by Louis Freedberg, Stephen K. Doig, California Watch/from the San Francisco Chonicle | http://bit.ly/ihy6KJ
Sunday, June 5, 2011 - State lawmakers have struggled for decades to bring equality to how school districts are funded, yet some districts receive thousands more per student than others, a California Watch analysis has found. And the data show spending more provides no assurance of academic success.
Last year, California schools spent an average of $8,452 to educate each student, a figure that includes money from local, state and federal sources, including one-time stimulus funds.
But that average masks enormous differences in spending. The Carmel Unified School District, for example, spent nearly three times as much as the Norris School District in Bakersfield. According to the state's Legislative Analyst's Office, some of the smallest schools in the Sierra foothills, with just a handful of students, received about $200,000 per student.
The differences can be due to funding for special programs that can come from a variety of local, state and federal sources. Put together, that can add up to quite a difference in spending.
In a show of bipartisan support to change the way schools are funded, the state Assembly approved legislation last week on a near-unanimous vote. AB18 by Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica, seeks a funding formula that would take into account the proportion of disadvantaged students in a school and other factors, such as students' proficiency in English. It now goes to the Senate.
As districts struggle with huge budget cuts, an extra few hundred dollars per student can make a significant difference. In a school district like Los Angeles Unified, by far the largest in the state, $500 more per student would yield about an extra $300 million, precisely the amount the district aimed to save when it sent out thousands of layoff notices this spring.
More money, however, does not necessarily translate into better learning.
The Capistrano Unified School District in Orange County, for example, spent much less than the San Bernardino City Unified School District. Yet its Academic Performance Index score, which is based on test scores and other measures, was 862, compared with San Bernardino's 699.
'Money Myth'
"Money may be necessary for school improvement, but it doesn't guarantee that improvement takes place," concluded UC Berkeley education Professor W. Norton Grubb in his recent book "The Money Myth."
He found that urban schools tended to spend inefficiently for a variety of reasons, including high staff and student turnover and conflicts over how to teach struggling students. At the same time, he said, urban districts often have extra expenses for needs such as security, dropout prevention or for teaching students who are not proficient in English.
One of those districts with higher expenses is the Ravenswood City School District in East Palo Alto, where about two-thirds of students are English learners. The district has had to hire three full-time Spanish translators - mainly to translate lengthy special education reports as required by law - and has translators working in the school office, in classrooms and at parent meetings.
Ravenswood spends nearly $13,000 per student, yet has cut several programs and may slash two weeks from the next school year, Superintendent Maria De La Vega said.
"It is sad, when you look across the freeway and see so many other opportunities" for students there, she said, referring to the Palo Alto Unified School District, which is in a wealthier community on the other side of Highway 101.
Last year, financial frustration prompted nine districts, including Alameda Unified School District, and several dozen parents and students to file a lawsuit claiming the funding system is unconstitutional. The suit, Robles-Wong vs. California, is being heard in Alameda County Superior Court along with another suit by the Campaign for Quality Education, which makes similar allegations.
'Fundamental reform'
"We are not asking for simply more money," the Campaign for Quality Education lawsuit contends. "We're asking for fundamental reform so that existing and additional funds will be more efficiently spent."
What especially galls education leaders in Alameda is that its district receives substantially less money than nearby districts like Berkeley, Oakland and Palo Alto.
"There is a huge sense that the system is very inequitable in how it operates," said Patricia Sanders, a middle school math teacher who is also president of the Alameda Education Association, the district's teachers union. "For us not to receive the same amount as other districts near us is like saying, 'We are going to value one child more than another.' "
Four decades ago, the California Supreme Court declared the state's system of financing schools unconstitutional. In the 1971 Serrano vs. Priest ruling, the court found that using local property taxes to fund schools resulted in vast differences between a wealthy district like Beverly Hills and a low-income community such as Baldwin Park, which is east of Los Angeles.
The Supreme Court ruled that differences in the basic amount spent per student - so-called "revenue limit" funding - had to be within $100 across all districts. Taking inflation into account, the permissible difference is now $350 per student. Although larger differences remain among some districts, disparities in the basic amount districts receive from the state have been substantially reduced.
But that reduction has been wiped out by local, state and federal funds for close to a hundred different programs. A large part of the money is based on formulas established in the 1970s for meals, transportation and other services that often have little connection to current student needs.
THE DATA:
California school district spending and test scores
from California Watch | http://bit.ly/kxlaTW
June 2, 2011
Despite years of efforts to equalize spending in California schools, some districts receive thousands of dollars more per student than others. And although some districts spent much more than the average, the bigger expenditure didn't assure higher scores on the state's Academic Performance Index, which is based on student test scores and other academic measures. Download a spreadsheet of spending per student and Academic Performance Index data for all school districts here.
California school district spending and test scores
Los Angeles Unified School District
June 2, 2011
How does Los Angeles Unified compare to other California districts?
Spending per student
$10,015 Median: $8,234
API score in 2010
709 Median: 783
LAUSD: $10,015 spent per student ($5.8 billion total expenditures)
LAUSD: 709 API score in 2010
| Districts with similar API scores in 2010 Colusa Unified Emery Unified | API scores in 2010 Corona-Norco Unified (50,531.90) Elk Grove Unified (58,583.70) San Diego Unified (110,420.40) Long Beach Unified (81,638.70) Santa Ana Unified (51,936.20) Fresno Unified (67,444.60) Los Angeles Unified (576,700.40) | API scores in 2010 in adjacent districts Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified Torrance Unified Santa Monica-Malibu Unified Glendale Unified Burbank Unified Sulphur Springs Union Elementary William S. Hart Union High Alhambra Unified Downey Unified Pasadena Unified Lynwood Unified Compton Unified |
A note about the data: Spending figures refer to "current expense of education" per student in average daily attendance in 2009-10. The figures exclude certain expenditures, such as retiree benefits, food services and facilities acquisition and construction costs. Figures should be interpreted in the context of local conditions.
The state's nearly 1,000 school districts are responsible for reporting the information to the state. If individual districts spot problems with the state-reported statistics in our database, California Watch will confirm and update the data while encouraging districts to correct any errors with the state so that the public has the most accurate data available.
Interactive by Agustin Armendariz and Michael Corey. Reporting by Louis Freedberg and Stephen K. Doig.
Source: California Department of Education
Interactive by Agustin Armendariz and Michael Corey. Reporting by Louis Freedberg and Stephen K. Doig.
Source: California Department of Education
- California Watch is a project of the Center for Investigative Reporting. E-mail lfreedberg@californiawatch.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment