Voice For Liberty

Tag: Kansas Association of School Boards

  • Kansas schools and other states

    Kansas schools and other states

    A joint statement released by Kansas Association of School Boards, United School Administrators of Kansas, Kansas School Superintendents’ Association, and Kansas National Education Association makes claims about Kansas public schools that aren’t factual.

    The Kansas public school establishment is proud of Kansas schools. In a joint statement released at the start of this year’s legislative session, satisfaction with schools is evident: “Our Kansas public schools are great. … The results are there. Working with parents and communities, Kansas schools rank in the top ten nationally on every measure on reading and math tests, high school completion and college preparation.”

    According to National Center for Education Statistics, Kansas does have a high percentage of students that graduate from high school. But this is the only bright spot for Kansas students. In many other measures Kansas is near the middle of the states, and in some cases much below the middle.

    In the recent report Quality Counts by Education Week, Kansas ranked twentieth overall among the states.

    For last year’s ACT scores, Kansas ranked twenty-first in composite score. Kansas ranked twentieth in readiness for college in English, and twentieth also for math readiness.

    In U.S. News and World Report’s How States Compare in the 2015 Best High Schools Rankings, we find Kansas ranked forty-fifth among the states, with 1.3 percent of its high schools earning a gold or silver medal. There were no gold medals; only silver.

    The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as “The Nation’s Report Card,” reveals the unfortunate weakness in Kansas schools. NAEP is a test that is the same in all jurisdictions. Consider fourth grade math, looking at the percent of students who score “proficient” or better. For all students, Kansas ranks twenty-second, a little above the middle. But when we look at subgroups, something else appears. For black students Kansas ranks thirty-eighth, for Hispanic students the rank is thirty-fourth, and for white students the rank is twenty-ninth. Similar patterns exist for math and reading in grades four and eight. The highest Kansas ranks in any subgroup is fifteenth for grade eight math for Hispanic students. (Click here for a pdf version of these rankings. An interactive visualization of these scores is here.)

    NAEP Scores, Kansas and National. Click for larger version.
    NAEP Scores, Kansas and National. Click for larger version.
    When comparing Kansas NAEP scores to the national average, using appropriate subgroups, we find that often Kansas underperforms the national average. The reason for this anomaly is Simpson’s Paradox, in which aggregated data hides differences between subgroups. Given that white students across the nation score higher than black or Hispanic students, and that Kansas has a high proportion of white students compared to the nation and many states, Simpson’s Paradox makes Kansas NAEP scores — only when considering all students — appear high. But if you are a parent with young black children learning to read, would you rather be in Kansas (thirty-seventh in reading for black students, grade four), Louisiana (twenty-fifth), or Colorado (third)?

    It’s unfortunate that Kansas does not rank better in all these measures. What’s worse is the insistence that Kansas schoolchildren are doing well. Notwithstanding this evidence, after listing all the ways Kansas schools and teachers work to make school great, the joint statement says “This is how the Kansas school system operates. We are good at.”

    But it isn’t good for Kansas schoolchildren to be in a system that does not recognize the truth.

  • Must it be public schools?

    Must it be public schools?

    A joint statement released by Kansas Association of School Boards, United School Administrators of Kansas, Kansas School Superintendents’ Association, and Kansas National Education Association exposes the attitudes of the Kansas public school establishment.

    In a joint statement by the leaders of the Kansas public school establishment the clear theme is that education must be provided by public schools. Not schools in general, but public schools.

    There’s no reason that education must be provided by government, and many reasons to keep government out of education. Across the spectrum of human activity, government provides services at high cost, with low levels of diversity and innovation, and with low accountability. School choice programs allow parents and children to find alternative non-governmental sources of education (although charter schools are public schools).

    Defenders of public schools over school choice programs note that parents do have choice. Parents can, they say, enroll their children in private schools. But these parents still must pay for the public schools, which severely reduces their ability to pay private school tuition. That isn’t much choice. And for parents in poor neighborhoods, such as Wichita’s zip code 67214 where the median family income is $29,637, there isn’t much money available for private school tuition, or to move their households to suburban school districts. The latter is a form of school choice available to middle-class and wealthy parents that isn’t available to low-income families.

