Kansas State Board of Education

Kansas school test scores, in perspective

by Bob Weeks on January 10, 2013

We hear a lot about how Kansas shouldn’t strive to become more like Texas, especially regarding schools. Defenders of high school spending in Kansas portray Texas as a backwater state with poor schools.

Superficially, it looks like the Kansas school spending establishment has a valid point. Scores on the National Assessment of Education Progress, a test that is the same in all states, has Kansas scoring better than Texas (with one tie) in reading and math, in both fourth and eighth grade.

That makes sense to the school spending establishment, as Kansas, in 2009, spent $11,427 per student. Texas spent $11,085, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Considering only spending deemed by NCES to be for instruction, it was Kansas at $6,162 per student and Texas at $5,138.

Texas also has larger class sizes, or more precisely, a higher pupil/teacher ratio. Texas has 14.56 students for each teacher. In Kansas, it’s 13.67. (2009 figures, according to NCES.)

So for those who believe that school spending is positively correlated with student success, Kansas and Texas NAEP scores are evidence that they’re correct in their belief.

But let us take another look at the Kansas and Texas NAEP scores. Here’s a table of 2011 scores.

Notice that when reporting scores for all students, Kansas has the highest scores, except for one tie. But when we look at subgroups, all the sudden the picture is different: Texas has the best scores in all cases, except for two ties. Similar patterns exist for previous years.

Kansas students score better than Texas students, that is true. It is also true that Texas white students score better than Kansas white students, Texas black students score better than Kansas black students, and Texas Hispanic students score better than or tie Kansas Hispanic students. The same pattern holds true for other ethnic subgroups.

How can this be? The answer is Simpson’s Paradox. A Wall Street Journal article explains: “Put simply, Simpson’s Paradox reveals that aggregated data can appear to reverse important trends in the numbers being combined.”

The Wikipedia article explains: “A paradox in which a trend that appears in different groups of data disappears when these groups are combined, and the reverse trend appears for the aggregate data.”

In this case, the confounding factor (“lurking” variable) is that the two states differ greatly in the proportion of white students. In Kansas, 69 percent of students are white. In Texas it’s 33 percent. This large difference in the composition of students is what makes it look like Kansas students perform better on the NAEP than Texas students.

But looking at the scores for ethnic subgroups, which state would you say has the most desirable set of NAEP scores?

Kansas progressives and those who support more spending on schools say we don’t want to be like Texas. I wonder if they are aware of Simpson’s Paradox.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas State Department of Education, Kansas state government, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 1 comment }

Electing Kansas legislators: Education issues

by Guest Author on October 31, 2012

By Dr. Walt Chappell
Member, Kansas State Board of Education

Before Kansas voters can decide who should represent them in the state Legislature, we must have accurate information. This is especially important when it comes to which candidates will make responsible decisions about how to improve our schools.

Some campaign mailers and editorials claim that student achievement has improved and funding for Kansas schools has been drastically cut. Neither is true.

To give the impression that more students are “proficient” in reading and math, the State Department of Education lowered cut scores in 2005. Since then, high school students only have to answer 50 percent of the state math questions correct to be labeled “proficient.” They also claim that any student who gets 40 percent on the state science test “Meets Standard.”

As anyone who has gone to school knows, getting 40 or 50 percent on a test is failing. Yet, by lowering the bar so low that nearly all students appear to be “proficient,” the state education staff have mislead the legislature, voters, and parents into thinking that our students are learning what they need to know to compete for jobs in the global economy.

But, this spring’s results on the ACT test show that only 29 percent of Kansas students are ready for college. On the national NAEP test, less than 40 percent are proficient. Even though Kansas scores on these national tests have stayed low for 15 years, state bureaucrats claim 86 percent of our K-12 students are now “proficient.” Education lobbyists then repeat just the inflated state test scores to demand more funding for schools.

Due to the economic recession, the base state aid for schools was cut some under governors Sebelius and Parkinson but federal stimulus money made up the difference in most districts. Under Governor Brownback, the Legislature added money back into school budgets.

However, over the past 10 years, school districts have spent $2.7 billion more to teach the same number of students. That is an increase of 56 percent. They also held back $874 million in their bank accounts last year. With more of our tax dollars being spent and kept each year to educate Kansas students while test scores remain flat, why are lobbyists claiming that schools need more money?

