9:05am-9:55am
Funding Formula Technical Working Group Update and Crosswalk Progress – Julie Salvi and Jennifer Priddy
See the PowerPoint here.
>>Sen. Joseph Zarelli asked if the current class size in the crosswalk is based on teachers the state is funding or the number districts actually hire. Jennifer Priddy answered that these number are based on the number of teachers districts hire with the state allocation. Mary Jean Ryan pointed out that these numbers do not reflect staff funded through other funding sources, including local levies, 728, etc.; this information would be helpful moving forward.
>>Ms. Ryan asked about funding assumptions for principal salaries, since most local districts augment administrator salaries. QEC needs to think about that in the bigger picture moving forward, that administrator costs are higher than what the state is funding. Sen. Zarelli would like to see that data. Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn clarified that these numbers reflect what districts are actually buying, on average, with state allocations. Sen. Zarelli followed up that regional cost differentials are part of this, and doesn’t want to leave districts hanging later on because of regional differentials.
>>Stephen Rushing asked about administrator funding. Ms. Priddy answered that the state funds four administrators per 1,000 students at rates determined in the 1970s. Some districts receive $57,000/administrator from the state while others receive $85,000/administrator. Most administrators earn more than the baseline, leaving the difference to be picked up by districts.
>>Sen. Eric Oemig asked about the state’s ability to track supplemental salary for teachers (data system isn’t set up to collect this). Ms. Priddy said that is mostly correct, and some of the supplemental salaries are for coaches, National Board certified teachers, and the like.
>>Rep. Bruce Dammeier highlighted how helpful the crosswalk will be in phasing in the new funding model and setting phase-in priorities. Dr. Bette Hyde asked about 6th grade in middle schools and if that is reflected in the crosswalk. Ms. Priddy said that only 6th grade in elementary schools was included in the crosswalk.
>>Ms. Ryan asked about other basic education costs not in RCW. Ms. Priddy responded that in addition to staff allocations, NERCs and transportation are also considered basic education.
>>Sen. Zarelli asked about certificated staff allocations, and if the state provides specific funding for non-classroom staff (educational staff associates). Ms. Priddy said that ESAs are included in the certificated staff ratio and districts decide how many ESAs to hire. Sen. Cutis King asked about the library enhancement previously funded in the budget. Ms. Priddy said districts could use that allocation to either hire librarians and/or buy library materials; any FTEs purchased with that allocation are not reflected in ESA crosswalk. Sen. Zarelli indicated he would like to see how many teachers the state would fund in the prototype, not just the funded class size.<<
9:55am-10:20am
Early Learning Work Group Update – Dr. Bette Hyde and Superintendent Randy Dorn
One page update is here.
-Dr. Hyde clarified that this plan will be for Washington State as a whole, it won’t be just a Department of Early Learning Program – OSPI and DSHS will also have pieces of it.
>>Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe asked if any other states include early learning for at-risk children in basic education. Dr. Hyde said other states do provide universal preschool or preschool for at-risk children, but not part of basic education. Rep. Sullivan asked for more information about what other states are doing, in regard to state preschool programs.
>>Rep. Skip Priest brought up that investing in early learning programs can save money down the road. That information may be useful for this group, especially for those members interested in cost efficiency. Ms. Ryan asserted that the QEC needs to look at possibly return on investment in all areas, not just early learning.<<
10:20am-11:15am
Date Governance Update – Bob Butts, Debbie Spaulding and Allan Miedema
PowerPoint is available here.
-Bob Butts thinks enough money has been allocated to get the job done.
>>Rep. Priest asked if he just meant OSPI and the Date Governance Group, and not local districts. Mr. Butts said there is enough money to do what was called for in ESHB 2261. Rep. Priest asked if the group will determine what this new system will cost districts. Mr. Butts said that information will be collected during the gap analysis.
>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if the group will also look at unnecessary reports and perhaps reduce the data reporting burden on districts. Mr. Butts said Sen. King sponsored a bill in the previous session that directs that type of analysis to be done (identify duplicate and/or unnecessary reports).
>>Sen. Oemig asked about the ability to link student and teacher data. Mr. Butts said the group will look at that. Sen. Oemig asked when these reports would be available (per ESHB 2261). Ms. Priddy answered the question, saying he is asking about reports in subsection five of ESHB 2261, and OSPI does intend to produce those reports, but needs more staff.
