Can you say... Disparity?

[Menehune Man]

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080616/NEWS07/806160344/1001/&source=nletter-news

"Larger public schools in Hawai'i could receive some $200 more per student in the 2009-2010 school year under proposed changes to the budget formula. While changes to the per-pupil funding formula could benefit larger public schools, questions remain about how much the changes could affect smaller schools, which typically need more money per student to cover the cost of teacher salaries and school operations."

Shouldn't it be per amount of students? What I mean is... equal payout for equal personage?!
I'm flabbergasted at this! Wot da _ _ _ _ !

[scrivener]

I know people get really, really sensitive about this, but I am convinced that there is no one formula (nor one approach) that can address school funding in a way that helps all schools meet their needs. I know that for a while, it was a subject close to pzarquon's heart, and I disagreed with most of the protest then, too.

It simply doesn't work to say "every school should receive the same amount per student," because there are sooooo many variables to account for, and there are sooooo many needs that must be addressed. It's true that (very) small schools require more money per student just to provide the basic structure (there needs to be a principal, whether the school has a hundred students or three thousand), but beyond that, it's just not a simple matter of "this many students = this much money."

Schools with veteran faculties, for example, are going to cost much more money to cover payroll than schools with mostly younger teachers, but the experience of a faculty is not something that can be tied to the size of a school. As a school gets bigger, its needs increase in a way that's tough to formulate. How big does a school need to get, for example, before it needs to think about creating a band program for students with musical interests? If a school has a boys' football team, it has to have equal numbers of spots available on girls' teams to satisfy Title IX. That costs money, and it costs the big schools more than the small schools; at my school (and at most small schools), the athletic director teaches courses, while at other schools, the athletic director is so busy administering that he or she has full-time assistants. That costs money, too.

I'm rambling now, but I say all this just to emphasize the point that per-student formulas just don't work all the time. They're a good starting point, but the decision cannot simply end at the initial number.

[timkona]

Attention BOE:
There is a concept known as "economy of scale" which would fly in the face of the wisdom of your latest decision. Smaller schools need more money per student. DUH.

[MyopicJoe]

Yeah, MM. Financial decisions made by others can be very frustrating and confusing, especially when we don't have all the information they have access too. We can only hope they're doing the best they can.


As a school gets bigger, its needs increase in a way that's tough to formulate.

I agree with Scrivener. Larger schools have more facilities and programs which need to be funded. Most things don't scale in a linear fashion.

Of course larger schools have more political clout. They can fight for a bigger piece of the pie. Not fair for the little guy, but I guess that's life.

Instead of fighting over the scraps, we gotta ask ourselves why we only have scraps. Why is Hawaii relatively poor compared to other states? Is our population growing larger than can be supported by our economy?

Of course these questions are heading off topic.

[Amati]

Let's hope we have a ConCon, so that we can have discussion on having smaller Board of EducationS instead of just one BOE for the entire state.

[Frankie's Market]

If a school has a boys' football team, it has to have equal numbers of spots available on girls' teams to satisfy Title IX.

Even if you have girls playing football?

That costs money, and it costs the big schools more than the small schools; at my school (and at most small schools), the athletic director teaches courses,

Must be a private school you are talking about. In the public schools, the ADs are considered administrators and are members of the HGEA, not HSTA. Therefore, they don't teach classes. Neither are they allowed to be coaches for the teams at their school. Gone are the days when you had public school coach/ADs like Larry Ginoza (Waianae) and John Kauinana (Mililani).

[akrauth]

Aloha no...

I forgot, did I already show my empathy here?

If not, aue!

[salmoned]

I know people get really, really sensitive about this, but I am convinced that there is no one formula (nor one approach) that can address school funding in a way that helps all schools meet their needs. I know that for a while, it was a subject close to pzarquon's heart, and I disagreed with most of the protest then, too.

It simply doesn't work to say "every school should receive the same amount per student," because there are sooooo many variables to account for, and there are sooooo many needs that must be addressed. It's true that (very) small schools require more money per student just to provide the basic structure (there needs to be a principal, whether the school has a hundred students or three thousand), but beyond that, it's just not a simple matter of "this many students = this much money."

Schools with veteran faculties, for example, are going to cost much more money to cover payroll than schools with mostly younger teachers, but the experience of a faculty is not something that can be tied to the size of a school. As a school gets bigger, its needs increase in a way that's tough to formulate. How big does a school need to get, for example, before it needs to think about creating a band program for students with musical interests? If a school has a boys' football team, it has to have equal numbers of spots available on girls' teams to satisfy Title IX. That costs money, and it costs the big schools more than the small schools; at my school (and at most small schools), the athletic director teaches courses, while at other schools, the athletic director is so busy administering that he or she has full-time assistants. That costs money, too.

I'm rambling now, but I say all this just to emphasize the point that per-student formulas just don't work all the time. They're a good starting point, but the decision cannot simply end at the initial number.

I have no idea what Scrivener is saying here. There is one formula, according to the schools and it reads like this, "MORE! We want more!" However, if a sum per pupil is set and schools are allowed to attract as many or as few as they wish (and have complete control of how they spend the funding), we will be optimizing financial equality. That's not to say educational equality (much less excellence) would ensue, but at least it may engender higher quality through competition for students/funding. Look at Title IX in sports - women don't enjoy equal ability or fan interest, but they do see more nearly equal funding; look at salary caps in professional sports. Funding is something that can easily be addressed, increases 'fairness' across the board and encourages optimum economy where no such emphasis currently exists.