Significant changes must be made to prepare our students for 21st century jobs. But using taxpayer money to sue the state to increase funding and repeating false claims about student achievement will not get Kansans where we need to be.

So, it is up to the voters to elect responsible legislators, judges and school board members who will ask tough questions, demand honest answers and make the hard decisions needed to improve our public schools.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas legislature, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 0 comments }

At Kansas Board of Education, some questions aren’t allowed

by Bob Weeks on September 20, 2012

At a meeting of the Kansas State Board of Education, it became clear that there are certain topics and questions that aren’t to be discussed in public.

At September’s meeting (video here), BOE chair David Dennis interrupted questioning by board member Walt Chappell and proceeded to the next member’s questions. Chappell was asking whether “cut scores” had declined and whether definitions of “meets standard” and “proficiency” had changed. Dennis would not allow these questions to be answered.

It’s clear that Dennis — and the entire Kansas public school bureaucracy — doesn’t want to talk about these questions. Here’s why.

Until this year, scores on Kansas-administered and controlled assessments have been rising — “jumping,” in the recent words of Kansas Education Commissioner Diane DeBacker. But scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for Kansas students don’t reflect the same trend. Scores on this test, which is given every two years, haven’t been rising as they have on the Kansas-controlled test scores. Sometimes they decline.

We now know why the Kansas-controlled test scores have risen: The Kansas State Department of Education has lowered standards. Kansas Policy Institute has done the research.

In Removing Barriers to Better Public Education, updated in June with new data, KPI concludes: “In 2000 and 2001 a student needed at least 87% correct answers in Reading to be Proficient (the second-highest performance level), but from 2002 through 2005 they only needed 80% correct answers to be Proficient (the third highest level) on the same test; Proficiency in Math required only 48% correct answers, down from 60%.”

It’s not only KPI that has noticed that Kansas schools have low standards. Data from U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reveals that Kansas has low standards for its schools, compared to other states.

These are the types of things the Kansas school public school establishment doesn’t want Kansans to know. Board of Education chair David Dennis uses his authority to silence those who might mention these facts.

While Dennis squelches those who ask inconvenient questions about Kansas public schools, he floated a proposal to increase regulation of homeschooling in Kansas. It’s simply incredible that someone presiding over a failing system — and proud to be part of that system — would want to extend his influence and control over people who have taken great effort to escape the public schools.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas Policy Institute, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas State Department of Education, Kansas state government, Regulation, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 4 comments }

Kansas schools receive NCLB waiver

by Bob Weeks on July 23, 2012

Last week Kansas received a waiver from the main provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

The press release from Kansas State Department of Education reads in part: “With the approval, the accountability system for Kansas schools will shift from ensuring a prescribed percentage of students achieve proficiency on state reading and math assessments each year to ensuring schools achieve a prescribed level of improvement on at least one of several Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) established by the state. … With the waiver in place, the state can now look to multiple measures to assess the performance of Kansas schools in helping all students achieve.”

One of the major criticisms of NCLB is its emphasis on high-stakes testing in reading and math, which may lead to over-emphasis on these subjects at the expense of others. “Teaching to the test” is another related criticism.

But we need to be watchful of the standards Kansas state officials establish going forward. That’s because few states have lower standards than Kansas. One of the features of NCLB is that it let each state establish its own standards for evaluating student learning. What we find is states like Kansas have rising scores on their own state tests, but steady or even falling scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests, called “the nation’s report card.” See Kansas needs truth about schools.

The waiver will also require Kansas to modify the way teachers are evaluated. Again, from the KSDE press release: “Another key component of the state’s waiver is related to evaluating teachers and school leaders. Among the criteria for achieving a waiver request was implementing an evaluation system that includes student achievement as a significant factor in the evaluation. The Kansas plan calls for appointing a commission to identify the most effective means of tying student achievement to teacher and leader evaluations and building that into the existing Kansas Educator Evaluation Protocol (KEEP).”