>>Dr. Hyde asked about progress toward becoming a P-20 data system. Debbie Spaulding said they anticipate other data systems to tack onto the CEDARS Data Warehouse.
>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if online schools will be included in the data system. Allan Miedema said it is the hope that they would have reciprocity with online schools.
>>Rep. Priest said it sounds like much of the system is punitive, and asked about student mobility. Will teachers be able to use data to inform instruction, or for schools to be able to understand how to best help students who transfer to a new building? Mr. Butts indicated that the intent is for the system to help educators, schools and districts effectively teach students. Ms. Spaulding said that just yesterday these data can now be linked, and users indicated the need for a teacher portal to access the data.
>>Sen. Oemig said that in the bill it called for a “data improvement system,” with the intent that data be used to improve instruction, better match professional development opportunities with teachers, better identify student needs, etc.
>>Rep. Sullivan asked about implementing the expanded data system, and how that would be phased in. Mr. Butts said he didn’t know if the group would be able to do that.
>>Dr. Jane Gutting brought up that in the health care industry, practitioners enter data and are responsible for accuracy. In education, secretaries enter most of the data. How do we want to do data entry in the future? Mr. Miedema said that is a key part moving forward, and staff who enter data need training because they may have been moved from another role/position and don’t have data entry experience.
>>Superintendent Dorn asked if this new system would require every teacher to have access to a computer. Ms. Spaulding said that every teacher has access to a computer and the internet, many of whom have it in the classroom. Superintendent Dorn highlighted the need for teachers to have computers in the classroom.<<
11:35am-11:50am
Meeting Dates and Planning – Superintendent Dorn
-Recommend that the December meeting be two days
>>Dr. Hyde asked if the November meeting should also be two days.
>>Ms. Ryan suggested having a meeting later in December to better digest the recommendations of the Funding Formula Technical Working Group. Ms. Priddy said the legislation limits the QEC to only four meetings per year. Sen. McAuliffe said it was intentionally written that way. Ms. Ryan said it seemed the intent of ESHB 2261 was that the QEC could meet more than four times in 2009 because of startup needs, and then meet only four times in 2010 and beyond. Rep. Sullivan said he believed the intent of the legislation was the QEC could meet more than four times in 2009.<<
-Ms. Priddy presented how current ESA staffing in the prototype model translates to a per 1,000 students ratio (the information Sen. Zarelli was asking for).
11:50am-12:15pm
2018 Funding Values: SPI Proposal – Jennifer Priddy
Proposal is here. PowerPoint is here.
>>Sen. Zarelli asked what the range in class size is nationally. Ms. Priddy said Vermont has the smallest with 10.8, the U.S. average is 15.5, Washington has 19.1 and Utah has the largest with 22.1.
>>Sen. King asked if they looked at the research indicating smaller class sizes do have a positive impact in the early grades, but don’t necessarily in the other grades (citing a WSIPP study). Ms. Priddy answered that they are considering research, and that there is national research indicating smaller class sizes make a difference in high-poverty schools, and workload is an issue for secondary teachers.
>>Superintendent Dorn spoke to teacher workload and the benefits of reducing teacher workload. Sen. Zarelli responded that reducing teaching workload and lowering class size are two separate issues, and teacher workload can be reduced through other methods. Superintendent Dorn did not disagree. Rep. Priest jumped in saying the Basic Education Finance Task Force was a little arbitrary in selecting class sizes for the prototype and settled on many of the numbers because they were round (e.g. 25 instead of 26), and some of the small class sizes were meant to enable smaller schools and districts to offer more specialized programs like AP and CTE (otherwise they wouldn’t have enough students in the program to support it).
More on this after lunch…
1:05pm-3:05pm
2018 Funding Values: SPI Proposal, continued – Jennifer Priddy
>>Sen. Oemig questioned the use of national rankings since we don’t know what other supports all other states are providing.
>>Ms. Ryan would like some data disaggregated to help answer questions, e.g. is lowering class size in the early grades more effective for certain students? What about teacher compensation?
