This could take us back a generation, it could take another generation to come back and I don’t think that’s what the people of North Carolina want.
Senate Minority Leader Martin Nesbitt commenting on what he sees as the impact of the proposed state budget for public education.
There is no shortage of exaggeration and hyperbole from those commenting on the impacts of the proposed state budget on public schools. In addition to having to address a $2 billion budget deficit, reductions are necessary to adjust to a slowing economy and unsustainably high levels of spending as well as the failure of legislative leadership to make hard choices. While the budget includes year-over-year reductions, if you listen to some critics you’d think the public schools won’t be opening next year. In addition to fully funding teachers for next year, a few facts can help to provide perspective on budget proposals under discussion.
Budget Comparisons. While no one knows what the final budget will be, an average of the adopted House and Senate budget targets for K-12 education is $7.17 billion. This figure falls almost exactly halfway between the K-12 budget for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The new figure reflects only a 4 percent reduction from what was appropriated for public schools in 2010-2011.
If you combine state, federal and local spending, North Carolina public schools spent a total of $11.57 billion in 2010-11. The proposed House-Senate budget estimate represents a spending reduction of $307 million less than last year’s total appropriations, thus a reduction of total spending of approximately 2.6 percent.
Hardly the draconian cuts you hear mentioned.
Spending Reductions. Over the past two years North Carolina has received about $1.1 billion in one-time federal money to backfill spending programs and to fund education jobs. While those funds might have helped to sustain current employment and programs, the funds were meant as a temporary solution. Lawmakers were more than happy to accept “free” federal money. However, it also gave lawmakers the chance to put off difficult budget decisions. State budget writers were well aware that the federal funds would dry up this year, but instead of addressing serious budget questions, lawmakers did nothing. Such inaction made the current reductions both necessary and larger than they otherwise needed to be.
Lay Offs. Many of the proposed layoffs are of hires made in the last two years whose jobs likely would have been eliminated sooner without stimulus funding. Since 2008-09, the federal government hired more than 13,500 new employees to work in the public schools, including 5,700 teachers.
Teacher Layoffs: The Only Option? A review of personnel counts over the past three years reveals the number of full-time teachers has declined from 99,098 to 94, 879 (there are about 5,000 part-time teachers in North Carolina). The total number of instructional support staff, however, has remained virtually unchanged, declining slightly from 14,550 (2008-09) to 14,465 (2010-11). Furthermore, even though there was a 9 percent decline in the total number of non-certified staff, the total number still exceeds 64,100. Non-Certified staff includes teacher’s assistants, technicians, clerical and secretarial staff, and other occupations that don’t require licensure or certification by a board. The number of non-certified staff has increased 67 percent in the last 10 years. These numbers suggest teacher layoffs are far from the only option available to those who need to trim budgets.
Changes in Per Student State Support. Average state support per student in fiscal year 2010-11 is $5,072. If House and Senate proposals are averaged, state support per student for fiscal year 2011-12 is $4,845. This represents a decline of 4 percent. However it is less than last year’s 5 percent decline in support per student. In 2006-07, state support was $4,684 per student.
Notes: 2011-12 data estimated from average of House adopted budget and Senate budget targets. Other figures available from Senate Education Committee on Education /Higher Education Target Comparisons handout. Prepared by Fiscal Research Division, May 11, 2011.
I continue to remain flabbergasted that I NEVER hear of dropping any of the unnecessary courses that have crept into our school systems over the years. Based on meeting the current crop of students, many do not seem to be able to do simple math, spell, speak and likely know little about the real history of America.
In the previous 100 years + the democratic party has had control of the NC legislature and in the last 20 years + the product called our children has fallen by all educational standards. The data are in – the proof cannot be contested – cost per student is not the key measure nor is class size. Singapore is the world leader for those who once dominated the halls of Raleigh. Find out why……………..
Now the republicans are faced with making cuts due to economic times. I would ask that the voices from our past be silent – it is obvious they were more concerned with votes than our children and our worldwide competitive educational standards
Steven – I wrote about the course offering issue in February.
http://www.johnlocke.org/research/show/spotlights/257
I am pretty fed up with the politicians who use school funding as a barter point for their campaigns. Our children’s education is used as a pawn in elections- the last funded, the first cut.
I also resent our state being a lapdog for the federal government- jumping through hoops to do the bidding of the Federal Dept. of Education for funding reasons. We are an independent State and should not allow ourselves to be manipulated in this way.
It would be wonderful to set up this portion of our budget to be a permanent consideration. Our elected officials should be able to come up with a reasonable per capita spending rule, for example $5000, and SET IT. This figure should be one we can live with without federal involvement.
Individual schools should then receive that amount according to their enrollment and not where they are located or who they know. That would END all of this last minute grappling and wean us off the federal teat.
It would be a KNOWN budget item that could be planned for and not subject to political promises and lies. The only factor that should then change the bottom line would be an annual cost of living adjustment.
There are a variety of cuts that could be made without harming the education of children, and in some cases would reduce the bureauracy with which classroom personnel have to deal. Terry Stoops has clearly identified many of these in his research papers, including course offerings (mentioned above)pay for performance, the abundance of “support staffs”, etc. By increasing the funding each year without requiring some measure of accountability, the state and local school boards continue to reward fiscal mismanagment by over-paid superintendents.
I agree that cuts in the education budget need to be made and wonder why cuts are not happening in superintendent’s offices where there are so many “support” positions that in reality offer no support and for which there is no accountability. Why not go after those before taking out positions for teacher assistants that are so needed, particulalry at the elementary school level?
I agree that cuts in the education budget need to be made and wonder why cuts are not happening in superintendent’s offices where there are so many “support” positions that in reality offer no support and for which there is no accountability. Why not go after those before taking out positions for teacher assistants that are so needed, particularly at the elementary school level?
If tenure was abandoned and the educational system operated like other businesses there would be jobs and rewards for those teachers who excel rather than blanket employment. I volunteer on a regular basis and am now serving as a proctor for the end-of-year testing. It has become clear, no obvious, that these tests are of such concern to and for the teacher. It is also clear after today’s testing the children are not learning. Multiplication seems to require they make an entire “chart” in order to multiply. Though calculators were allowed only 4 out of 16 used them. Why? Do they KNOW how to use them? I can honestly say the NC tests (particulaly math) are way too difficult for the third graders according to the “teaching” that I witnessed preceding these tests. My experience this past year in the classroom has been most disheartening. Increased budgets are NOT the answer…improved teaching is.
I myself am studying to become a teacher and hearing about the cuts in the school systems is quite disheartening.
Larry, yes, spending per student is not a measure of how successful a student is and that can not be contested. However, cutting per pupil spending does in fact harm the system. When money is taken away from textbooks and supplies, it becomes difficult for teachers to teach. When teachers have to BUY THEIR OWN paper to use and distribute in class, there is something wrong with the system.
Karen, I agree that tenure needs to be abandoned. There are too many young and new teachers being layed off with numerous older teachers who simply are not doing there jobs. However, the fact that you stated that only 4 of the 16 students used the calculators is impressive and actually a sign that the teacher probably taught them well, not the other way around. Granted, I was not in the classroom when the teacher was teaching, but past experiences from my life tell me that if students were not using their calculators, and were drawing the charts or using them, they understand the material more than the ones who were using them. One of the main problems when students get to high school (and ask any high school math teacher) is that students have become too dependent on the calculators and have forgotten how to do the simple calculations. So, not using a calculator is not necessarily bad, and in fact could mean they know the material. Lastly, I agree with your last statement, improved budgets is not the answer, improved teaching is. But, if money were used correctly, more money could help.