation and others [couldn’t hear] a curriculum to the whole country. We need to retain local control so that our elected officials can choose from a variety of curriculum and choices, and not have one mandated by the federal government to rule them all – one way that things have to be done, because I think choice is what is best. It is part of our state duty to fund education, and so I believe the state has a definite role in that, but I think anything the federal government takes over and becomes a monopoly – creates more problems than it solves. I did not want to see us move in that direction. However, our school board has already set aside $500,000 for the nationalized math curriculum, and that is going to cost about 4 times that amount – even though they haven’t seen it yet and don’t know totally what’s in it. Instead of fixing it now and putting the books into place that will help the kids now, they’re waiting for this curriculum. That’s not great if you’re one of those kids that’s losing this year of math instruction.

Deana Brower: Because my opponent brought up [can’t hear] in that example, I would like to point out that my son Joshua in 7th grade uses Holt Math textbooks. I’ve yet to see him use a calculator. He may have lost it for all I know. But our kids use a solid math curriculum. The curriculum that my opponent referred to – the common core – our district has – these are not coming down from the federal government. These are programs that as a school board, as a school district you can opt into. Forty states nationally have opted into this curriculum, and I think that at times there, it can be very beneficial in the world of education to not recreate the wheel, but rather come together, combine resources and put together a solid program from which everyone can benefit. We see all too often kids going out-of-state to colleges, and it’s very nice to see children competing nationally.

Question 4: The state board of education recently graded all of the schools in the state. Not one Spokane public school received the highest ranking of exemplary. What are some of the reasons for this, and what would you do to fix it?

Deana Brower: I think we’re doing a lot of things really well in our district, but we still have much more [can’t hear]. And I can say that with [six?] years of experience working on our Middle School Advisory Committee. I think that’s a great example where a group of folks were brought together to say, “All right. We have a problem. We have concerns over our dropout. How are we going to solve those issues?” Well, Priority Spokane came together and met, and said let’s look at .. They did a study. They said, “You can immediately identify - very quickly identify - your at-risk students while they’re in junior high.” And they listed the factors. So, as a school district, we can get right on those factors. And we’re in that process of momentum and change right now. It’s a very exciting time. It’s a time that I’m excited to be involved in our schools. We‘ve got great programs in place like the ICan program in middle schools, and programs like Avid in science, uh academy. All sorts of great programs to help our students achieve opportunities for themselves. We have more students here in Spokane going off to four-year colleges than the state-wide average. We know the direction that we’re headed, and we need to look at the programs that are working well, and support them, and encourage those programs [can’t hear].

Sally Fullmer: If you’re going to solve a problem or look at an issue, the first thing is to be willing to admit that there is a problem. That is something I think sometimes our district has trouble doing. They’re very good at public relations, and that’s great, putting the best foot forward, and that’s important. But you also have to be willing to look at where you do have problems, figure out the best methods, [can’t hear], and then have the courage to implement that, rather than just trying to cover them up. So, it goes back to making sure we have strong curriculum. We already have great teachers, but many of them are being micromanaged by the administrators - the instructional coaches - who are telling them how they want things to be taught and when they want things to be taught. We need to give our teachers the freedom to teach.

Question 5: If you could implement one school reform within existing resources by reprioritizing funds and staff time, what would you push for?

Sally Fullmer: I’m going to go back to the math again because I think math is the new reading. To get a good job in many fields, you have to understand your math. We need to have kids be ready. I’ve been talking to business owners who say, "I can’t find employees that can make change or handle customers – or the basic things in math." We have industries that can’t find the employee base they need in Spokane because the kids don’t have the level of math they need. This is not the kids’ fault. This has not been offered to them. And I don’t blame the teachers, because they had to work with great constraints with the curriculum and constant experimentation. Teacher-directed learning to get the basic tools is where it starts [can’t hear]. So I would change the math curriculum and let the teachers loose to teach.

Deana Brower: I would be very interested in seeing a continuation of our improvement in our graduation rate. I think we need to make sure that every student who graduates from any of our schools are college and career ready for a path of success when they leave our schools. And it doesn’t just come from the math. Math is important. I agree, wholeheartedly. But we have a spectrum of subject areas that we teach to and that we’re dedicated to, and we need to make sure we’re meeting all the students. Direct instruction works very well for many students, but for some students, they need alternative programs. We need to make sure that their needs are being met and that we are taking them through their educational experience with what their opportunities [can’t hear] their potential. I’d like to see programs that have had great success be encouraged and grown [can’t hear].

Question 6: Would you support putting the detailed budget and union contract agreements online for everyone to see, and is it true that people have to file a public disclosure petition to get full details of Spokane School board meeting minutes?