>>Sen. Zarelli said he doesn’t want to take just take the current funding model and increase spending; he would rather funding increases be targeted to effective investments. He would also like allocations be given to districts in block amounts to allow more flexibility. QEC needs to determine priorities for funding.
>>Dr. Gutting suggested members of the QEC sit down with the finance manager for their local districts to see what decisions districts are making and try to identify where the “fat” is.
>>Dr. Hyde said that the intent of the BEFTF’s recommendation was to hold districts accountable for results, and let districts decide how to spend funds. Rep. Sullivan agreed, citing differences between districts.
>>Sen. McAuliffe brought up different learning styles and the needs of today’s students.
>>Dr. Gutting said that they need to “get the most bang for their buck” with new investments but the state isn’t providing enough funding to “keep the doors open.”<<
>>Rep. Dammeier asked if the intent is that guidance counselors could be decreased down the road once dropout rates decrease. Superintendent Dorn spoke to the workload of guidance counselors and the benefit of having more counselors in schools. Rep. Dammeier asked for background on the BEFTF guidance counselor recommendation. Dr. Hyde said it was based on recommendations Picus and Odden made during Washington Learns.
>>Sen. Oemig asked if the intent was still that this model is for allocation purposes only and districts can choose to spend funds differently. Superintendent Dorn said yes, however, districts will probably follow it because districts will worry they will be held more accountable for deviating from the model. Rep. Dammeier asked if the model could include broader staffing categories (e.g. non-teaching staff) so districts can have more flexibility. Rep. Priest said the intent was for the model to lay out specific staffing ratios, citing librarians as an example of the import.<<
>>Sen. King asked how the state will hold districts accountable. If districts have the flexibility to spend funds as they see fit, and then don’t achieve to the desired level, what happens? QEC members pointed to Ms. Ryan for a response. Ms. Ryan said the State Board of Education is working on the accountability system, including improvement plans for low-performing schools and districts. Sen. Zarelli said we can do two things, 1) not promote students that don’t pass the grade, putting pressure on parents, and 2) not give anyone in the building raises if performance targets aren’t met – this way everyone will work together to improve achievement. Sen. King again said something about expectation of results.
>>Rep. Priest shared some background on the BEFTF, including members thinking on recommendations. He said, basically, the BEFTF didn’t want to get too bogged down and focused on those areas with the most impact on student learning (early learning, lower class sizes in early grades, etc.). Dr. Hyde followed up saying the big ideas behind the model were transparency and accountability.<<
>>Mr. Rushing asked about instructional aides, as no one he works with uses that term; does this include paraeducators? Ms. Priddy said it may include paraeducators, although these positions are often funded through special education, or pullout tutors.<<
>>Re maintenance, Sen. Zarelli asked if it made more sense to allocate on a square footage basis. Superintendent Dorn said schools have more going on in the evenings now than in the past, with sports, evening classes, community meetings, etc. which requires additional facilities maintenance. Sen. Zarelli said he understood but was wondering if a different method to determine funding made sense. Rep. Priest said that idea makes sense, and is worth exploring. Ms. Priddy said they have tried to run those numbers, but we don’t have accurate data on the square footage of the entire system. There are national studies that indicate the level of funding necessary to maintain facilities. Sen. Zarelli said the state does have the square footage for every school in the state. Ms. Priddy said they just haven’t collected the data at the state level and JLARC is working on that.
>>Sen. King proffered that state funds should not be used to maintain facilities built with local funds. Superintendent Dorn agreed but said levy funds are not just used for extras anymore. Sen. King agreed.
>>Sen. McAuliffe asked about the maintenance supplies per student allocation from Washington Learns; it seems low. Ms. Priddy needs to double check it.<<
>>Mr. Rushing asked if the extended day tutoring in the Learning Assistance Program would occur outside of the school day. Ms. Priddy said it wasn’t prescriptive. Mr. Rushing then asked about transportation for such a program. Ms. Priddy said that could be built into the new transportation formula.<<
>>Sen. Zarelli asked if the ELL program is based on research, because research he’s seen would point in another direction — especially with the growing ELL population. Ms. Ryan mentioned the work being done with ELL students in Spokane, and the strong results they are seeing. Sen. Zarelli again stressed not just putting more money into the system, but spending wisely. Ms. Ryan agreed with him, and cited the need for these programs. Sen. Zarelli added that he just wants Washington to look at best practices from other states and within the state. Dr. Gutting said she would also like to see the research on effective programs for ELL students. Rep. Priest agreed, but added that some districts have greater needs in this area (i.e. more languages spoken at home) and may need greater funding.