KEEP is an evaluation system that was first used in the last school year on a pilot basis. In April Peter Hancock of Kansas Education Policy Report wrote: “Under guidelines for the waiver, states must either have an evaluation system in place that makes student achievement a ‘primary component’ of an evaluation, or they must commit to putting such a system in place by the end of this school year. Kansas is currently piloting a new system called the Kansas Educator Evaluation Protocol (KEEP), but it does not currently have a component that includes student achievement.”

Many people would be surprised to learn that student achievement has not been the primary factor used in evaluating teachers in Kansas. This is one of the reasons why Kansas has been found to rank low in policies on teacher quality.

The fact that 33 states have been granted waivers — and more have applied — raises questions regarding public policy and rule of law. Last year David Boaz wrote regarding the increased use of waivers from federal laws and regulations “The rule of waivers is not the rule of law. … Philip Hamburger of Columbia Law School says waivers raise ‘questions about whether we live under a government of laws. Congress can pass statutes that apply to some businesses and not others, but once a law has passed — and therefore is binding — how can the executive branch relieve some Americans of their obligation to obey it?’”

The No Child Left Behind law has proven to be very unpopular. The solution is to repeal it, rather than offering piecemeal waivers, especially since the waivers are accompanied by other regulation.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas State Department of Education, Kansas state government, Regulation, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 0 comments }

Harm of NCLB to be eclipsed

by Guest Author on March 30, 2012

By Dr. Walt Chappell, member, Kansas State Board of Education.

Recent ads in Kansas newspapers have told the truth about the unacceptable level of reading and math scores for Kansas students. Yet, for Diane DeBacker, the State Education Commissioner, and education lobbyists to continue to deny these documented results from Kansas schools is a disservice to our students, their parents and taxpayers. This massive cover-up has gone on for years and needs to stop.

All outside indicators of how well our schools are doing show that the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandates have been a major disaster and a tremendous waste of taxpayer money. Our students are not dumb plus our teachers and school administrators are doing what they have been told. But, largely due to these bureaucratic regulations, most students who graduate from American’s schools have not been taught the employable skills needed to compete for jobs in the global economy.

This is not just a Kansas problem. Anyone willing to look at the facts can clearly see that major changes must take place in what and how we teach America’s children the concepts and skills they need to be productive adults. Yet, the Federal and State education bureaucrats and their lobbyists keep claiming that there is nothing wrong with public education — just give them more money to spend.

Since the Montoy court decision in 2005, the Kansas legislature has appropriated $1 billion more for schools. But for the past 10 years, NAEP, ACT and SAT test scores still show that only about one-third of our students are “proficient.” With this new money, Kansas school districts hired over 6,000 new employees. And, since 2005, they had accumulated $868 million in unspent cash balances — an increase of 90 percent. Clearly, spending more tax dollars is not the answer to higher student achievement.

In Kansas and the nation, one in four students do not graduate. Of those who do graduate and go to college, over 30 percent need remediation. Only half finish college yet most end up with huge student loans to repay — whether they earned a degree, can find a job, or not.

A national commission has reported that 30 percent of high school graduates do not score high enough on aptitude tests to qualify to join the military. And, since the NCLB emphasis is only on teaching and testing reading and math, few students graduate with knowledge or skills for any other career.

Clearly, the NCLB mandates from federal bureaucrats are failing to prepare our students and putting our teachers in a “no win” position of “teaching to the test.” But, the majority of the State Board has “rubber stamped” Diane DeBacker, the Kansas Commissioner of Education’s request that Kansas schools comply with the new Federal mandate to replace the Kansas standards with something new called the “Common Core Standards,” or CSS.

However, there is no research to show that CCS will improve student achievement or that they are more relevant to what students need to learn. Yet, like NCLB, they will force teachers in every school to focus primarily on just reading and math so students can pass computerized national tests — which will replace the state assessments. As a result, there will be less time to teach all other subjects such as science, technology and careers.

CCS are an unfunded federal mandate which will cost Kansas taxpayers millions of dollars to implement. These “new” standards were written by unknown, unelected, and unaccountable academics who have close ties to private publishing companies which will make billions of dollars of profits at the taxpayers, students and teachers expense. As a result, no Kansas elected official will be allowed to make key decisions about what and how students are taught in any K-12 school.