Deana Brower: I absolutely support full disclosure. I think it’s a contract agreement between elected officials and the public. I think a good example of that is that I worked very hard just three years ago on our last bond and levy election. I was the speaker’s bureau chair, and I was out in the community asking for money for this very remodel at Ferris High School, levy funds to pay for that music program that you heard as you came in. We worked very hard for that. I went out in the public and asked for support for these programs. Therefore, I am a steward of that [can’t hear], and I look forward to being a good steward of those dollars on the school board. In terms of requesting public records, I would be all for having records more easily accessible. Absolutely. I think there are times in contract negotiations where there are issues of sensitivity and I think we have to respect that. We’re dealing with the second largest employer in the City Spokane, and there can be very difficult contract negotiations from time to time in discussions. I have to trust that those who have gone before me know - were giving guidance on that. But I absolutely agree with full disclosure on school board meetings.

Sally Fullmer: As I said in my opening, that’s one of the things I really want to see improve: full disclosure. I recently wanted to look more at the budget. The 185-page budget is available online, but this 40-page document that has [explanatory figures] that you can’t get without putting in a public records request. So I had to put a public records request to get that. And then to get the code for that, you have to go to some other Web site. I’ll go to read the minutes of the meetings – Quite often, they’ll talk about we’re going to change this policy or that policy, and just have a number, and then you are left to go find that policy. Quite often, you can’t find that anywhere without filing another records request. So, we definitely need to improve on that. Transparency when we’re asking the public for money is crucial. If we’re going to say, collect levy money from people, then we need to know where that’s going [can’t hear].

Question 7: (To Sally Fullmer) Some people think you are a one-issue candidate, concerned with the location of Jefferson school. True or false, and if not, please explain.

Sally Fullmer: False. I’m not a one-issue candidate. I think I’ve made that clear from my opening. You can go to my Web site http://www.seewhatsallysays.com/ and read a lot about all of the issues I’m concerned about. It is true that I don’t want Jefferson School to be moved. And I am a member of an organization that filed a lawsuit to hold the district accountable for what they put on their bonds and levies. On the 2009 bond, they said they were going to modernize four schools, and Jefferson was one of them. And instead, they decided to move the school six blocks away onto Lewis & Clark High School athletic fields. The court will simply clarify whether they can actually use that money to move something and build new buildings instead of modernize it. Everyone is excited about a new Jefferson – either a remodel or a new building – It’s a question of, was it transparency in the bond to use that language. So that is my involvement in that. Because of that involvement, I’ve also found what it’s like to go before the school board when you’re on the other side of an issue. You get a little bit different reception than when you have the same viewpoint as the board does. That is why I’m so keen on respect for students, parents, teachers, and taxpayers. The board is elected officials, so when the people come to talk to you, they should be respected. We have this problem in our city council – we need people to be respected when they come down to speak to elected officials. So that’s a thing that I would really like to see improve.

Deana Brower: As far as I know, my opponent has not been involved in our schools in a voluntary capacity beyond our neighborhood school and the discussion of this move. If you look at the effort to make broad progress in our schools, you see individuals who put themselves out to volunteer on committees, and work with our educators and our parents to bring improvement to our schools. I haven’t seen this. I’ve seen a candidate come forth out of anger, with one particular situation, and I don’t think that that’s broad enough for the leadership we need of our entire school district. I also find, when you talk about transparency, that we have one individual funding my opponent with $3,850. I think that’s very, very significant in this race. So in terms of independence and transparency, we have to take that into consideration.

Question 8: Recently, teachers in Tacoma went on strike, defying state law and a judge’s order to return to work. Documents now show it was part of a larger plan by the teachers union. Did the WEA want to send a painful message to parents and lawmakers? Do you see the same thing happening in Spokane? And if so, what would be your reaction?

Deana Brower: I don’t know what WEA – I’m not privy to their discussions, but what I do know is that I have the endorsement of our education association. I’m very proud of that. I have a good working relationship with our educators in Spokane. I’m very proud of that. I also have a good working relationship with administrators, and former superintendents and former school board members. And what that allows us to do in situations, unlike Tacoma … in most school districts across America, the breakdown happens between management and labor. That’s where the lockout happens. That’s where the problems arise. When you have school board members who have good working relationships, and strong collaborative, problem-solving history with our educators and our administrators and our parent community, I think that allows those situations to be worked out long before they turn into the situation like we saw in Tacoma. I’m very, very proud of the working relationships that I’ve established, and I look forward to bringing that to our school board, and I think we need those relationships now more than ever.

