Translate

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

More Money Talk

So somewhat as predicted, the information I gave you yesterday is wrong today -- such is the matter in Sacramento.  The new new formula distribution as proposed in SB 847 does NOT equally distribute money on a per ADA (student) basis which would be obvious and equitable.  Instead the money according to this proposal would be distributed to districts based on last year's Revenue Limit (RL) -- which vary from district to district.

Theoretically, the winners and losers in the matter would look like this:
"Losers"
  • Elementary School Districts -- They have a lower RL to begin with
  • Growing or Flat Enrollment Districts -- Overall they will have more students than their RL from last year
"Winners"
  • High School Districts -- They have the highest RL of all districts, so they will get more per student
  • Declining Enrollment Districts -- Because their funding would be based on the prior year -- even though they have fewer students this year
It would appear, as we have been a slightly declining district, that we will be a "winner" in this competition.  But wait, that of course is based on the potential passage of SB 847 -- by TONIGHT -- when the legislative session ends -- and this is Sacramento.  So failing passage tonight, who knows what how these dollars will be allocated or WHEN they might actually get here.

Monday, August 30, 2010

More Budget Madness ...but some good news

Okay, once again there is NO budget ...so there is ONLY speculation, including mine!!  But assuming that we all want to know the latest "guesses" of those in Sacramento closest to the engagement, I provide the following:

Remembering that this is NOT official and is just another in a series of guesses... I spoke with one of our Sacramento friends on Friday, and the basic budget story is that Sacramento is continuing to “talk” about the budget and actually beginning to get serious. Apparently for the FIRST time the “Big 5” met (as a total group) this past week. There is NO anticipation that this budget will be resolved prior to at least the middle or late September – which is probably optimistic. The overall anticipation is that the education budget is likely to look much like the May Revise – though there may be changes that harm us in RUSD and the potential for some of this to be ONE-time money.  Another though similar view of this was in yesterday's Sacramento Bee from long-time political columnist Dan Walters.

On the federal "job dollars" front, there is a Sacramento opinion that we will actually get the money and it will be ADDITIVE – that’s great news if it happens. There is a legislative bill (AB184) on the table that would provide the structure. The allocation at this point seems to be on a pure ADA basis (e.g., $200/ADA) versus by Title I which was discussed at one point (and is an inequitable distribution). The restrictions on the money are that it must be spent on site-level personnel (versus District Office) and must be spent within two years (i.e., 10-11 or 11-12).  What this would likely do for us, IF this is accurate -- it could help us mitigate further layoffs and reductions that we know right now we will need to resolve our 2011-12 deficit of $30 million.

Friday, August 27, 2010

Annual Report

At the beginning of this coming week there will be an ANNUAL REPORT provided by the Board of Education to our community.  I bring this to your attention as this is the first time that we have provided this report in RUSD.  As such, you should be aware of a variety of pieces regarding this annual report:
  1. This report is provided in color to enhance its legibility and interest.
  2. The report will be delivered to the homes of parents in RUSD for ease of access.
  3. The report will also be available for community distribution sites (e.g., Chamber of Commerce, local businesses, etc.).
  4. The intention of the Board is to provide an informative report that is also authentic -- and not necessarily a "glitzy" marketing report.
  5. The entire cost of this report is paid for by Altura Credit Union.
  6. There is a one page insert that tries to descibe short answers to Frequently Asked Questions regarding the budget.
  7. We hope and believe that this is the FIRST report and that we will be providing similar reports every year as we progress forward.
We hope that this annual report will be helpful to you and inform you of just a few of the things that are happening in our School District.  Of course, we continue to provide daily updates on any number of topics through our District webpage at: http://www.rusdlink.org/

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

In The News

California competed in Round II of Race To The Top (RTTT) and once again was not selected.  While there is great interest in system reform in California, we have not been competitive in this national competition.  Regardless of RTTT and federal dollars, we in California need to continue to be more aggressive in moving our system to a 21st century model that responds to the global competition.

Also this past week the Governor has encouraged local school districts to be transparent in their reporting of financial and budgetary information.  We certainly applaud the Governor's effort and have consistently been attempting to do exactly that ourselves.  While we hope that is has been obvious and there is a great deal of budget information on our District website under Budget Update and Budget Information.  More specifically, the Governor requested reporting on:
  • The amount of money going to our classroom instruction (teachers, etc.) -- which we have previously reported -- on slide #13 on page #7 on our website -- which is significantly above any state requirement.
  • Additionally, there is the actual state report (along with many others) that is available on the website for public review and information.
Certainly, our continued goal is to provide transparency and improve our communication to all concerned regarding all of our RUSD operations.