The Kansas legislature and local school boards need to be strong and say “enough of this nonsense.” NCLB has not worked and CCS will be more of the same — but worse.

Our students and nation are at risk of losing much of what previous generations have worked hard to achieve. Let’s put an end to the federal NCLB and CCS in Kansas schools, and let our teachers teach the employable skills our students need to earn a living wage and keep America strong.

More information that Chappell has gathered may be found at his website, Walt Chappell: Main Issues.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas legislature, Kansas State Board of Education, Regulation, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 0 comments }

In Kansas, public school establishment attacks high standards

by Bob Weeks on March 23, 2012

When a Kansas public policy think tank placed ads in Kansas newspapers calling attention to the performance of Kansas schools, the public school establishment didn’t like it. The defense of the Kansas school status quo, especially that coming from Kansas Commissioner of Education Diane DeBacker, ought to cause Kansans to examine the motives of the public school spending establishment and their ability to be truthful about Kansas schools.

As an example, an ad placed by the Kansas Policy Institute in the Topeka Capital-Journal had a table of figures with the heading “2011 State Assessment Results: Percent of 11th Grade Students who Read Grade-Appropriate Material with Full Comprehension; Are Usually Accurate on All Grade-Level Math Tasks.” For the Topeka school district, the number given for reading was 36 percent, and for math, 26 percent.

The publicity given to these low numbers raised the hackles of the Kansas public school spending establishment. Here’s the nut of the disagreement:

When Kansas schoolchildren are tested using the Kansas state tests, results are categorized into one of five categories: Exemplary, exceeds standards, meets standards, approaches standard, and academic warning. Each of these categories has a definition. In its ads, KPI chose to present the number of students who fall into the two highest categories. The Kansas school bureaucracy argues that KPI should have also included students in the third category.

So what do these performance categories mean? “Exemplary,” according to Kansas State Department of Education documents, means just that: “A student scoring at the exemplary level always performs consistently and accurately when working on all grade-level mathematical tasks.”

“Exceeds standards,” for eleventh grade math, means: “A student scoring at the exceeds standard level usually performs consistently and accurately when working on all grade-level mathematical tasks.” In further detail, the standard uses these phrases: “The student demonstrates well-developed content knowledge and application skills … The student is accurate … The student usually uses multiple problem-solving techniques to accurately solve …”

“Meets standards,” again for eleventh grade math, means: “A student scoring at the meets standard level usually performs consistently and accurately when working on most grade-level mathematical tasks.” More detail includes “The student demonstrates sufficient content knowledge and application skills … The student usually understands and uses … The student is usually accurate when … The student uses some problem-solving techniques to accurately solve …”

What we’ve learned is that the Kansas public school establishment wants Kansans to be proud of the number of students who are sufficient, who usually understand, and are able to use some problem-solving techniques.

KPI, on the other hand, wants to call attention to the much smaller number of students whose knowledge is well-developed, who are accurate, and usually uses multiple problem-solving techniques. This level of achievement sounds like what parents want for their children.

If we’re concerned about our national security, we need more students to be in the two highest categories of achievement. That’s right — a recent report by the Council on Foreign Relations concludes that U.S. schools are so bad that they pose a threat to national security.

For calling on Kansans to insist on high standards for their public schools, KPI has been attacked by the public school establishment, most notably from the teachers union president and other union officials.

It’s one thing for union officials to defend the current system of public education. Their job is to deflect attention from the truth in order to defend a system that is run for the benefit of adults, not children and taxpayers.

But you’d expect more from the Kansas Commissioner of Education, wouldn’t you?

Not if the commissioner is Diane DeBacker. She took to the editorial page of the Wichita Eagle to defend the status quo in Kansas public education. Her defense centers primarily around the “process.” There are experts in education, she says, who create the system of assessments and determine the level of performance that we ought to be satisfied with for Kansas schoolchildren.

The problem is that nearly everyone who looks at U.S. and Kansas schools who is not part of the public school establishment finds that schools are not performing well. Can everyone but education school establishment experts be wrong?

That’s what Debacker wants us to believe.

DeBacker writes that she is proud of student achievement in Kansas: “Since 2001, the percentage of students statewide who perform in the top three levels on state reading assessments has jumped from about 60 percent to more than 87 percent. In math, the jump has been from just more than 54 percent to nearly 85 percent.”