Sally Fullmer: I have a hard time with people who have a great-paying job, paid for by the public, who refuse to go to work and do their job. They need to work out their problems some other way. I’m opposed to public employees striking. So that’s where I am with that.
As far as the other volunteering in the public schools – Deana’s only been here for six years and was in California previous to that. So she doesn’t realize what I’ve been doing since 1999 – volunteering in the classrooms with my kids, being involved in the music programs at LC, in the sports programs. I was involved [can’t hear] and working in the classrooms there also. So that’s just a lack of information on her part.
I also would like to talk about support and endorsements. I’m pleased to have many private citizens endorsing me, and some of them have given large sums of money to counteract and allow me to get my message out, because I don’t have the backing of the union and their money and all of the other ways that they support Deana, which I’ll talk about later.

Question 9: Would you support strengthening District 81’s ability to retain or place teachers based on criteria rather than seniority?

Sally Fullmer: Yes, I would. I think it’s really important that we have the best teachers that we can for our students. I think teachers are professionals, and we need to make sure that when we hire teachers, that they’re trained and ready to go. I know though, that as you teach and gain experience, you improve, and you learn more about what works and what doesn’t work. And teachers are supportive of each other and helping them that way. So we can’t always tell when we hire someone. So there has to be a process in place. [Can’t hear]. It is very difficult to let go of a teacher who’s not being successful in the classroom. There needs to be additional ways to work on that issue. I wish the unions would come along and say “Hey, we recognize that this is a problem and we want to work on that.” I don’t see that. [Can’t hear] We have to step up and say, “We demand something different now."
(I'll also talk about how) other than money, the union also supports Deana and also the administrators. For one thing, they have brought her into the public schools to speak to teachers during the school day about her candidacy. They have also done a lot of funding through small contributions through individuals and then you don’t have to say who they’re from. So that doesn’t show as a large contribution. There is this newspaper called Kids that’s sent home in every elementary child’s backpack across the city. In September and October, the union put an article in there. It’s actually an ad endorsing Deana and several other Democratic candidates. So to me, that’s the kind of support you can’t pay for. What would that cost be?

Deana Brower: I’ve been an educator for 12 years in the classroom. I taught high school, social studies for 8 years and middle school, social studies and English for four years. I know firsthand the challenges of teaching a classroom, particularly when budgets are in flux like we see right now. We have teachers who are coming on to the job with some of the largest class sizes that we’ve seen in many, many years, and with resources diminishing right before their very eyes. When they were student teaching, they’re coming into their classrooms the first year with conditions unlike anything that they’ve ever seen before. We need to provide support for our education professionals so that they can do the best job that they can. In terms of hiring and retaining, I think we need to support our educators and make sure we’ve got the best teachers working in our district that we can provide our students.

Question 10: (For Deana Brower) You have been endorsed by the teachers unions, received union campaign contributions, and attended union candidate schools. If elected, how will the voters know that you will act in the interests of the community and not the proxy of the unions?

Deana Brower: I’m glad to be able to address that. I’d love to address the financial question. $800. Two $400 checks from the education association, representing 3,000 members, that’s about $.25 per employee. I don’t feel I owe anybody anything for $.25 per person, not that I could be bought that easily anyway. I’ve been criticized for having the support of the education association, and I’m criticized for having the support of the administration. Again, that’s labor, that’s management. If I can work with those two groups successfully, I feel that that is a winning combination for our students in Spokane. My greatest loyalty is to my children and to their generation, and to the legacy of education here in Spokane. That’s where my priorities will be as a school board director. I think that’s significantly different than taking a chunk of money -- Most campaigns you cannot take that kind of money from one candidate. There are campaign contribution limits in most campaigns. $3,850 from one individual who is on record as voting against our levies time and time again is significant in terms of [can’t hear] what would be represented on the school board, and that’s not the voice that I would bring.

Sally Fullmer: Like I said in my opening, I will be an independent voice, not beholden to anyone. If it weren’t for individual citizens helping me get my message out, I wouldn’t have a voice, because the traditional methods that the school uses to contract people using school emails, to contact teachers using school resources, are not available to me. I was not invited to come into the schools to meet with teachers as Deana was. Also, these people have chosen to donate to my campaign because they believe in my message, and they want to help me get it out, and have not asked for anything in return. Although I do know that they are really big on transparency, as I am, and I think the majority of people want to know where the money is going, and what’s happening with that in the school district.

Question 11: School administrators have asserted that local tax dollars are going to Washington, DC, but they’re only getting a fraction of those dollars back. Meanwhile, many federal mandates are unfunded. As a school board member, what would you do to change that?