    Across the country 393,467 students participate in school choice programs, in this case defined as vouchers, tax credit scholarships, or education savings accounts. 1 There are around 49 million students in public schools. So for every one student in these school choice programs, 125 students remain in public schools.

    Despite the small number of students enrolled in school choice programs, the anti-choice establishment vigorously fights against any school choice program, even the small Kansas tax credit scholarship program. Kansas State Department of Education reports that since the beginning of the scholarship program, there have been 73 students awarded scholarships which totaled $108,384. 2

    Seventy-three students. $108,384. The public school establishment describes this as a grave threat, something that drains public schools of funds. For a bit of context, there are executives of Kansas Association of School Boards and Kansas National Education Association that earn more than $108,384 per year. These executives earn these salaries, in part, by blocking the type of school choice programs that benefit children living in Wichita’s zip code 67214 with its median family income of $29,637.

    Why is the public school establishment so firmly against school choice? Private schools don’t pay dues to the Kansas Association of School Boards. Teachers not in traditional public schools are not members of Kansas National Education Association, the teachers union. Without this revenue, it might be difficult to pay the high salaries of KASB and KNEA executives and staff.

    But there’s more. The ideological bent of these groups is for more government, more taxes, more government spending, and more governmental control over the people of Kansas. Consider this sentence from the joint statement: “Now, we turn our attention this week to the Statehouse in Topeka where the Legislature is gathering to consider how to provide for the people of Kansas.” (emphasis added)

    In a nutshell, there is the paternalistic governing philosophy of our state’s public school establishment: Government provides for us.

  • School choice in Kansas: The haves and have-nots

    School choice in Kansas: The haves and have-nots

    Kansas non-profit executives work to deny low-income families the school choice opportunities that executive salaries can afford.

    Kansas Association of School BoardsKansas Association of School Boards
    Executives and annual salaries 1
    John Heim, Executive Director $158,809
    Donna Whiteman, Assistant Executive Director $105,872

    Can afford to send their children to any school.

    Kansas National Education AssociationKansas National Education Association Political Action Committee
    Executives and annual salaries 2
    Karen Godfrey, President $98,234
    Claudette Johns, Executive Director $125,052
    Kevin Riemann, Associate Executive Director $123,143
    David Schnauer, General Counsel $114,886
    Marjorie Blaufuss, Staff Counsel $116,731
    Mark Desetti, Director of Governmental Relations $115,106
    Anthony White, Uniserv Director $112,605
    Burle Neely, Uniserv Director $111,199

    Can afford to send their children to any school.

    All the above lobby vigorously against any form of school choice.

    Zip code 67214 in Wichita from Google mapsZip code 67214, Northeast Wichita
    Median family income $29,637 3

    Can this family afford school choice?

    School Choice in Kansas - The Haves and Have Nots b

    —

    Notes:

    1. Source: IRS Form 990 for 2013 ↩
    2. Source: IRS Form 990 for 2013 ↩
    3. Source: U.S. Census, 2014 ↩
  • Survey finds Kansans with little knowledge of school spending

    Survey finds Kansans with little knowledge of school spending

    As in years past, a survey finds that when Kansans are asked questions about the level of school spending, few have the correct information. From Kansas Policy Institute.

    Survey Finds Kansans Misled on School Spending

    December 14, 2015 — Wichita — Kansas Policy Institute released a new Survey USA Poll of 509 registered voters in Kansas showing a significant disconnect between voters’ perception of Kansas school spending and true expenditures.

    The survey found 47% of Kansans believe per-pupil funding has dropped more than 5% in the last 5 years. Another 15% believe it has dropped less than 5%. In fact, school funding has increased by 6.4%. Only 7% of those surveyed believe there have been such increases.

    “The narrative coming out of school districts is intentionally misleading,” said Kansas Policy Institute President Dave Trabert. “District officials aided by their government funded lobbyists are telling parents and students that because they didn’t receive increases as big as they want, they are being ‘cut’. This is patently false.”