This rise in performance, however, is only on tests that the Kansas education establishment controls. On every measure of student performance that I know of that is independent, this rising trend in student achievement does not appear. In some measures, for some recent years, the performance of Kansas students has declined.

Instead of facing this reality, the Kansas public school spending establishment would rather attack the integrity of the Kansas Policy Institute. This is on top of constant advocacy — including multiple lawsuits — for more spending on public schools. This establishment also beats back any attempts to introduce competition and accountability to Kansas public schools through school choice programs.

Again, this is to be expected from union officials and other partisans. Their job is to direct as much spending as possible into Kansas public schools while shielding schools from meaningful accountability. If Kansans became aware of the true performance of their public schools and how much they cost, these officials wouldn’t be doing their jobs.

But DeBacker, the Commissioner of Education, ought to hold herself and her profession to a different — higher — standard. For defending the current system against those who tell the truth and advocate for higher standards, she should apologize, to students first and Kansans second.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas Association of School Boards, Kansas National Education Association, Kansas Policy Institute, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, KASB, KNEA, School choice, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 3 comments }

Kansas education data collected but not shared to inform policymaking

by Guest Author on February 14, 2012

Would you purchase a refrigerator without comparing models and reading reviews? How about buying a car without a test drive or a home without an inspection?

If you’re a taxpayer or parent of a school-age child in Kansas, that’s what your elected representatives have done with public education that spends more than half of the state’s budget and has a major influence on our children.

Continue reading from Kansas Watchdog at Education Data Collected But Not Shared to Inform Policymaking.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 0 comments }

Kansas Speaker: Schools don’t spend all they have

by Bob Weeks on January 16, 2012

Based on choices that many school districts have made in response to legislation giving them flexibility to spend fund balances, Speaker of the Kansas House of Representatives Mike O’Neal questions whether a school funding crisis actually exists.

O’Neal, a Republican from Hutchinson, addressed members and guests of the Wichita Pachyderm Club at its regular Friday luncheon meeting. He started his talk by giving a quick history of recent Kansas school finances, especially litigation.

In 2005 there was the Montoy II ruling, which resulted in a special session of the legislature in response to a ruling of the Kansas Supreme Court. O’Neal described this as “nearly a constitutional meltdown,” because the was not a party to the lawsuit, but the Court ordered the Legislature to appropriate a specific amount of money to schools, or schools would close. O’Neal said this was an unconstitutional usurpation of the separation of powers.

Nonetheless, the Legislature did respond to the Court’s order and agreed to spend as directed.

O’Neal cited two provisions in the Kansas Constitution that relate to spending and education. One, Article 2, Section 24, states: “No money shall be drawn from the treasury except in pursuance of a specific appropriation made by law.” The other is Article 6, Section 6(b), which reads: “The legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state.”

Before Montoy II, this had been interpreted to require an appropriate and equitable mechanism for distributing available funds be in place. But after Montoy II, the Court interpreted this clause to apply to adequacy, that is, the Court can determine whether enough money is being spent on education.

O’Neal said there are now two pending amendments to the Kansas Constitution. One would make it clear that the Supreme Court can’t order an appropriation, and the other is a clarification to the “suitable provision” clause. “It’s trying to keep courts out of the business of education and school finance funding, and putting it in the hands of those who are elected and closest to the people,” O’Neal told the audience.

After this review of school finance litigation, O’Neal switched to the topic of whether schools are underfunded, as is the claim of the education community.

The claims of the school spending lobby are that the cuts are “devastating,” O’Neal said. But the facts, he said, do not support this contention. Since 2005 schools have enjoyed “a pretty healthy increase in funding.” The cuts that we hear about, he said, are not cuts in the sense that most people would use. Instead, there have been reductions in the amount of annual increases that have been experienced.

O’Neal said that during the last legislative session he spent a great deal of time investigating the status of school funding. He also said he tried to give schools authority to utilize funds in a way that would help address any funding crisis. He was aided by the Kansas Commissioner of Education, and also the Assistant Commissioner.