Sally Fullmer: First of all, I think right now we do have local control over many things, so it is our board’s choice to chase after those federal dollars. They did not have to apply for Race to the Top or any federal grant. We need to look at those monies, and say, “What do you have to do to get that money? Will that benefit our students? Is that going to improve their education? Or is that going to take us down another rabbit trail, and leave us with things we have to do and pay for after the federal money runs out?” When I’ve gone to board meetings, I sometimes felt like all they’re about is where can we get more money? How much money would ever be enough? When are we going to concentrate on making sure we’re getting the best education for the money that we have available to us? So, we do not have to follow the federal mandates. You can challenge federal mandates. School districts across the country are doing that. They’re not accepting that money. They’re not being controlled by that. It usually is a very miniscule amount, that asks you to do a lot more than what we’re getting for that money. So I would challenge that involvement.

Deana Brower: We have to make sure that our mandates are funded. First and foremost. And we have to make sure that the state is honoring its paramount duty in making sure education is a top priority. And that includes fully funding state programs as well. We have had some interesting state financing as of recently. Education finance is very interesting, insofar as, the state kicks the money into school districts that have lower-income rates than other parts of the state. Say, compare Spokane to Bellevue for example. Our property rates are lower here than they are in Bellevue. It’s easy for Bellevue to pull in levy money and support their schools. We have something called levy equalization that the state kicks in. The state is looking to cut levy equalization in the upcoming budget session they’re going into. We have to make sure that money is protected so our schools are fully funded.

Question 12: Studies show that so-called green schools are not as efficient or cost-effective as widely promoted. Please define green schools, and also, should we be spending substantially more of taxpayers’ money to build them?

Deana Brower: Green schools obviously are those that are energy efficient and using energy and environmentally friendly products or materials. It’s funny – just today I saw a news release awarding Shadle High School for their architectural plan. I find it interesting what appeals to say, one group in a population might not appeal to another group. I think when we’re building schools, we have an obligation to our community to make sure that they are friendly to our environment. We owe it to the educating future of our community and our students. We also need to take care of our community and our environment. I’ve heard funding reports both ways, that say it’s right in line with any other spending, and then there’s criticisms that say it’s exorbitant and costs too much. We need to look at that. I’ve not examined the budget of every school built, however, I do feel that our district in general has been good stewards of the bond money. In fact we have the highest rating a school district can have in their bond ratings. And that comes from a review of how that money is being spent, and in maintaining integrity and trust with citizens. So we’ve demonstrated – the district has demonstrated responsibility with [can’t hear] funds, according to this group that evaluates how bond dollars are collected and spent, and a higher financial rating [can’t hear].

Sally Fullmer: When we’re going to build new buildings and modernize schools, I know that at times, there has been extra funding available if the school is built to a certain green standard. One of the things that they found, though, in studies, is sometimes it costs more to build them to that standard and then it costs more to operate them when they’re built that way. I think we have to take a look at those as more of that information is coming in. Of course we want to do the best that we can for our environment at all times. Sometimes the latest trendy green thing in the end doesn’t turn out to be quite as sustainable as it looked in the beginning. So we need to again stick with [can’t hear] proven things and not go off on every new fad that comes along.

Question 13: The amount of money paid to public school superintendents in the state of Washington is a hot topic. Superintendent Dr. Nancy Stowell is paid much more than the state schools chief, and even the governor. Are public school administrators paid too much money?

Sally Fullmer. Yes. And I also believe that their pay in their contracts isn’t tied to the results that they’re getting in the district. Administrators are very keen to tie teachers’ pay and results to what results they get out of the students. But who’s telling the teachers what curriculum to use and what to do? It’s the administrators and the board. So let’s tie the administrative pay to the results of the students, and I think suddenly, they would be much more interested in how the students are doing.

Deana Brower: I think sometimes when we look at things isolated in Spokane, it makes us scratch our head a little bit. Take a step back and look at it state wide, and you start to get perspective. We have the second largest district in the State of Washington, and our superintendent Dr. Stowell doesn’t make the second largest salary, or the third or the fourth or the 8th or the 10th. Her salary is the 12th, and I think that’s a competitive place to be to maintain quality professionals here in our school district. If statewide, that number is too high, and we as a community and we as a state don’t value that level of service for our students, then put it all in check. But we cannot take our one superintendent and look at her out of context. We are, we have, most figures, if you look at district administration is in line, and salaries are in line with what we’re seeing statewide.

Question 14: Deana Brower, you have called for more state taxpayer money for schools. Yet Spokane Catholic schools pay significantly less than the $11-12,000 per student that District 81 spends, and with better measurable results. Is more money really the problem, or is there another issue?