    Citizens have also been misled about actual funding amounts. The survey found 61% of Kansans believe per-pupil funding from the state is less than $5,000 when in reality, it was $8,567 last year; 61% also believe total funding is less than $10,000, while actual funding was $13,124 per pupil. Less than 10% of Kansans identified true funding levels. “Knowing the extent to which school districts have misled Kansans, it’s no wonder that so many are upset about school funding,” said KPI President Dave Trabert.

    However, when voters are faced with the factual data of per pupil spending and cash reserve balances, a majority reject the idea of paying more taxes to fund schools, 50% somewhat or strongly disagree to 41% somewhat or strongly agree.

    “Every Kansan wants to do what is best for their child’s education. Unfortunately, too many Kansans haven’t been trusted with the complete truth and won’t have the opportunity to make sure their children are in the best possible situation to succeed,” said KPI Vice President and Policy Director James Franko.

    The survey also found that 66% agree, somewhat or strongly, that spending on out-of-the-classroom expenses should be provided on a more efficient, regional basis to divert savings back into classroom spending. only 21% are somewhat or strongly opposed.Support for this common-sense concept extends across all geographic and ideological boundaries, yet local school boards remain fiercely opposed.

    “Kansans need to know the truth about record-setting school funding”, said Dave Trabert. “Only through an informed citizenry can we create sound economic policy and improve education outcomes for our students.”

    The survey was of 509 registered voters with a 4.4% margin of error. Full results of the survey can be viewed here.

  • Kansas NAEP scores for 2015

    Kansas NAEP scores for 2015

    Reactions to the release of National Assessment of Educational Progress scores for Kansas and the nation. Also, an interactive visualization.

    Results for the 2015 administration of the National Assessment of Educational Progress became available October 28. The test, sometimes called the “nation’s report card,” is described as “the largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas.”

    The Wichita Eagle didn’t have much to say on this, reporting “Results from the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress show that Kansas scores dropped in most areas since 2013, state education officials announced Wednesday. The decreases echo a downward trend in scores nationwide on the NAEP exam, also known as the Nation’s Report Card.”

    The Kansas State Department of Education reported “Results from the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) exams, also known as the Nation’s Report Card, show that Kansas followed the national trend of decreasing scores. Across the nation this year, both fourth- and eighth-grade mathematic scores, as well as eighth-grade reading scores, are lower in 2015 than in 2013. Fourth-grade reading scores aren’t significantly different from 2013.”

    The Lawrence Journal-World used the Associated Press story: “Kansas schoolchildren are faring worse on a test known as the nation’s report card. The state’s performance dip follows a national trend of falling scores on the National Assessment of Educational progress.” So too did the Topeka Capital-Journal.

    The Kansas Association of School Boards noted “State and national education leaders, including KASB, are currently researching the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress scores, which were released earlier this week. Both nationally and in Kansas the 2015 NAEP results decreased slightly. … While Kansas results decreased slightly, Kansas student achievement remained above the national average in 4th- and 8th grade math and 8th grade reading and was the same as the national average in 4th grade reading. KASB is currently doing an in-depth analysis of the NAEP results and release its findings as soon as possible.”

    Kansas Governor Sam Brownback issued a statement: “Today’s NAEP scores reflect the need for real education reform to benefit our students. This is a complex issue with no single cause or solution and today’s results confirm a trend showing that even though education funding has increased by more than $1 billion over the past decade, NAEP scores have remained largely flat. … While our Kansas schools remain above the national average, we can and should do more. We want our students to excel and have the skills they need to succeed in school and life in the 21st century. To do that, we must work to get more dollars into the classroom and into the infrastructure our teachers need to improve student performance, particularly in math. We need flexibility at the local level to address students’ needs, and we should support the great efforts of the thousands of teachers who work every day to help give our students opportunity for a brighter future.”

    Some of these statements compared Kansas scores to the national average. That is not appropriate if there are subgroups that score at different levels, and if the composition of these subgroups varies significantly between states or the national average. That is the case with Kansas, which has significantly lower minority populations than the nation and some states. Care must be used when making comparisons.

    To assist in understanding NAEP scores, I’ve updated two interactive visualizations with 2015 data. One visualization shows subgroups based on race/ethnicity, and the other shows subgroups based on national school lunch program eligibility, which is a commonly-used surrogate for income.