>>Sen. McAuliffe said this reminds her of 1209, where the state said it would set the standards then provide the funding to get there.<<
>>Sen. King asked why the state would fund 10 learning improvement days. Ms. Priddy said Picus and Odden recommend 10 LIDs, and WSIPP found research that said increasing LIDs can increase student achievement. Mr. Rushing added that LIDs are in addition to the 180 instructional days. Ms. Ryan brought up that the SBE spends too much time processing waiver requests from districts asking to reduce student instructional days to offer one or two staff professional development days, so if the state pays for 10 LIDs then districts should not be able to apply for those waivers. Ms. Ryan added that any professional development needs to be effective, and curriculum needs to support our academic standards, diagnostic and formative assessments should also be invested in.
>>Sen. Zarelli said he would like to see these built into the academic year, rather than be add-ons. Sen. McAuliffe agreed with Sen. Zarelli, and thought we may not want to think of them just as days, but imbedded in the school year. Mr. Rushing said the funds could instead pay for release time for teachers, and the substitutes that would also be needed, to allow teachers to meet during the school day, or observe other teachers.
>>Ms. Ryan asked about the difference between LIDs and the professional development MSOC allocation. Ms. Priddy said the LID allocation would pay the teacher salary for that professional development, and the MSOC allocation would cover contracted costs (trainer, travel, materials) and costs for professional development for all staff (classified, etc.).<<
>>Questions about the amount of funding local levies provide, including funding for supplemental salaries and transportation. Ms. Ryan mentioned the COLA.
>>Members asked for a break down of QEC responsibilities beyond the prototype, will help inform priorities going forward.
>>Rep. Dammeier asked if increasing state funding to the national average (along with accountability) will push student achievement higher (since Washington’s student achievement is above average with below average spending). Ms. Priddy said research supports a “yes” answer.
>>Mr. Rushing asked what would happen to funds like 728 when the state transitions to the new model. Ms. Priddy said she doesn’t recall what happens specifically to 728, but that is a policy question to consider, probably just roll 728 into the general fund.<<
3:15pm-3:50pm
Public Comment
Laura Kohn, The New School Foundation – success of The New School, emphasizing investments in the early years
John Bancroft, White Center Early Learning Initiative – stressing the importance of early learning programs, ECEAP/Head Start not adequately funded
George Scarola, League of Education Voters – QEC needs to do three things: 1) develop program for early learning, specifically preschool for 4-year-olds, 2) adopt the prototype model, and 3) create a phase-in plan
Sarah Francis, MomsRising – parents need access to early learning opportunities
Allen Jones, director of finance, Tumwater School District – use the current accountability system, give districts flexibility
Hilary Ryan, parent – early childhood education is very important
3:50pm-4:05pm
Looking to tomorrow
>>Sen. King is unsure of whether LIDs are meant to be included in basic education.
>>Sen. Oemig thinks the QEC should adopt the categories for the prototype, and is less concerned with setting the 2018 amounts right now.
>>Sen. Zarelli said local funding fits into this, and it needs to be considered.
>>Rep. Priest asked for clarification of the tasks before the QEC and the Funding Formula Technical Working Group – who fills in the prototype? Can we direct the FFTWG to vet the numbers in Superintendent Dorn’s proposal? Rep. Marcie Maxwell agreed that things need to move forward.
>>Sen. McAuliffe said the FFTWG is working, and it’s too early for the QEC to make a recommendation, and the QEC should wait for the FFTWG’s recommendations.
>>Mr. Rushing said he would like more time for discussion. Dr. Gutting said she doesn’t want to pre-decide if the QEC can make a decision tomorrow, but think about things tonight and come prepared for good discussion tomorrow.
>>Rep. Dammeier suggested everyone think about this proposal tonight, come prepared to discuss tomorrow and at least set some priorities tomorrow. Ms. Ryan asked about the importance of setting ending values.<<