Deana Brower: I would argue the measurable results. I think we do a fine job in our public schools. I’m proud to have my children in our public schools. We are a large, urban school district. 28,000 plus students in our school district. We have 60% of our students on free and reduced lunch, and with that comes responsibility and an obligation to fully serve our students in a way unlike our private schools in our community. We have 24% of our student population are from minority groups. There are challenges. You don’t see that exact population breakdown in our private schools. We have 55 languages being spoken in our public schools. I think all of that provides a very rich culture and diversity in our public schools, but it’s completely different to those challenges faced by private schools in our community. We’re still very fortunate to have strong schools in general – public and private – and I really believe the more investment our community makes into our education – be it public or private or otherwise – it supports our entire system. And I’m very proud just recently of Spokane being named one of the 100 best communities for youth in America. In large part, it’s because of that. We are one of those communities that traditionally supports our levies. We are one of those communities where folks come out and support our education consistently. And that’s where a sense of pride in education comes in our community. I hope to continue that tradition for a good long time.

Sally Fullmer: I don’t believe that a lack of money is the problem. I believe we can educate a student very well for $12,000 a year, and possibly even less. I don’t think there’s any amount of money that would satisfy the ever-growing bureaucracy that is the government school industry. It’s a case of not really looking at what the problem is, and just saying everything’s great. We need to make sure we’re not taking property taxes from people who have an average salary of $32,000-45,000 a year here in Spokane, and using that money to give raises to administrators who are making over $200,000 per year. I think the people of Spokane want their money to be used efficiently and productively.

Question 15: The controversy over teachers unions. Who benefits most from teachers unions – the students or the teachers – and why?

Sally Fullmer: The purpose of teachers unions is to bargain for better conditions for the teachers as workers. I think they’re doing a great job at that. However, their purpose is not to bargain for what’s in the best interests of the students. It’s very important to be clear about that difference. I’m not saying that everything they bargain for couldn’t be in the best interests of the students, for example, class size is obviously in the best interests of the students, so there are times those things overlap, but the primary purpose of the union is to bargain for teachers.

Deana Brower: The union is the teachers. There is no separation. They are educators. They come into this profession to serve our children. And they do a very good job of it. There’s quality of intent, and quality produced. Quality delivered. There are financial situations that enter into the picture. I think that is the business side of education that management and labor have. The more collaborative that relationship is, the better that situation is for everyone.

Accountability, transparency desperately needed for education expenditures

[Edited Nov. 12 to update FTE enrollment based on information provided at the Sept. 28 board meeting, and Nov. 30 to update the proposed levy figure for 2012.]


By Laurie H. Rogers

The British are coming! The British are coming!
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Public education needs more money! Public education needs more money!

One of these statements (had Paul Revere actually said it) was true. One of these statements is obviously false. And the third, well, skies don’t fall, silly.

Taxpayers keep hearing how the funding for public education has been cut. We’re constantly barraged with: “Money is tight.” “We’ve cut the budget to the bone.” “We’re running out of options.” “We’ve done all we can; now we have to cut programs and teachers.” These claims defy explanation. They aren’t true in Spokane. They aren’t true in Washington State. They aren’t true in most other states, and they aren’t true at the federal level. Unfortunately, many people believe them.

A city council candidate insisted recently: “We can’t gut education!” Last week, a Spokane reporter wrote: “Since 2002, Spokane Public Schools has cut $45 million from its budget…” In its budget forums last spring, district administrators and board directors told the public that since 2002, the district has cut $54 million from its budget. Spokane school board candidate Deana Brower has repeatedly said that the district needs more money.

Let’s look at some numbers. Follow the links to the budget documents. See how enrollment has dropped, the budget has grown, and see the district’s tendency to budget for greater expenditures than it has in revenues.

Spokane Public Schools expenditures
	2001-2002	2010-2011	2011-2012
FTE (Full-time enrollment) ** On Nov. 12, this figure was updated based on information provided at a board meeting. Costs per students were recalculated based on this number.	31,518	29,050	28,093
Operating budget	$254.2 million	$316.8 million	$313.3 million
Capital Projects	$14.8 million	$124 million	$142.9 million
Debt Service	$14.2 million	$35.4 million	$37.1 million
Total	$283.2 million	$476.1 million	$493.2 million
Local levy for district, after rollback. Update: The district has indicated an increase in the 2012 levy to $73.3 million.	$36.4 million	$59.5 million	$60.6 million
District expenditures per student (based on operating expenses only).	$8,065	$10,905	$11,152
District expenditures per student (based on operating/capital projects/debt service). There are other expenses not noted here.	$8,985	$16,389	$17,556

This is for just one district, in just one state – a district in which full-time enrollment (FTE) drops nearly every year and the outcomes are dismal. Look at the remedial rates in math for recent graduates from Spokane high schools (put together for me by Spokane Community Colleges). Look at the low rates of success in those remedial math classes.

Spokane Public Schools isn’t alone in its seemingly insatiable appetite for the taxpayer dollar. Taxpayers across the country pay exponentially more dollars – for generally weaker outcomes. Expenses per student have risen dramatically. It seems the districts have plenty of money – perhaps enough to fund a private education for every child. Where is the money going?