Monday, August 23, 2010

"A Penny Saved Is A Penny Earned"

When we think and talk about budget times like those that we are currently in -- the vast majority of the conversation is on how, when, and where to make reductions.  We sometimes miss the other side of the equation of how we enhance what we have or as Ben Franklin "coined" it, "A Penny Saved Is A Penny Earned" -- except we are talking about dollars not pennies.

While there obviously has been lots of discussion on the reduction side of things, we have also been working on the "savings" side of things.  More specifically, we have been working to save energy and their related costs.  We have for some time been aggressive about pursuing energy savings by investing in equipment and software that gives us maximum utilization.  However, we have recently been engaged in a program to help us with modifying our behavior -- which has effects on our energy uses.

We have been engaged in this endeavor for less than a year -- and have a six month data report.  The news of 1/2 of a year is good!! We have saved (avoided energy costs) over $560,000.  Those savings can obviously go to preservation of jobs and other critical costs.  Stated in an environmental manner, this would be similar to removing over 260 automobiles from our highways and streets every year.

I commend our Energy Managers as well as the entire staff on this effort and the savings that have been achieved to date.  While I am encouraged by the results and am thankful for the savings, I know we can even do better, as we work together to make this program effective.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Performance on "testing"

As we come upon the time when the state releases the state test data from last Spring, it seems appropriate to try to clarify a couple of things.  Recently, I was accurately quoted in a Press Enterprise column as saying, "I think we are frankly much better than our test scores."  I stand behind that statement, but would like to clarify some of my intention:
  • We can, should, and will improve our student learning that is demonstrated on state assessments (which I also said when I made the earlier statement).
  • Test data is one thing -- but typically it is somewhat narrow in its scope (e.g., focuses on math and language arts to the exclusion of science, arts, etc.).
  • We have students and programs that don't show on "tests" but nonetheless have extraordinary results by any measure.  Some examples would include:
    • Arlington HS Envirothon Team -- the North American Champions of this highly competitive assessment
    •  A number of our athletic teams that are recognized across the county and CIF as having "best in sport" grade point averages -- demonstrating that athletics and academics do go together.
    • Many of our HS bands and performing arts programs that are renowned regionally (and beyond).
    • Our students in high performing activities of Science Fair, History Day, and Mock Trial -- that are regionally and nationally recognized.
    • Our recently initiated AP Chinese class at North HS where 100% of the students scored a perfect score on their national Advanced Placement examination.

I commend our students, parents, and staff on providing great experiences and performances, beyond those that are "measured" by a single test assessment.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Jobs Bill -- Revisited

I know there is much concern about the federal jobs bill and its potential impact on both our District and those teachers and classified staff that have been laid off.  I also know that my scenario of how RUSD may, in fact, not receive much, if any, assistance with this bill is very disconcerting. 

As such, I want to share an article in the Sacramento Bee that I became aware of today.  I am sharing it NOT because it is going to be what happens -- but because it again offers some perspective of the complexity and options in this situation.

Jobs Bill -- Round II

After my last post on this topic, the feds did indeed pass the bill (a FAA bill at that).  However, questions continue to abound.  While there is clear language in the federal bill, it gets might muddy after that, and bottom line we need to understand what the "rules," issues, and requirements are with this (and any) legislation.

All states (including California) need to turn their application into Washington, D.C. by September 9, 2010.  Assuming the approval of the application, the money will be released after that time.  In the case of California, there are at least two key issues:
  1. Maintenance of Effort (MOE) -- The state has legal obligations to continue paying for what they start.  Our best interpretation, at this moment, is that the state cannot qualify in this category until they make some adjustments.  Of course, the larger question might be can CA legitimately take on any new MOE efforts when they can't pay their current bills?  But that is for Sacramento to determine.
  2. The State Budget Situation -- When Sacramento is looking for money to balance their budget (which they are), it has been obvious that any and all use of "smoke and mirrors" is appropriate to get to that end.  Thereby, leaving us with the question -- Do we (local school districts) actually get any money out of this deal?
As I stated earlier, there is a question as to how California or any state will distribute their federal job funds.  It is now clear that they can choose either to do it in the normal manner on a per student basis OR they can utilize the Title I procedure -- which favors the less affluent schools and districts.  Potentially, with a Title I distribution there may be questions as to how the funds can be spent (as with all Title I funds).  By federal law, the funds must be spent by September 30, 2012.

It does appear from the regulations that the money can be used for all employee groups (i.e., teachers, classified, and principals) at the school site level

While there are many politicians claiming victory for "saving teachers jobs" with this bill, they have provided something less than clarity on the matter. Obviously, given all the above, how many employees would be positively effected and when -- are impossible questions to answer at this point.  We will continue to monitor and report progress on this important item.  I am sure we will make every effort to move forward as quickly and prudently as possible in this matter.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Changes in the SYSTEM?