O’Neal said there are about 28 separate funds related to school funding. The Legislature created many of these in an effort to track how appropriated funds are being spent. One — the contingency reserve fund — is generally thought of as the primary reserve fund for schools.

At the end of 2011, the balance in all funds was $1.7 billion, O’Neal said, emphasizing the “b” in “billion.” He said this is a substantial increase over the prior year. Some of these funds are encumbered or spoken for, he said. In an effort to be fair, an analysis removed items like bond and interest and KPERS obligations. Taking away everything that could be argued as encumbered, O’Neal said there was still $640 million.

These balances are not distributed evenly across school districts, he added.

Referring to the 2005 Montoy decision, O’Neal said that the Court said the school finance formula distributed funds equitably, but there was not enough money in the pot. Noting the irony, he said “I would respectfully suggest today, based upon our analysis, that the Court not only got it wrong, but it was completely opposite. Why do we have a situation where some school districts have zero, with very conservative administration and management, and we have other schools districts that are sitting on tons of reserves.”

Using the Wichita school district as an example, he said the unencumbered balances are $39 million.

O’Neal asked the Kansas Department of Education this question: “Is this money that should be available to schools, and should they be utilizing that to educate Johnny and Susie?”

The answer he received was yes: There are funds, other than the contingency reserve fund, that have balances that ought to be available.

O’Neal said the analysis didn’t consider fund balances only at a particular point in time, but looked at the trend in balances over a period of five years. These balances, he said, are increasing over time, and at a “pretty hefty rate.”

The balances in some funds — he mentioned special education and at-risk — are growing rapidly. This, he said, is an indication that schools can’t spend all the money the state has sent. “But, it’s a devastating situation nevertheless, according to the education community.”

In response to recent cuts in Kansas base state aid per pupil funding, O’Neal said in 2011 the Legislature passed a bill giving school districts authority to spend up to $154 million to back-fill losses in base state aid. KNEA — the teachers union — and the Kansas Association of School Boards approved the bill.

But O’Neal said he was terribly disappointed in the result. Only 77 school districts (Kansas has nearly 300 districts) elected to spend any of the fund balances. The total amount involved was $23.4 million, which O’Neal said was 15 percent of the total authority granted by the Legislature, and a much smaller fraction of the total unencumbered fund balances.

Based on this, O’Neal questioned whether school funding is really inadequate. He said that schools could use these fund balances to compensate for cuts in base state aid, and could avoid laying off teachers. But many districts chose not to spend fund balances.

Regarding the ending balances in the Kansas general fund, O’Neal said there will be calls to spend more on education. “My question becomes: If you’re not spending the money you have already, why do you want the state to spend down its reserves, and send you more money that’s likely only to end up increasing some of your ending balances.”

Tagged as: Education, Kansas Association of School Boards, Kansas legislature, Kansas National Education Association, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Kansas Supreme Court, KASB, KNEA, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 2 comments }

Kansas school funding formula is badly broken

by Bob Weeks on October 14, 2011

By Dave Trabert, Kansas Policy Institute.

Data from the Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE) shows school districts’ unencumbered operating carryover cash reserves (excluding capital, debt and federal funds) as of July 1, 2011 were at a record-high $868.3 million. All last year districts said funding shortfalls were prompting them to cut teachers and programs. Meanwhile, most districts didn’t spend all of their state and local tax aid and increased their operating carryover cash reserves by $85.7 million.

This isn’t a one-time phenomenon; 2011 was the sixth consecutive year (since the courts said schools were under-funded) that some state and local tax aid was used to increase operating carryover cash reserves. Total operating carryover increased by $410.1 million since 2005.

If the school funding formula is consistently providing more money than necessary to operate schools, we should put the money where it’s really needed or give it back to taxpayers. That may be a controversial statement, but we can’t let controversy get in the way of providing kids with a quality education and a fiscally stable state after they graduate.

A large portion of the buildup in carryover cash is in funds set aside for special education, academically at-risk, and bilingual students. The balances in these funds alone have grown by $164.5 million; their total is $314.4 million. This is money specifically allocated by the funding formula for those purposes; the fact that this much apparently wasn’t needed is a clear indication that the formula is badly broken.