    Each visualization has a number of tabs that display data in different ways. Most tabs allow for filtering of data in several ways.

    Click here to access the visualizations.

    Example from the visualization. Click for larger.
    Example from the visualization. Click for larger.
    Example from the visualization. Click for larger.
    Example from the visualization. Click for larger.
  • Kansas school funding growing faster than inflation

    Kansas school funding growing faster than inflation

    Kansas school funding has been growing much faster inflation and enrollment, but for some, it will never be enough, and they will continue to use taxpayer money to press their monetary demands, writes Dave Trabert of Kansas Policy Institute.

    Even by KASB standards, school operating spending is $3.9 billion ahead of inflation

    By Dave Trabert

    A recent blog post by the Kansas Association of School Boards (KASB) Associate Executive Director Mark Tallman says “Total school district funding is, in fact, at an all-time high, expected to top $6.1 billion this year” but “… the part of school funding available for day-to-day operating costs is not keeping up with inflation and enrollment.” There are several misleading aspects to his statement and the data does not support the intended message, but let’s first give credit for the courage to contradict education officials who say funding has been cut. Bravo!

    KASB’s definition of operating costs does not comport with the official definition used by the Kansas Department of Education or the U.S. Department of Education1, but for the sake of argument, let’s say that it’s correct. Let’s also assume that their definition of current operating funding represents the amount needed to efficiently operate schools and achieve the required outcomes, even though the facts refute any such claim.

    By increasing the KASB-defined operating spending for inflation (the calculation for 2006 is $6,928 times (191.41 ÷ 185.14) = $7,162), we find that schools received a lot more money each year than if KASB’s 2005 amount had been increased each year for inflation. The margin of difference is getting closer over the next two years (if one doesn’t count all of the funding), but funding will have exceeded inflation by almost $3.9 billion since 2005.

    KASB uses a different methodology in their inflation analysis. They show prior years’ spending in 2014 inflation-adjusted (constant) dollars; i.e., $X spending in 2014 has the same buying power as $Y in prior years. That methodology is common for restating buying power but it is irrelevant to the question of whether schools are or have been adequately funded.

    The Kansas Constitution says the legislature must make suitable provision for the finance of public education; it does not say that schools must be given whatever they want to spend or that efficient use of taxpayer money cannot be taken into account. The honest truth is that no one knows what schools need to achieve the necessary outcomes while making efficient use of taxpayer money, because no such analysis has ever been undertaken in Kansas. We do know, however, that every Legislative Post Audit has found schools to be operating inefficiently and school superintendents openly acknowledge that they choose to spend more than is necessary in many circumstances. We also know that school districts haven’t even spent all of the money they’ve received over the last ten years, as about $400 million has been used to increase operating cash reserves.

    There may be ways to demonstrate that today’s funding has less buying power than a particular point in time but that doesn’t mean that each year’s funding didn’t keep up with inflation and enrollment — as shown above, per-pupil funding as defined by KASB was $3.9 billion more than an inflationary increase.

    The gap is even greater for total funding, which would have been $6 billion less over the last ten years if per-pupil funding for the 2005 school year had been increased each year for inflation. School districts received large funding increases beginning in 2006 from a Supreme Court Montoy ruling based on a cost study that has since been abandoned by the Supreme Court in Gannon.

    The Shawnee County District Court may believe that schools are not adequately funded, but they ignored the Kansas Supreme Court in arriving at what amounts to little more than a political perspective. School funding has been growing much faster inflation and enrollment, but for some, it will never be enough … and they will continue to use taxpayer money to fund KASB justifications (and attorneys) for their monetary demands.

     

    1KSDE and the U.S. Department of Education say operating expenditures “…do not include equipment (700 object codes), Capital Outlay or Bond & Interest. [700 object codes include expenditures for acquiring fixed assets, including land or existing buildings; improvements of grounds; initial equipment; additional equipment; and replacement of equipment.]”  The KASB definition also excludes Food Service and employee retirement costs but they don’t disclose that their definition is not the official definition and it also does not comport with the Kansas Supreme Court, which says all funding sources, including retirement costs, should be considered as part of adequate funding.

