|
Education reform is more about
ensuring quality results than about finding new dollars
by Bethany
Carson
There are winners and losers in the state's education
system. Schools in wealthy regions can afford to spend $25,000
on each student, while those in poor areas can only afford
about $5,000 per student.
In recent years, the debate on school finance reform
has focused on finding ways to increase and equalize school
spending. At the heart of the debate is whether Illinois
should shift the burden of funding elementary and secondary
schools from the local property tax to the state income tax.
But voters' fears of tax hikes keep that issue under the
political table.
Yet finding ways to raise education dollars is only one
side of the equation. How the state spends the money is the
other. Distribution of Illinois tax dollars affects students'
ability to learn and ultimately grow into productive,
responsible adults.
George Clowes, senior fellow with the Chicago-based
Heartland Institute, takes that a step further. "If we fail to
improve the education of our students for very much longer,
it's really going to affect the way that we compete with
nations around the world."
He supports a completely different idea, a so-called
choice-based approach wherein the money follows the student
rather than the teacher — and parents, rather than
administrators, decide how to spend their tax
dollars.
To get to the root of Illinois' problem, however,
researchers say everyone needs to take a step back. Reforming
education isn't about raising the dollars, they say, as much
as about results.
Case in point: The state has generally increased the
amount of money put toward education — from $4.9 billion in
2000 to $6.5 billion this fiscal year. Some lawmakers and
advocates ask why that additional money hasn't translated into
more equitable educational opportunities in those schools with
the highest percentage of minority and low-income
students.
The question is, "What are we getting for our money?"
Timing for this discussion couldn't be better. Illinoisans
will get the chance November 7 to pick the person they want to
lead the state for the next four years: Democratic incumbent
Gov. Rod Blagojevich of Chicago, GOP state Treasurer Judy Baar
Topinka of Riverside or Green Party candidate Rich Whitney of
Carbondale.
While most of the attention centers on the candidates'
revenue ideas, voters shouldn't be distracted from their plans
for education quality.
Those plans were graded by the A+ Illinois coalition,
which consists of more than 100 civic, education and business
groups, among them AFSCME Council 31, which represents public
employees, the nonprofit Center for Tax and Budget
Accountability and the Metropolitan Planning Council. The
coalition aims to
improve education equity and reduce the state's reliance on
property taxes in funding schools, mainly through a tax
swap.
The group gave Blagojevich a "D-" for pledging not to
raise income or sales taxes if he's re-elected. Instead, he
would privatize the Illinois Lottery, which he says would
garner up to $15 billion to fund his $6 billion education plan
and pump $650 million into schools each year until at least
2025.
MarySue Barrett, president of the Metropolitan Planning
Council and a member of the coalition, says the group dislikes
the idea of selling state assets for one-time revenue
sources.
Topinka didn't do much better on that score. She got a
"D+" from the coalition for proposing a new casino in Chicago
and authorizing expansion of the state's nine other
riverboats. Topinka says she won't rule out a tax hike but
would consider it a last resort. But she estimates her casino
plan would generate $5 billion over four years, immediately
funnel $650 million into schools and ensure $600 million each
year thereafter. Her report card from the coalition notes that
revenue idea also lacks stability.
Only Whitney supports a tax swap —though as a
third-party candidate he's not getting much of a hearing on
the issue. Because he didn't get on the November ballot until
late August, he wasn't initially graded by A+ Illinois. His
report card was scheduled to be available after press
time.
Though A+ Illinois' report on Blagojevich and Topinka
docks them for their revenue ideas, it rewards them for
their efforts to help schools that have academically
struggling and needy students.
For instance, both promise to raise the minimum amount
guaranteed per student. Yet neither would reach the $6,400
level recommended by the Education Funding Advisory Board,
which was created by a 1997 law and is responsible for making
education funding recommendations to the General
Assembly.
Those candidates' other initiatives resemble each
other, with some differences in how they package the money.
Both would dedicate $180 million to expanding preschool, but
Blagojevich promises $60 million annually for at least three
years and Topinka promises $30 million for each of the next
six years.
Blagojevich's "B-" rewards his plan for mentoring
teachers and administrators, but makes no comment on his plan
to make teachers accountable through "performance-based pay,"
partially measured by students' test scores. His report card
says his plan lacks detail in how he would measure the quality
and impact of his programs.
Topinka's "B+" gives her a slight edge for offering a
$5,000 stipend to teachers who agree to teach in struggling
schools, as well as $250 million in grants to under-performing
schools that show how they would help students meet state
learning standards.
Clowes, the Heartland researcher, has a different idea
about how to make teachers and principals accountable to
students' needs. He would allow parents to use tax-funded
vouchers or tax credits to send their children to any public
school they wanted. Then, he says, principals would become
accountable to the parents. "If you want to have influence
over the way money is spent, then you have to raise it locally
and you have to spend it locally," he adds. "Once it gets to a
higher level, then there are all kinds of special interests
that will try to swing it to their favorite funding
destination."
That, he says, contributes to the "maldistribution of
teachers" and the unmet needs of students, as reported by the
Education Trust, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit
research and advocacy group.
Out of all the reforms tried, he says, "none of them
has proven very effective in changing the thing that everyone
wants to change, and that is improving student
achievement."
Regardless of which approach is on the table, the
universal question for parents, teachers, unions, principals,
business leaders, mayors and lawmakers is, "What are we
currently getting for our money?" This
election season could be the best time to discuss any
education reform plans on, or even near, the table.
Bethany Carson can
be reached at capitolbureau@aol.com.
Illinois Issues, October
2006
For information about how
to subcribe to Illinois Issues go to:
http://illinoisissues.uis.edu/subscribe/subscribe.html
Go to Illinois
Issues blog at http://illinoisissuesblog.blogspot.com/
 Write a letter to the
editor
I would like to comment
on this article
(Please state month and author of
article.)
Ask a
staff member
Home
| 