Kansas Policy Institute has been researching this issue since 2009. At first, some districts said the money wasn’t there; others said it existed at one point but had been spent. Still others said the cash existed but couldn’t be spent.

There is a legitimate issue of needing some degree of carryover to manage cash flow, especially since the state has been late sending money to districts over the last two years. But even that reason has an element of ‘the dog ate my homework’ for many districts.

Data collected from KSDE shows that districts’ operating carryover ratio last year (beginning carryover cash divided by operating costs) ranged from 1 percent (USD 312 Haven) to 64 percent (USD 502 Lewis), with the median at 16 percent. If Haven and dozens of other districts consistently manage cash flow with less than 10 percent carryover cash ratio, those with ratios of 20 percent or greater could do so with much smaller carryover balances.

Fortunately, the Kansas Legislature recognized the absurdity of having carryover cash pile up and gave schools full authority to transfer carryover balances from previously-restricted funds to offset up to $156 million in Base State Aid reductions over the last two years. (Another quirk of the formula caused base state aid to decline even though total state aid increased.) KSDE reports that only a small portion has been put to use so far.

The school funding formula should be based on what it costs to achieve required outcomes and also have districts operating and organized in a cost-effective manner.

Believe it or not, that wasn’t the basis of the last school lawsuit.

How’s that for a broken system?

Tagged as: Education, Kansas legislature, Kansas Policy Institute, Kansas State Board of Education, Wichita and Kansas schools

{ 0 comments }

Kansas school spending: the deception

September 27, 2011

Kansas school spending advocates like Mark Desetti of the Kansas National Education Association (KNEA) use only a small portion of school spending when making presentations, letting them be accurate and deceptive at the same time.

Tagged as: Kansas National Education Association, Kansas State Board of Education, KNEA, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Wichita school fund balances again an issue

July 10, 2011

The issue of school fund balances in Wichita and Kansas is a serious issue that deserves discussion. At the same time, we need to make sure we don’t lose sight of Kansas school issues that are even more important. But school officials need to be held accountable for their deception of the public, most notably through straw man arguments.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas legislature, Kansas State Board of Education, Lynn Rogers, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Wichita school board: critics not welcome

July 7, 2011

A recent meeting of the board of USD 259, the Wichita public school district, provided insight as to the insularity of the board members and district staff, and as to how little meaningful discussion or debate takes place at board meetings.

Tagged as: Connie Dietz, Education, Kansas State Board of Education, Kevass Harding, Lynn Rogers, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Kansas needs truth about schools

May 31, 2011

Kansas needs an honest assessment of the performance of its schools from education commissioner Diane M. DeBacker.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas State Board of Education, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Thursday April 14, 2011

April 14, 2011

Today: Kansas State Board of Education vs. Walt Chappell, protest on tax day; tax day tea party events; Steineger, Kansas senator, to address Pachyderms; trade protectionism makes us poorer; city government under control.

Tagged as: Americans For Prosperity, Chris Steineger, Free trade, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas Watchdog, Walt Chappell, Wichita Pachyderm Club

Read the full article →

Kansas school teacher cuts

January 27, 2011

As Kansas struggles with its budget and decides what to do with public schools, advocates of public school spending exaggerate claims of pending job cuts and fail to take advantage of an opportunity to improve our state’s base of teachers.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas legislature, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Kansas schools cut, yet fail to spend

November 18, 2010

Kansas schools have cut staff and teachers at the same time carryover fund balances have increased.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, KansasOpenGov, Wichita and Kansas schools, Wichita Eagle opinion watch

Read the full article →

Kansas school spending advocates sue; opportunity for reform is overlooked

November 11, 2010

As Kansas schools sue taxpayers for more funding, important issues of education in Kansas are being overlooked.

Read the full article →

Balance Kansas budget without raising sales tax

April 29, 2010

The following article is by Dr. Walt Chappell, a member of the Kansas State Board of Education. A version appeared in the Wichita Eagle. Chappell has offered testimony to the Kansas Legislature on many ways that schools can reduce spending and fulfill their mission at the same time

Tagged as: Kansas legislature, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Kansas news digest

March 16, 2010

News from alternative media around Kansas for March 16, 2010.