An interesting, if not a provocative, article in a recent issue of the LA Times.  They are moving the same direction as the feds with a move from HQT (Highly Qualified Teachers) to HET (Highly Effective Teachers).  In the case of the times, they are asking about the data available in LA Unified and the efficacy of individual teachers (somewhat like the RTTT requirements for teacher evaluations to be based on student data).  Of course the next question is, what does effective mean?

In this case, the Times has utilized a statistical approach with student test scores to come to their "value-added" conclusions.  More specifically they have utilized individualized student scores from the annual, state-required California Standards Test (CST).  While there are certainly other measures that are valued and valuable -- that is what they choose.  Additionally, they attempted to account for variations in all the normal student demographic variables.

This approach (Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System) was pioneered by Dr. William Sanders in Tennessee several years ago (1993) -- and while controversial has arguably assisted Tennessee in making serious progress in their public education system.  Part of Sander's conclusion when the data was fully analyzed statewide was that there were lots of surprises -- a number of affluent schools did not perform well -- a number of less-affluent schools performed well.  However, Sander's analysis was based on a school-by-school basis, not a teacher-by-teacher basis.

Regardless, of the varied views on this matter (and there are varied views), it is clear that this is the direction that the federal Department of Education is headed with our state leadership close behind.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Help or no help!

There continues to be lots of discussion and media accounts of the possible $26 Billion bailout bill from the feds to assist in the rehiring of teacher (avoidance of job loss).  The problem is that few of us know what it means AND it is NOT approved yet -- meanwhile school is starting in a week and a half.  Specific to the California issue and problem the following things seem relevant to the issue (at least today).
  • This is "one-time money" and as such fixes things for one more year, but does not resolve the basic problem
  • Estimates of the distribution of funds would indicated that California would receive something approximating $1 Billion and "save" approximately 13,000 teachers across the state.
  • Typically this type of money has what is called a "maintenance of effort" (MOE) requirement -- which in the past CA has figured out how to skirt the issue.  MOE is intended to make sure that the state doesn't take the money before it gets to us.
    • Best estimates at this time are that IF there is an MOE, California cannot meet the requirements -- but who knows that could change.
    • A related matter, is after the fed bill is approved and they make their rules, THEN the state typically takes the money and make the state rules (none of which we know at this time).
  • Should this bill and should CA qualify and should ... and should ...  THEN local school districts should receive approximately $140-160 per student -- which obviously would be a great help.
  • Probably the biggest question of all is HOW the money will be distributed.  Currently there are two theories:
    • Money is distributed as an equitable allocation to all districts/schools
    • Money is distributed through the federal Title I program.  Should this occur there definitely will be a LACK of equity between schools and districts.  Additionally, there are lots of rules with Title I that will make expenditure of funds somewhat problematic and at times will seem irrational.
  • Finally, IF all of this happens -- the next question would be WHEN we would actually receive the money (which is never fast).  MY best guess is that the earliest we can expect to see any of these funds would be during this coming Spring in anticipation for 11-12.
While this is kinda where we are today, this obviously can and does change on a daily basis.  Aren't you glad I "cleared" all of this up?

Friday, August 6, 2010

One More Time!!!

After winning multiple local, regional, and state championships -- The Arlington Lions Envirothon Team won the NATIONAL title yesterday in Fresno, California where the 2010 Canon International Envirothon Contest was held on the CSU Fresno campus (and environs).  The competition is the largest high school environmental science competition in North America with typically 500,000 students being involved.  The Arlington HS team won 1st in Soils and 1st Overall.
These student winners not only won recognition for themselves and their high school, but also substantial  scholarship / cash awards to support their further study and collegiate journey.

The team also has been supportive of their  fellow students and the community.  Most recently, they spent the day at Longfellow Elementary assisting with the Space Day by providing elementary students with environmental science activities and lessons to complement the space and engineering fare.

Congratulations to Arlington High School and especially their Envirothon team led by Ms. Shari Harris, science teacher at Arlington.

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Mark THE Day

Recently (July 20, 2010), via the New York Times, Amazon announced that for the first time ever, their sales of eBooks were greater than their hard copy books.  While I have no idea of how many books Amazon sells in a given week or month, I have heard that it is quite a few.  Therefore, it seems significant and is impactful on what we do in schools and elsewhere in our lives.  Personally, I LOVE books (meaning the hard copy version), but that doesn't change the progress and options available.  Clearly this is a trend that we will continue to see along with the proliferation of digital textbooks and other digital material in our classrooms.