Monday, June 06, 2005

Kansas Supreme Court Education Fiasco

A few things you should know about the recent Kansas Supreme Court ruling on Education Funding:

First, there is little in government more important than education. I think we should provide our children with an excellent education, not merely a suitable education. We should provided an education that prepares our children for the world they will face when they graduate, and we should be willing to pay for that. The recent decision by the Kansas Supreme Court to legislate an additional $142 million in selected funding does not further the goal of providing an excellent education.

Second, this court decision has nothing to do with grades, test scores, educational outcomes, or learning. If you don't believe me, read the decision. The court assails the Legislature for failing to provide a "suitable" education for Kansas students, but the only way "suitable" is measured is money. I think the performance of Kansas students, which is actually much better than average, indicates that a suitable education is being provided. The education may not be as expensive as you would like, and you could debate if it is an "excellent" education, but the constitution says suitable and it looks suitable to me.

If funding is item number one on the court's education plan, and learning falls somewhere lower on the list I think the court has its priorities out of order and I think it is creating a plan to fail, just look at the disaster that happened in Kansas City, MO when a judge did the same thing 15 years ago.

Third, Kansas spends a comparable amount per pupil, but less of that money reaches the class room in Kansas. Approximately 57% of education funding reaches Kansas class rooms vs. 61% on average. Reducing non-class room spending, or consolidating some of the hundreds of school districts in Kansas would bring more funds to bear where they make a difference without increasing taxes. Too bad legislators don't have the guts to do this.

Fourth, This ruling will actually reduce the amount of money spent on the best schools in Kansas. Many of the best districts use their local option budgets to raise extra money to make their schools places of excellence. The Kansas Supreme Court will substantially cut funding for Shawnee Mission, Olathe, and Blue Valley, hurting the education of those children and throwing their budgeting process into chaos, all in the name of fairness.

Fifth, the ruling has major internal logical flaws. The biggest is the repeated criticism of the legislative process and the political compromises that come from that process. However in their remedy for the case the court simply doubles the Legislature's political compromise rather than impose the full funding amount.

Sixth, The court relies on this one study done by some no name consultants over the decision of the legislature because it disregards historical costs and determines the "real" cost of education? Ridiculous, and couldn't the legislature just commission a new report and make up another number?

Seventh, don't worry despite years of trouble funding education, the $135 million renovation of the Capital will proceed on schedule, the Senate will have a newly refurbished chamber next year, it will be beautiful, ornate and new, I just wish our children could say the same thing about their schools.



Timothy Burger

2 Comments:

At 4:20 PM, Blogger Tony said...

It's hard to argue with your logic but the "Rage Against the Machine" fan (read: hippie) in me just wants all the money spread out. Still, excellent post.

P.S. - You should publish an ATOM feed. It would make keeping up with your great posts easier. I know I don't, but I'm silly that way.

 
At 8:47 PM, Blogger P. McB. said...

The points you make are all valid, but that still doesn't mean that Kansas education is suitably funded.

As you note, Article 6:6 of the state constitution says the legislature must fund a suitable education for kansas students. The problem is defining what is suitable. Suitable in Salina or Hays is not going to be suitable in Olathe or Shawnee Mission. And that is what creates the problem... legislative members who are only interested in getting the maximum amount for their districts. JoCo has all the power (not to mention money) and puts in all kinds of "bonus clauses" that will get them the lions share of the funding. Linking additional funding to a districts property values doesn't help the kids in Salina or Hays... but the kids in Shawnee Mission and Blue Valley districts get a big bonus.

The legislature should just flat fund a per student expenditure, and if bonus clauses need to be put in, let the districts that don't have a huge tax base to collect from reap those benefits.

I do support local tax support of local districts, if that is what the local voters approve.

BTW, I'm a JoCo resident, and I know we are screwing the rest of the states kids. Property values tied to educational funding... priceless!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home