Public school administrators argue that they have expenses private schools don’t. That’s a huge generalization. Some private schools do take special education students, for example. Some do have transportation costs. It's true that public schools are subject to legislative mandates; on the other hand, many public schools have expenses like these:

• Flipping curricular materials in and out at dizzying rates, along with a veritable cornucopia of untested curricular supplements;
• Adopting an unproved federal "vision" for public education, including unproved standards, unproved curricula, unproved testing, and an unproved multi-million-dollar data system;
• Buying SMART Boards for each classroom, computers or laptops for every student, calculators for children in all grades (including graphing calculators);
• Paying for endless teacher substitutes because classroom teachers are constantly pulled out of their classrooms for conferences, committees, mentoring, “lab classrooms,” collaboration, and never-ending “professional development”;
• Paying for administrative conferences, studies, social-services programs and other activities that have little or nothing to do with actual academics;
• Designing expensive new school buildings in which insufficient academics are provided;
• Retaining a thick, impermeable layer of redundant, over-paid, micro-managing, spirit-crushing, can’t-get-rid-of-them-no-matter-how-useless-they-are decision-makers;
• Paying stipends to board directors who seem more interested in getting along with administrators than in being transparent and accountable to the people.

See how the percentage of education dollars that go to actual instruction has decreased. In 2007-2008, it was barely above 50%. It’s almost certainly less than that today. It all depends on how one counts it. Consider the U.S. Department of Education’s spirited education handouts:

• $97.4 billion from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA);
• $10 billion in Education Jobs money (Gov. Gregoire took Washington’s “share” of the Ed Jobs money for the General Fund.);
• Approx. $6 billion in three phases of the federal Race to the Top “grant” initiatives;
• All of the ED’s other taxpayer-funded “carrots” (and sticks), as Sec. Arne Duncan works to implement a “federal vision” for public education.

American public education has become Audrey, the monster plant from “Little Shop of Horrors.” “FEED ME!” it bellows in our ears while bleeding us dry. All for the kids, of course.

As I read through emails obtained through public records requests, I can see how much those taxpayer dollars mean to everyone in the school system. No doubt it’s that deep caring that produced nearly 900 emails on Spokane's 2009 bond and levy. In 2009, “Yes for kids!” was the district-wide refrain.

Supposedly, there isn’t enough money to pay for solid math materials or remedial programs, but there’s enough money to pay for more administration, an unproved data system, an unproved nationalized math curriculum, administrator raises (paid from the levy), and the latest techno-toys. The kids aren’t learning enough math or grammar, but Spokane administrator Mark Anderson said he was OK with giving them a pamphlet to take home in their backpack encouraging their mommy and daddy to vote on the bond and levy. Administrator Michael Syron appeared OK with pulling students out of class to talk about the bond and levy. Administrator Steve Fisk appeared OK with using district resources to get 100 students to pass out leaflets on the bond and levy.

Those tykes are darned useful. Maybe next time, administrators can tattoo “Yes for kids” on the children’s forehead. It could save on paper.

On Sept. 28, 2011, I filed a Public Disclosure Commission complaint regarding the district’s efforts regarding the 2009 bond and levy. The PDC complaint also has to do with Deana Brower’s 2011 campaign for the school board.

Brower was a co-chair for Citizens for Spokane Schools, which campaigns for district bonds and levies. She was endorsed by Stand for Children, which campaigned for the Children’s Investment Fund, a ballot initiative. She has hosted a representative from the League of Education Voters, which campaigns for more money for education. She also tends to parrot district administrators’ contention that they desperately need more taxpayer dollars.

In 2010, Mark Anderson and Superintendent Nancy Stowell appeared OK with meeting with Deana Brower and the rest of the leadership team of bond/levy advocacy group Citizens for Spokane Schools. Stowell emailed Brower: “Thanks so much for organizing us!” Stowell later wrote to Brower that she was looking forward to the meeting: “Time to start strategicing.” (sic)

On May 25, 2011, Brower was endorsed by the teachers union as a school board candidate. On June 6, 2011, she filed as a candidate. In June 2011, according to public records, Brower was invited (via district resources) to meet with teachers and staff on school district property. Is anyone out there actually expecting Brower to hold the district and union accountable?

Some people see it as anti-education, anti-schools, even anti-kid to question the education establishment's constant bleating for more money. I think most people have no idea of how much money it really is – or of just how focused on the money the establishment is. It’s time for some tough love.

We’re paying through the nose for a failing public system. Most of us will pay again for multiple remedial classes when our children try to go to college or begin a trade. If the district leadership spent as much time and effort on real academics as it does on trying to get more money, they might actually begin turning out entire classes of college-ready graduates.

This October, when the ballots come out, consider whether you want a board director who’s been working closely with the district and the union, or a board director who knows that school boards should be accountable to the voters and taxpayers.


Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:

Rogers, L. (October 2011). "Accountability, transparency desperately needed for education expenditures." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was published Oct. 10, 2011, on Education Views at: http://educationviews.org/2011/10/10/accountability-transparency-desperately-needed-for-education-expenditures/

This article was published Oct. 10, 2011, on EducationNews at: http://www.educationnews.org/education-policy-and-politics/laurie-rogers-transparency-needed-for-ed-expenditures/

The Lake Wobegon Effect? Or deceit by omission?

[Spokane friends: Ask yourself why you don't see ANY of this questioning in local newspapers.]

By Laurie H. Rogers

In Garrison Keillor’s fictional Lake Wobegon, “all of the women are strong, all of the men are good looking, and all the children are above average.” Keillor’s famous phrase encapsulates the cognitive bias known as “illusory superiority” – a fancy name for the natural tendency we all have to overstate our achievements and positive qualities as compared against others. Because Keillor articulated this bias so well, “illusory superiority” is often called the Lake Wobegon Effect.

The term popped into my head last week while reading various press releases and news articles about Spokane Public Schools. In Spokane, apparently there is no bad news, everyone is always doing better, scores are always going up, and management is always excellent.

(Sarcasm alert.) Administrators are especially remarkable when you consider the difficult job they have of working with the poor, the weak, the incapable, the unknowledgeable, the ungrateful, the uneducated, the stupid, the antagonistic, and the misguided. The consistent gist of their message is, “If only everybody else would carry THEIR weight, you’d see just how positively brilliant we are.” (End sarcasm.)

Hey, here's some fun with acronyms: Administrators in Spokane Public Schools are GNOMES, hindered (so they say) by IT, UP and US.

• GNOME: Good News Only; Management Excellent.
• IT: Ineffective Teachers
• UP: Uninvolved Parents
• US: Unmotivated Students

Ever your humble servant, I give you actual information that isn’t tarnished by the district’s desire to appear competent. Administrators are touting their new focus on “data-driven” decision-making (as if it were a smart new task and not something they should have always done). I offer "celebrations" from these GNOMES, followed by real data. I encourage all ITs, UPs, and USs to share this with others.

The GNOMES celebrate:

“North Central, Lewis and Clark, Ferris and Rogers were named to the 2011 Washington Post top high schools list for the number of students taking AP tests. Only one other Spokane County school made the list.” (Source: “Points of Pride.”)

Laurie says: About the Washington Post ranking

The Washington Post survey is based on how many students take AP tests. It isn’t based on how many pass the classes or how many pass the tests. Therefore, the more students a district shoves into AP classes (ready or not), the higher its Washington Post ranking – even if every student ultimately flunks the tests. Directors and administrators have said that passing the AP test isn’t as important as being in an AP class – that “students learn just by being there.”

The GNOMES celebrate:

More students are college and career ready, as evidenced by the increased number of AP Placement exams (Source: The superintendent’s June Rotary Club presentation.)

The data say: About Spokane’s AP Classes

	1992	2000	2008	2010
Number of students	193	368	1093	1208
Number of exams	271	636	2028	2270
Number of course areas	13	15	27	27
Number of exams passed	198	515	1099	1251
Percent passing	73%	81%	54%	55%
Percent failing	27%	19%	46%	45%
Average Grade	3.18	3.45	2.72	2.69

Spokane’s high ranking in the Washington Post survey is due to the higher number of AP exams. You can see that, numerically, more tests are being passed, but also that the percentage passing has dropped precipitously. Many more tests also are being failed. Administrators and board directors have brushed this failing off as being immaterial. It is not immaterial to the students who failed.

Additionally, the average grade on AP exams has dropped below a “3,” the point at which students can obtain college credit at state schools. (Gonzaga and Whitworth give credit for AP math classes only if students receive a score of “4” or “5” on the AP exam.)

The GNOMES celebrate:

 “A higher percentage of SPS students go to college directly after high school than in the state.” (Source: District publication “Points of Pride.”

The data say: About college and career readiness

 The 2010 10th-grade state math test (the HSPE) was a low-level, basic skills math test. Students needed just 56.9% to pass and to be considered by the state as “proficient” on the exam. The pass rates in 2010 for Spokane’s high schools looked like this: Ferris: 54%, Lewis and Clark: 54.2%, North Central, 27.1%, and Shadle: 44.4%.