Tagged as: Education, Health care, Kansas legislature, Kansas Liberty, Kansas Reporter, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Kansas Watchdog, Mark Parkinson, Open records, State of the State KS, Taxation, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Kansas schools fail to make cut for grants

March 5, 2010

Last year Secretary of Education Arne Duncan created a program named “Race to the Top” which would make grants to states that are willing to make certain reforms. Two such reforms prominently mentioned by Duncan and President Barack Obama are charter schools and merit pay for teachers.

We now know that Kansas was not selected to receive a grant, at least not in the first round. Kansas had applied for $166 million.

Tagged as: Barack Obama, Education, Kansas National Education Association, Kansas State Board of Education, KNEA, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

For Kansas teachers union, fund balances are an illusion, not a solution

January 21, 2010

Today’s edition of Under the Dome Today — that’s the house organ of the Kansas National Education Association or (KNEA, the teachers union) — contains a story with the headline “Anti-Government Group launches another attack on public education.”

A more accurate headline might read “School spending advocacy group refuses to acknowledge budget solution that Kansas Deputy Education Commissioner Dale Dennis says could be used.” But that’s a tad wordy.

Tagged as: Kansas Association of School Boards, Kansas National Education Association, Kansas State Board of Education, KASB, KNEA, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Lawsuits and tax increases not necessary to fund Kansas schools

January 11, 2010

A recent commentary by Kansas State Board of Education member David Dennis said educators “…just ask that they (legislators) make their decisions based on accurate information, with the future of our students in mind. “We completely agree, and just ask that educators do the same. Unfortunately, some have been making their case for tax increases and lawsuits with a healthy dose of inaccurate and/or misleading information.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas Policy Institute, Kansas State Board of Education, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

What’s missing from the Dennis editorial on Kansas school funds

January 3, 2010

Today’s Wichita Eagle carries an editorial by Kansas School Board member David Dennis taking issue with claims that Kansas schools have money that can be spent.

At issue is the claim made by the Kansas Policy Institute and Kansas School Board member Walt Chappell that Kansas schools have hundreds of millions in funds that could be put to use to meet the current shortfall. See Districts Have Funds To Meet Projected $100 Million Shortfall for an explanation.

Tagged as: Kansas Policy Institute, Kansas State Board of Education, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Kansas school spending advocates: no alternative views welcome

November 25, 2009

On Monday and Tuesday, the Kansas House Appropriations Committee held hearings, and big topics were Kansas school funding and the Kansas budget. The reaction by school spending advocates to two speakers is illustrative of the highly divisive nature of public school operation and funding in Kansas.

Tagged as: Kansas Association of School Boards, Kansas legislature, Kansas National Education Association, Kansas State Board of Education, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Extra money in Kansas school funds could help with budget

November 20, 2009

Continuing a debate on Kansas school funding on the KPTS television public affairs program Kansas Week, Kansas Policy Institute (formerly the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy) President Dave Trabert appeared tonight to present KPI’s findings about school funding. While school spending advocates have criticized these findings, there’s really good news for Kansas in the numbers.

Tagged as: Education, Kansas Policy Institute, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Kansas open records examined

August 5, 2009

Government transparency in Kansas is determined largely by open records and open meetings laws which state lofty goals but offer many loopholes and exemptions and few penalties for violations of the laws.

The Kansas Open Records Act (KORA) starts off well. “It is declared to be the public policy of the state that public records shall be open for inspection by any person unless otherwise provided by this act, and this act shall be liberally construed and applied to promote such policy.”

Tagged as: Barb Fuller, Flint Hills Center for Public Policy, Government transparency, John Allison, Kansas Open Records Act, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Lynn Rogers, Martin Libhart, Open records, Sedgwick county government, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →

Lack of data, oversight raises questions on Kansas school spending

July 24, 2009

In the following report, investigative reporter Paul Soutar of the Flint Hills Center for Public Policy takes a look at school spending in Kansas. Particularly troubling is the decision to abandon an audit already in progress.

A recent decision by the 2010 Commission to not complete an efficiency audit of K-12 schools in Kansas may undercut the case for increased spending on schools.

Tagged as: Kansas Association of School Boards, Kansas State Board of Education, Kansas state government, Walt Chappell, Wichita and Kansas schools

Read the full article →