  • Kansas school employees, the trend

    Kansas school employees, the trend

    The trend in Kansas public school employment and teacher/pupil ratios may surprise you, given the narrative presented by public schools.

    “More students, but fewer teachers — Since 2009, Kansas schools have gained more than 19,000 students but have 665 fewer teachers.” (Quality at Risk: Impact of Education Cuts, Kansas Center for Economic Growth)

    “Class sizes have increased, teachers and staff members have been laid off.” (What’s the Matter With Kansas’ Schools?, New York Times)

    This is typical of the sentiment in Kansas — that there are fewer teachers since Sam Brownback became governor, and that class sizes have exploded.

    Kansas school enrollment and employment data. Click for the interactive visualization of this data.
    Kansas school enrollment and employment data. Click for the interactive visualization of this data.
    Below is a chart of data from Kansas State Department of Education. This data shows that for the past four years employment is rising, both for teachers and certified employees. Also, the ratio of these employees to students is falling, meaning fewer pupils per employee.

    Class size is not the same as pupil-teacher ratio. But if there are proportionally more teachers than students, we have to wonder why class sizes are growing. What are the teachers doing?

    The story is not the same in each school district. I’ve created an interactive visualization that lets you examine the employment levels and ratios in individual Kansas school districts. Click here to open the visualization in a new window.

    Kansas School Enrollment and Employment
    Kansas School Enrollment and Employment
    Kansas School Employment
    Kansas School Employment
    Kansas School Pupil-Teacher Ratio
    Kansas School Pupil-Teacher Ratio
  • For Kansas schools, a share of your income is the standard

    For Kansas schools, a share of your income is the standard

    If Kansas personal income rises but the school spending establishment doesn’t get its cut, something is wrong, they say.

    A publication by KASB is titled “Despite increases, share of Kansans’ incomes spent on public schools is at a 30-year low.”

    In the document, KASB, the Kansas Association of School Boards, states: “According to new reports released by state agencies, total funding for Kansas school districts will exceed $6 billion for the first time this year. However, when compared to the total income of all Kansans, school spending will be at the lowest level in at least 30 years.”

    This is not the first time KASB has made this argument. It’s a curious and ultimately spurious argument, that even though more will be spent on Kansas schools this year, it’s still not enough, as Kansan’s incomes rose faster than school spending.

    Can we list the reasons why this argument is illogical?

    1. What if Kansas income declined? Would KASB then call for reducing school spending to match? Not likely.

    2. What if the number of students declined? Would KASB then be satisfied with spending less of our income on public schools? I don’t think so.

    3. What if Kansans decided to spend more on private education rather than public education? Would KASB be satisfied if the total spent on education remained constant? Not likely, as KASB is only concerned about public education. Money spent on private education, in fact, is viewed by KASB as money that should have been spent on public schools.

    Another indication of the perversity of this argument is that spending less of a share of our income to obtain a product or service is usually viewed as an advancement, not a situation to be cured. For example in 1929, American households spent 23.4 percent of disposable personal income on food. In 2013 it was 9.8 percent. This is a good thing. We have to work less in order to feed ourselves.

    But to the Kansas school spending establishment, that’s not the way the world should work. If personal income rises, so too should Kansas school spending, they say. This is the entitlement society at work. When KASB writes “Kansas are spending less of their income to fund public education” it’s not meant as a sign of advancement. Instead, it is the Kansas school spending establishment complaining that it isn’t getting its share.

    It’s a risky argument to make. Many Kansans are concerned that school spending rises while the quality of education falls. Kansas school vigorously oppose any sort of market-based reforms to Kansas education, such as school choice or treating teachers like private-sector employees are treated.

    Now, Kansas schools argue that if hard-working Kansans increase their income, schools should get their cut too.

  • School boards in Kansas

    Voice for Liberty Radio 150x150Mark Tallman, associate executive director for advocacy at Kansas Association of School Boards addressed members and guests of the Wichita Pachyderm Club on January 9, 2015. The slides from his presentation are below.

    [gview file=”http://wichitaliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/School-Boards-in-Kansas-Mark-Tallman-2015-01-09.pdf”]