It’s no surprise, therefore, that high school graduates are testing into remedial math in college. In 2009–2010, according to data from Spokane Community Colleges (SCC and SFCC):

• Of all recent high school graduates enrolling in these two colleges, 87.3 percent took remedial math classes. Most tested into elementary algebra or below.
• 43.9 percent of those 1,112 remedial students withdrew early from their remedial classes or failed to achieve a 2.0 or better. The rates hold true over five years.
• Of recent graduates from six high schools in Spokane Public Schools, the remediation rate at SCC and SFCC was 86.8%. Three SPS high schools had a math remediation rate at SCC of 100 percent; the other three ranged from 91.9% to 97% at SCC.

Included in the data are students who enrolled in remedial math at SCC/SFCC within a year of graduation. Not included are students who tested into remedial math but waited to take their classes, graduates who left the area or who went to a four-year, graduates who didn’t want to go to college, students who dropped out, and graduates who tested into remedial math but decided it was too much to do.

The GNOMES celebrate:

 In 2009, Spokane Public Schools scored 106.9 on Education Week’s “Cumulative Promotion Index.” In contrast, Seattle is at 78.3, Tacoma is at 69.3, Kent is at 104.1, and Everett is at 74.7. (Source: District presentation on the Superintendent’s Work Plan.)

Laurie says: About Education Week’s Cumulative Promotion Index

According to Education Week, “a score of 100 points on this index indicates that the district's graduation rate is exactly as would be expected, based on its size, student composition, and other characteristics. Districts with scores greater than 100 points are outperforming expectations.”

This index is based on “expectations,” not on an academic standard. If our expectation is zero, and the district achieves at a level of .0001, then it will achieve above 100 on the index.

And, whose expectations are these? My expectation is that Spokane Public Schools prepares the vast majority of its students academically for postsecondary life – for college, a career, a trade, to join the military, to begin a business … And the district is NOT meeting my expectation.

The GNOMES celebrate:

 Graduation rates are “improving.” (Source: The superintendent’s June Rotary Club presentation.)

About Spokane’s graduation rates

How much of the “increase” was because of actual academic improvement? The district tracked down some students and removed them from the most recent total, causing the most recent graduation rate to go up. However, previous years' numbers were not recounted. It’s statistically incorrect to compare non-reworked numbers with reworked numbers.

Additionally, the “improved” graduation rate doesn’t indicate whether the students were qualified to begin college or a trade when they left high school. As noted, indications are that most were NOT college or career ready.

Additionally, the graduation rates do not indicate how many disgruntled families left the district before graduation. See below for information on that.

The data say: About enrollment

 Full-time enrollment in Spokane dropped by about 2,650 from 2003 to May 2010. This is a net figure, not a gross figure, therefore, incoming students offset the total drop.

A Fall 2008 district survey of families who chose to leave the district showed that about 33% left over the curriculum. (Private schools were not included in the survey. Had they been, I suspect this percentage would be higher.) At any rate, top academically-related reasons chosen for leaving:

• 33%: Quality of curriculum does not match your expectations
• 26%: District class sizes too large
• 21%: Desired coursework is not offered in the district
• 19%: Student is not on schedule to graduate

 The district didn’t release the results of this survey to the general public.

The GNOMES say:

“Our mission is to develop the skills and talents of all students through rigorous learning experiences, supportive relationships, and relevant real-life applications.” (Source: District brochure of "fast facts.")

About the mission of Spokane Public Schools

 Spokane Public Schools’ stated mission is useless. Taxpayers do not want to pay $12,000+ per student to develop skills and talents through “learning experiences, supportive relationships and relevant real-life applications.” The district’s mission allows for a heck of a lot of wiggle room, and it holds no one accountable for getting the students ready academically for postsecondary life.

The GNOMES celebrate:

 “SPS earned excellence awards in financial reporting seven years in a row and sustains the highest credit ratings possible.” (Source: “Points of Pride.”)

Laurie says: About the district’s finances

Few community members can understand the district budget, as it’s given to the people. Many specific details aren’t available on the district’s Web site.

The levy paid for administrative raises last year, but the people weren’t told that -- not as they were signing on to support the levy, nor afterward, when the levy money was spent in that way. When I asked the district how MUCH of the levy paid for administrative raises, I was told the district “doesn’t break it down that way.”

In this year’s district forums, the people weren’t given budget totals. As they heard the district whine about an alleged budget “cut” since 2002 – they didn’t know that the district budget has actually grown by $60 million since 2002, or that the levy has grown by $23 million since 2002. It’s been an incredibly large money shift, not a budget cut.

Folks, there’s a lot more data out there just like this, but this snippet gives you the gist of the way the district presents outcomes. My conclusion is that Spokane Public Schools does NOT suffer from the Lake Wobegon Effect. What Spokane Public Schools suffers from is ever so much worse than that.

  

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is
Rogers, L. (July 2011). "The Lake Wobegon Effect? Or deceit by omission?" Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/  

This article also was published July 27, 2011, on the EducationNews Web site at: http://www.educationnews.org/ed_reports/159100.html