• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

OPINION: The '65 Percent Solution': Details of School Spending Demand Explanation, Not Politics

Posted on: Sunday, 23 April 2006, 12:00 CDT

By Ken Neal, Tulsa World, Okla.

Apr. 23--It is disappointing to see the so-called "65 percent solution" for schools injected into the Oklahoma political debate.

That program -- another one promoted nationally by an anti-government movement -- contends that too much money is being spent on school administration and not enough on the classroom.

The presumption is bogus, born out of the anti-public school crowd's hope that buckets of money are being wasted and that better management would cure money problems in the schools.

Bob Sullivan, an otherwise attractive and potentially solid GOP candidate for governor, apparently has been fooled into promoting the "65 percent solution."

First Class Education is a group that describes itself as growing nationally. Oklahoma, it contends, spends about 58 percent of its annual school budget in the classroom. That fails to consider actual spending on schools.

Oklahoma pays its teachers nearly $3,800 less annually than the regional average, for example.

If the 48,000 teachers were raised to the regional average, that would pump more than $182 million directly into the classroom.

If that alone were done, spending on the classroom would easily top 65 percent.

There is some difference in the calculation of regional averages. The federal government's National Center for Education Statistics groups the states it in a slightly different manner than the National Education Association.

NCES shows Oklahoma teachers are paid $3,764 less per year than others in the South Central region, which includes Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, Texas, Tennessee and Louisiana.

Instructional support in the form of counselors, computer labs, etc., would push the classroom spending to more than 60 percent. Direct pupil support, some of it mandated, would achieve 66 percent, more than the standard set by First Class Education.

And then what about transportation? A kid can't learn if he or she is not in school. How about keeping them warm, or cool? How about feeding them? How about counselors? Or librarians? A school nurse? A speech pathologist?

All these services are mandated in one way or another, but First Class Education considers them administrative. Further, building funds are lumped into the spending budget and, by law, building funds can't be spent on the classroom.

There are 540 school districts in Oklahoma, many of them small. They are spread across the 18th largest state in the U.S. There are instances in which districts could be consolidated, but the irony here is that those districts are in the heavily populated counties such as Tulsa and Oklahoma.

This is not an argument to consolidate the 15 school districts in Tulsa. In fact, the sprawling Tulsa public school district of 45,000 students is too big. It ought to be at least several districts to comply with what educators say is the optimum size.

Oklahoma school critics keep hoping that school district consolidation would mean fewer administrators and therefore save a lot of money.

Neither is the case.

In most small districts, the superintendent serves as the principal, or vice versa. The only way to eliminate administrators is to close school sites and if this is done in the interest of saving a few dollars, it is the students who pay.

But, as the First Class Education movement demonstrates again, there is a fond hope that efficiency will solve all problems, particularly the need for citizens to pay taxes to support schools.

Or, if only we could run schools like a business, all would be well. As some wag has said, that would mean shutting down the schools and sending the students to Mexico.

But like other populist movements, don't expect this one to lose its appeal. Who can be against spending most of the school money in the classroom?

It is a motto that sounds good in a sound bite. It is like the Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Who can be against the rights of taxpayers? The "65 percent solution" is like TABOR in that both are appealing if you don't look into the details.

It's an outdated idea, to be sure, but candidates and office holders owe it to their constituents to examine such phony solutions to important public operations.

------------

Ken Neal, 581-8308 ken.neal@tulsaworld.com

-----

Copyright (c) 2006, Tulsa World, Okla.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

Source: Tulsa World

More News in this Category