Change the world. Change our schools.

To: Washington State Board of Education

We’re parents, educators, business leaders, kids and others in the community working together to do all we can to improve education in our state.

We believe that a Washington State high school diploma should mean students graduate ready for college, job training and the workforce.

Washington’s high school graduation requirements are outdated and our kids are paying the price:

• Only 41% of high school graduates meet college entrance requirements in Washington.
• More than half of firms surveyed reported difficulty finding qualified job applicants in Washington.
• Our students compete with students from thirty-seven states that have stronger graduation requirements than Washington.

We want the Washington State Board of Education to vote to update our state’s high school diploma at their July 23-24 meeting in Vancouver, WA.

The time is now. Our future depends on all of us.

Sincerely,

Click here to sign our petition

Posted by Bonnie.

This morning there was an interesting story on NPR on the national debate on performance pay for teachers. The story reviews Obama and McCain’s education platform and looks closely at performance pay, specifically how it has played out in Colorado. Pro-Comp is one of the newer performance pay programs and they are working hard locally to cultivate teacher buy-in, an essential ingredient to a successful performance pay program. Click here to listen to the story.

While trolling the NPR website, I also found a link to an episode of The Conversation from last month that examined pay for performance and focuses on Washington. Click here to listen to the program.

Until recently many teacher unions have adamantly opposed pay for performance. Among other things they fear teachers will be evaluated unfairly. But many of the new pay for performance programs tend to be less rigid and more inclusive. Some teacher’s unions have embraced this new breed and believe they will encourage good teachers and better support struggling teachers. Although these programs are new, several models exist. Here is a link to a chart that briefly explains some the programs in place.

Our recent proposal to the Basic Education Task Force titled A Way Forward advocates adopting a modified pay for performance system that would include a new salary schedule based on three levels of responsibility and skills (Entry, Professional, and Lead), school-based bonuses, and additional funding for hard-to-staff positions as well as National Board Certified Teachers.

Posted by Bonnie

My morning ritual always involves two things: tea and NPR. This morning I was drinking my tea, listening to NPR and heard a great piece on Sup. Maria Goodloe-Johnson celebrating her one year anniversary in Seattle (including quotes from our very own, Lisa Macfarlane). She has been praised by advocates and policy makers alike who use words like focused, courageous, and decisive. Her strategic plan is bold in its honesty – revealing that only 17 percent of high school graduates took the credits necessary to be considered for entrance at a four-year college – and goals — to increase the 17 percent figure to 40 percent by 2012. One year in, Sup. Goodloe-Johnson says that the district has had little accountability to its 45,000 students and she plans on changing that.

But, the rubber is now beginning to meet the road and unfortunately the road is a bumpy one. A tight budget, shortages in math and science teachers, and persistent declining enrollment all pose serious challenges to the path ahead. Lisa Macfarlane states, “Where the rubber is going to meet the road is how we are going to measure progress against those goals [outlined in the strategic plan]. It’s great to say that we are going to have a quality teacher in every classroom, but how are we going to measure that and how are we going to do if we are not meeting those benchmarks?”

We look forward to rolling up our sleeves in Seattle and across Washington State – and hope you’ll join in.

There’s also a great interview with Sup. Goodloe-Johnson in the Seattle P-I.
The Seattle Public Schools strategic plan can be viewed here.

Posted by Katie

It’s wonderful to join the LEV staff, and I look forward to being a part of the movement to improve public education in Washington’s schools. My name is Katie, and I am the new office manager at LEV.

As a former student in the Edmonds School District and as a tutor and mentor for high school students in Seattle, I am very familiar with the challenges that today’s students face. Furthermore, I spent the past ten months as a corps member with City Year Seattle/King County, an AmeriCorps program that serves youth throughout Puget Sound. This experience has opened my eyes to the realities and implications of school funding (or lack thereof), graduation requirements (including the WASL, of course) and the beauties and intricacies of working within a diverse community.

The issues about which I feel most passionate parallel those of LEV, educators and citizens in Washington and across the country. Additionally, I would like to see an increase in student voice in policy and standards discussions. It seems ironic to me that students’ voices are rarely heard while important decisions are made on their behalf. I realize that school boards and lawmakers have their plates full of daunting responsibilities already, but with the well-being of Washington’s youth being the heart of why they serve, I believe that conversing with students should be a top priority.

As I enter this new chapter with LEV and begin applying for my Masters in Teaching, it is a personal and professional goal of mine to see that Washington students have a voice in decision-making. I believe that we (teachers, administrators, lawmakers and community members) need not only to encourage our youth to speak out but empower them to exercise their voices and challenge ourselves to listen.

Posted by Katarina.

Hi, I’m Katarina. Born here in Seattle, I am an upcoming high school junior. I have attended private school my whole life but I’m very interested and eager to learn more about issues in the public schools. Through Rainier Scholars, I was offered this opportunity to intern at the League of Education Voters office.

