On Tuesday, November 20 at noon, the Public Citizens for Children and Youth (PCCY) scheduled a news conference at City Council with testimonials from members of PCCY, the Youth Commission, parents, community members, and advocates in response to the Basic Education Funding Commission hearing that was scheduled for later the same day. Senator Mike Vereb from the 150th legislative district and Senator Pat Brown from the 16th district, Lehigh County listened to the testimonials. The comments included actual snapshots of what public education looks like in Philadelphia as a result of the budget cuts. David Lapp from Education Law Center spoke about the disparities caused by an increase in charter school funding, and the importance of revisiting the charter school reimbursement in light of the new charter school bill that was attached to the passing of the cigarette tax. Donna Cooper from PCCY also included in her testimony the reality that the new determined funding weights must provide “fairness and equity”, and that includes rates of poverty across the state.
At 2 pm, the official funding commission hearing was held on the 6th floor. Once the confusion over needing a ticket or being on the list was solved, individuals started to fill the limited seats quickly. The audience was packed with members from a variety of educational organizations, City Council members, retired teachers, parents, members of the SRC (School Reform Commission), the School District, and others. There was literally standing room only at the start of the hearing. The first to testify was Bill Green, Chairman of the SRC. “Philadelphia schools are now a strong investment.” He admittedly, did not support additional funding for the school district when he was on City Council, but now believes that there is, “less bureaucracy” surrounding funds. His testimony included the vast cuts made across the board in regard to 5,000 positions, suspending the PFT contract, and the increase of charter school costs.
Mayor Nutter was next to speak and lauded the, “open hearings to public input in an unpopular and necessary decision.” He centered most of his testimony around the term, ‘adequate.’ What it means and why would anyone simply want their child to receive an adequate education. “5th graders will be looking for their first job in 10 years and they are expected to be highly skilled and educated.” He mentioned the continued disparities in services. Schools with 1700 students have one counselor and no assistant principals. Mayor Nutter recommended that the panel read an article in the Notebook that details the connection between racial bias and PA educational funding system.
Superintendent Hite spoke about his vision for every child in Philadelphia, “Every child regardless of neighborhood will have access to art, adults that care, curriculum that is relevant…the fiscal landscape cannot reflect the value was have of children.” He continued, “We can’t cut our way to solvency. Can’t cut our way to high achievement.” Dr. Hite outlined the work that has already been done in terms of difficult cuts reiterating points from Green’s statement and the Redesign Initiative. Senator Mike Sturla asked Hite very pointed questions about the numbers connected to the individual children that make up the impoverished in Philadelphia County. He suggested that Philadelphia may discover a “natural ally” with rural counties that may share the same problems.
Sturla then asked Dr. Hite and the audience, “What does Philadelphia want? Do you want a fully elected school board?” The response literally was boos and no’s from half of the audience and loud agreements of yes from the other. This was very telling seeing how 41,000 signatures were delivered earlier this year to City Council in support of local control. Sturla did say that it appears as if Philadelphia is unsure. These questions were also in response to the repeated testimony that Philadelphia has no taxing authority without permission from the commonwealth.
The Chief Financial Officer, Matthew Stanski provided the necessary numbers of students enrolled in public and charter schools. This included the percentage that makes up special education and English Language Learners and the expected financial impact that the new charter school bill will have on the current funding disparity. It is a “revenue problem” despite the increased funding from the city, which is the highest in years at 47%.
Mike Gleason, the Executive Director of Philadelphia School Partnership (PSP) was the next speaker. (Dr. Hite, Green nor Mayor Nutter was present during his testimony.) His slides showed that PSP has contributed 11.5 million dollars to the School District of Philadelphia, 20 million dollars to charter schools, and 3 million dollars to private schools. “Outstanding leadership, effective teaching, and highly engaged parents and students” are the keys to high performing schools. “Funding is not the only tool.” There should be “equity and accountability in spending.” Gleason made a comparison between Mastery Gratz and King High School. Both SPP scores are below 70 (Gratz, 65.5 and King, 39.4). He pointed out that Mastery uses funds to purchase more supports for teachers and students as a result of the dollars flowing directly to the school and not through a district entity. “Don’t keep funding low achieving schools.” Some members of the commission agreed with his assessment and even asked if he believed low performing schools should be closed. He agreed that they should. A slide reiterated that 89,000 students were in low performing public and charter schools. Gleason then lauded Washington DC and New Orleans for their efforts in effectively transforming their school districts. Despite the turmoil that is reported in the national news daily about those same school districts, during his testimony they were both held up as examples of success. “Stop tolerating excuses for schools that continue to let students down.”
The panel and Gleason agreed that cyber schools had not proven effective. Unfortunately, many of the testimonies were lacking in qualitative data to support or connect with quantitative statistics and numbers. School districts are not widgets or mechanisms of a larger machine. Each one is comprised of children, adults, and communities. Layered over that is socioeconomic status, income levels, poverty, juvenile justice, homelessness, hunger, mental health, and race. A test score and a percentage of how many fit into each category is only scratching the surface because all of that must be considered when creating a funding formula that provides equity and balance throughout the entire commonwealth. The best analogy is what occurs when a hospital is implementing and evaluating a new treatment plan for a specific disease, illness, or virus. There are reports and observations of how the treatment directly affects the symptoms and the possible side effects. The research team also seeks observations of the patients receiving the new treatment in regard to mental health and well-being, and how it may or may not affect their domestic life. Additionally, the cost and a description of services needed to maximize the results are also considered. This is the difference between basic triage and whole personalized care.
Thankfully, Dr. David Rubin provided some necessary qualitative data with numbers and gaps in services to create a more complete picture of what education looks like in Philadelphia County. You can read the full report here, “commissioned by the Philadelphia Mayor’s Office of Education, School District of Philadelphia, Philadelphia School Reform Commission, and the Philadelphia Department of Human Services.” Dr. Rubin informed the commission that in 2008 when there was an influx of stimulus dollars, the graduation rate for at risk students experienced an increase. “Need to determine a funding formula that incorporates enhanced funding for levels of risk.” This risk includes students involved with child welfare or juvenile justice. The details of this report provided some insight to a direct question addressed to Dr. Hite, “How much is needed for homeless, adjudicated youth in regard to funding?”
Neil Theobold, the President of Temple University provided necessary testimony gleaned from his experience in heading up similar commissions in other states. He advised the commission to “Be cautious when dealing with national experts, select 2-3 important issues and create specific measures for each one with individual metric of progress” Lastly; he stated we should seek, “Innovation not adaptation.”
Each county is unique and Philadelphia County is even more unique and complex since the School District of Philadelphia has been under state control since 2001 with over 200,000 students in public and charter schools. The Basic Education Funding Commission will continue to hold special hearings across the commonwealth over the next months. It is vital that all voices and as many stories are heard in order for sustainable change to even have a chance. More information about the charge of the commission, its members, and the hearing schedule can be found here.
Examiner.Com – November 20, 2014 – Read article online