I consider Rainier Scholars more than just an academic program but as a family. The positive and continuous encouragement from everyone at RS has led me to truly believe an individual can make a difference in this world. By helping to develop future leaders, Rainier Scholars has helped me and my peers see our potential and have motivated us to step to up and prove that success is for everyone. I have been a part of Rainier Scholars since fifth grade and looking back, I can see the difference they have made in my life.

In two years I will be off to college. At this point, I am still unsure about what school I want to attend or what profession I want to pursue but with the support of school counselors, family and Rainier Scholars, I know I am heading down the right path. As a child I wanted to be everything. Now that I am older I know I can be anything, I just have to believe in my dreams and know my options.

I enjoy playing volleyball and just kicking back in the summer sun with friends. I spend a majority of my time with my two sisters and parents. Art is a large part of my life. I danced ballet for six years and I have recently started to draw and paint more. I played the piano and flute for a little and I listen to music whenever I can. I am also an active member of my church and youth group. Summer is my favorite season and I’m always up for an adventure.

Posted by Michael

This is the time of year school boards consider what to do about next year’s budget.  Unfortunately, school directors across Washington are facing cuts in order to balance the budget.  This is largely due to a combination of rising costs, inadequate state funding and an outdated education finance system.  The Kitsap Sun wrote an excellent piece about our education funding challenges in Washington State and how this is impacting their local schools.

Posted by Molly

Last week, I attended the 8^th Annual Quality Education Conference in Washington, D.C. The conference explored the inequities of the educational systems in our country and efforts, both successful and failed, to bridge the gap for a more just system.

Highlights:

• Progress report from the states

There were 30 states represented at the conference. Each state shared progress and challenges.

Missouri is really struggling. They lost their equity case on the grounds that there is no judiciable issue (there is no valid claim to a contentious issue). This makes future litigation nearly impossible.

Wyoming has probably made the most significant progress. They were successful in their litigation and have been able to hold the legislature’s collective foot to the fire in terms of implementing the court’s decision. Thus far, they have been quite successful in getting additional funding for teacher compensation. Wyoming teachers are some the best paid in the nation (accounting for regional cost differences).

New Jersey is finding that the momentum from the Abbott decision is stalling. Although funding — and performance — increased significantly for the 30 lowest performing school, the schools in the middle are still struggling. The issue has now moved towards equity and away from adequacy. This shift is not gaining traction and there is a belief that NJ used all of its political capital with Abbott.

Washington is in a unique position with their litigation. Tom Ahearne, one of the plaintiff’s lawyers in the McCleary case (also known as the NEWS lawsuit), believes that there is wide support in the legislature to increase funding. He views this lawsuit as a way to give those who support increased funding the political cover necessary to make the bold funding reforms that are necessary, though perhaps not popular.

• A View From the Bench – The Necessary Role of the Courts

Judge Greaney offered some really interesting insight into the most compelling components to the adequacy funding case in Massachusetts. He sited the amicus briefs as the most helpful and persuasive in making a decision. He also rejected the negative stigma attached to the concept of an “activist court.” Instead, he argued that the court is often a better place to decide such complicated issues. In particular, Judge Greaney believes that there is no other authoritative, impartial governmental entity that is capable of establishing and monitoring the delicate mixture of expert and political judgments that are involved in finding effective remedies in school funding lawsuits.

• Narrowing the Achievement Gap

This was an interesting session that explored the achievement gap from a data, economic, and advocacy perspectives. The data presented demonstrated a strong and growing problem. It is important to note that the data presented was national data and demonstrated glaring data holes at the state level. The economic presentation was not really anything new — simply highlighting the costs of “fixing” the problem. Finally, Bill Kopsky, Executive Director of the Arkansas Public Policy Panel, led a very interesting discussion on the successes they have had with grassroots organizing throughout Arkansas.  Their effort with the Arkansas Citizens First Congress mirrors the work we are doing at the LEV Foundation in regards to the Early Learning Advocates Table (ELAT). However, they are further along in coalition building process in Arkansas and function as a cohesive advocacy group.  

Full Funding Coalition - Round Two

Time: 3:30 p.m. - 4:21 p.m.

Randy Parr starts off by expressing that their proposal is just that, a proposal. While it does outline clear benchmarks, these are explicitly stated only to provide an example of one way we could move forward in the short-term. To that end, the suggested six-year transition to the new funding plan includes:

1. The state enriches funding through the current system for the 2009-11 biennium.
2. The state would convert to the new Foundation Formula in 2011-2013.
3. The CQEW reviews initial progress and makes recommendations for subsequent additional funding.
4. The state makes additional payments on known, prioritized interventions during 2013-2015 budget cycle.
5. Some additional interventions are necessarily spread across all six years.

Sup. Bergeson asks for clarification on student-weighted formula.

Randy continues to explain the year one phase in would include: K-3 class size reduction to 1:17, ramping up the phase-in of all day kindergarten, implementing additional relevant professional development, resources for struggling students, implementing behavior support systems, increasing support staff for principals and begin phase-in for NERCs.

Year two example includes: continue to increase K-3 class size reduction, all-day kindergarten, and additional ESA’s for classified staff, adding funding for key instructional programs in core subjects, and adding campus security funds for middle and high schools.

So - the cost: $1.2 billion increase in the next biennium. The most significant portion, about a quarter, of would increase teacher COLAs.

Randy goes on to outline a few revenue source ideas that would cover the first two years worth of reform efforts:

• Capturing a portion of future growth. Transferring half of anticipated new revenue (above %5) in 09-11 would yield $500 million for public education.
• Recapture the currently uncollected regular property tax authority to provide new revenue to school districts. Currently the state has reserved a total rate of $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value, but the state property tax rate for schools in calendar year 2010 is expected to be $2.12 per $1,000 of assessed  value

Q&A

First question is, unsuprisingly, about the price tag. Rep. Fred Jarrett asks if $1.2 billion is the total cost. Randy Parr says no. When the study was completed it recommended 45% increase (of 10 billion at the time). The study has not been updated. There is not a specific dollar amount to the proposal - but do suggest a specific amount in the short term. We’re offering more because we want to prove that it can be done.
Next, Sup. Bergeson asks about teacher compensation reform and distribution. Randy Parry points out that they advocate for a salary survey and adjustments made according to that. He also noted that they discussed some local teacher compensation experimentation, but did not develop a specific proposal to this end.

Rep. Priest asks Randy Parr and Paul Rosier if the Full Funding Coalition can have an open discussion about
any of the ideas presented to the Task Force (bargaining at the state level for example), or if the coalition partners should discuss the issues separately. Both Mr. Rosier and Mr. Parr assured Rep. Priest that they would continue to try and work together.

Sup. Kowalkowski asks how realistic the revenue source proposals are - especially the property tax increase. Randy Parr acknowledged the difficulty of the property tax increase by stating that the property tax is the tax most legislators love to hate.

And so the day - and live blogging - comes to an end.

Full Funding Coalition (WSSDA, WASA, AWSP, WEA, PSEW)

1:55p.m.  - 3: 10 p.m.

Randy Parr, WEA, illustrates our K-12 funding crisis in a few slides. First, expenditures per-student as a percent of the national average have declined since the state took over ‘full’ funding of basic education. Second, in terms of our student achievement, we are highly efficient (high performing despite low funding levels). Rep. Hunter claims ‘legislative rules’ and points out that if the chart accounted for demographics, our student achievement in terms of NAEP scores would be average by comparison.

Randy Parr moves on to state that our definition of basic education is already in place (legal and legislative reform). We simply need schools to get the resources to do the job assigned them by government.

Cutting to the chase, Mr Parr posits three funding proposals for the State to choose from: 1) students perform at higher levels, 2) students continue to perform at current levels, or 3) students perform at lower levels (Randy admits that this is their fear).

David Conely begins to answer the questions - what constitutes basic education? how much does it cost? what results can we expect if we spend the money? Answers to these questions are based in the Washington Adequacy Funding Study, published in 2007:

1. Major recommended additions: classroom-centered supports, educator supports, instructional supports, and learning environment supports
2. Creating a Commission for Quality Education in Washington, a nonpartisan commission that would determine the annual amount of money needed to make ample provision for the education of all Washington students (much like the K-12 Revenue Council proposed in A Way Forward).

Advantages of a system like this is that it is scalable and lends itself to ramping up full funding based on expected student performance levels.

Rep. Hunter interrupts to question the viability of the CQEM because we don’t have the data available to correlate spending with student achievement. David Conely points out that data now is much better than it was 15 years ago and will continue to improve. He admits that this might not be perfect - but this is a better way. This is a policy advisory tool.

Rep. Jarrret suggests that, because of our strong constitutional language, it might be difficult to move forward with a model that identifies what ample is and most likely not be able fund it.

Questions continue from Sup. Bergeson and Sup. Kowalkowski, Sen. Tom, Chair Grimm and so on. It is afternoon, after lunch, nearing the end of two long days of lots of information. It is a little hard to stay on task.

Getting back to the PowerPoint, Randy Parr underlines that they are proposing a new basic education funding structure. It is called the Foundation Formula.

• Like our proposal, local levy funds would only be used for their intended, supplemental use.
• Five categorical funds would remain: regular instruction, CTE, special education, learning assistance, and English language learners.
• Multi-Measure Accountability: multiple measures, reflection state goals, provide fair and scientifically accurate annual report cards for every school. Each school and district is held accountable fairly - in relation to student, school, and district characteristics (a growth model). Paul Rosier asks - how do we honor growth.

Time for a break… more later.