This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
In Friday's MDL, Governor Rounds responds to Rutland School District Superintendent Carl Fahrenwald, who wrote a strongly worded critique ("Unemployment Proposed as Solution for Low Salaries," Madison Daily Leader, 2008.02.01] of the push for school consolidation.
Editor's note: Dr. Fahrenwald's essay appeared in MDL as an op-ed column, not a letter to the editor. And contrary to the appellation used repeatedly by the governor, Dr. Fahrenwald does indeed possess a Doctorate in Education from USD.
I am again compelled to respond to a letter to the editor by Rutland Superintendent Carl Fahrenwald. This time, Mr. Fahrenwald's letter to the editor titled "Unemployment proposed as solution for low salaries appeared in the Feb. 1 edition of the Madison Daily Leader.
I do not take issue with Mr. Fahrenwald when he contends school consolidations are difficult propositions. School district consolidation is often the final step of cooperation between school districts. I would ask Mr. Fahrenwald if current examples of school districts cooperating, such as sports cooperatives or sharing of teachers, do not save money.
Mr. Fahrenwald talks about efficiency and savings. He does not seem to recognize the efficiency of one teacher in front of 20 students as opposed to one teacher in front of ten students. His logic completely falls apart when he says "no state government official is promising to pass even one dime of this imaginary 'extra' money immediately (if ever) on to the remaining K-12 schools."
Mr. Fahrenwald apparently does not understand, or chooses to ignore, the working of the state aid to education formula. For the 2008-09 school year, each school district will receive $4,642.02 from state aid to education plus property taxes for each student, regardless of whether or not a consolidatio may take place. If Mr. Fahrenwald thinks consolidated school districts somehow receive less money per student, he is mistaken.
Mr. Fahrenwald continues to misunderstand the state aid to education formula when he says, "More land added per district may well be more financially efficient overall, but it is state government that will capture and control this efficiency."
I don't know what he is talking about, and I don't think he does either. As a matter of fact, SDCL 13-13-72, known as the "Cutler-Gabriel" amendment, provides growth in valuations be offset by reduction in tax levies so that the ratio of state aid to education and property taxes remain constant. In other words, the taxpayer, not the state treasury, is the beneficiary of increasing property values.
Part of Mr. Fahrenwald's complaint is "...the humiliating annual pilgrimage to Pierre where funding for K-12 public education (and even basic recognition and respect) must be re-begged and bartered for during every legislative session." Again, I have no idea what he means by begging for basic recognition and respect.
I welcome Mr. Fahrenwald to provide examples where he or school officials have not been recognized or treated with respect. I remind Mr. Fahrenwald that funding for K-12 education is the only part of the state budget which is entitled to an automatic increase. On top of the automatic increase, the Legislature has, on several occasions, providing for declining enrollment (making that feature permanent last year), increasing enrollment, sparsity, and increases in the per student allocation in excess of the amount of the automatic increase.
In his letter the to editor, Mr. Fahrenwald talks about efficiency, school officials, school board members, economic impacts, horses and veterinarians. He does not mention students. I think that omission speaks volumes.
M. Michael Rounds [Letter to the Editor, Madison Daily Leader, 2008.02.22, p. 3]
The governor's crafty parting shot is correct in only the most lawyerly sense: Dr. Fahrenwald's essay does not include the word students. It does, however, end with the following two paragraphs:
Let us instead work to support local school board members in charting a course for their own districts, large and small, as directed by their own local patrons. This is not about blind loyalty or the sentimentality of "saving a town." It is about the quality and variety of educational programs available and the ability of Madison area families to have some choice in public education.Opportunities for children (students, right?), quality and variety of educational programs, choice in public education, local control... gee, sounds like Dr. Fahrenwald mentions not only good education for the kids his community entrusts him with, but all the main Republican talking points on education.
We are tired of being negatively characterized and dismissed by those with no knowledge of the tremendous opportunities available for children at the Rutland and Oldham-Ramona school districts. We are not some lame horse waiting for the vet to come back with the rifle. Our local farmers, parents and other district taxpayers have the knowledge, experience, and "horse-sense" necessary to guide school board members in the leadership of our school districts. Please allow them to continue doing so [Fahrenwald 2008.02.01]
Feel free to review Dr. Fahrenwald's complete text yourself and decide whether Governor Rounds really addressed Dr. Fahrenwald's argument that school consolidation isn't the great financial boon the big-town interests claim.
Governor Rounds has proven time and time again that he has no clue about Education Funding and the inadequacies of the Funding Formula as it relates to declining enrollment. In his term of office, he has not brought forth any positive education ideas, and if you look at his record, vision is not his strength. He simply bangs the same old drum his predecessor, Bill Janklow tapped regarding education funding. For the Governor to answer a guest editorial is shameful. I'm surprised he didn't pound the fact Rutland gets "Small School Factor" funding as a final driving nail in his comments. Poor leadership or maybe no leadership from a defensive governor. He should know better.
ReplyDeleteGovernor Rounds has asked me in his editorial "to provide examples where I or school officials have not been recognized or treated with respect."
ReplyDeleteOh where do I even begin with this? Perhaps the most glaring example of this disrespect is the state TCAP (Teacher Compensation Assistance) program.
The additional money that TCAP provides to school districts is at least somewhat helpful and thus is appreaciated.
The strings attached to this money (rather more like towropes) are not at all appreciated as these TCAP rules and procedures serve as ready evidence of the utter lack of respect for the teaching profession (at least at the K-12 level).
In a state with the lowest teacher salaries in the entire nation, the rules prevent schools from simply handing out the dollars across the board to certified staff.
Contrast this with the "mid-point adjustment" program for state employees where additional raises are given out because the employees salary is calculated to be below average.
With TCAP dollars for teachers it is assumed from the onset that not all deserve nor should get these additional dollars. With state employees, all who qualify for the mid-point adjustment (however the system defines it) simply get this additional money by definition.
With TCAP dollars for teachers, teachers must often do something "extra" to qualify for the extra money. This is called accountability I guess, as if educators were circus animals jumping through hoops for a prize.
State employees targeted for the mid-point adjustment dollars on the other hand have no accountability system in place (that I am aware of) whereby they must perform extra feats, etc. They simply get the money for doing a good job at what they have always done.
The regulations and official procedures that guard the TCAP dollars are truly astounding. I am not aware of any similar regulations controlling the distribution of mid-point adjustment dollars to state employees.
Take a look for yourself using the link provided. You'd better have a ream of paper ready before downloading the TCAP rules.
Carl Fahrenwald
Here is the web address for TCAP:
ReplyDeletehttp://doe.sd.gov/secretary/TCAP/index.asp
once at this address, click on the
Quick link called:
"BOE approved TCAP rules"
I am very offended by Governor Rounds' comment "He does not mention students. I think that omission speaks volumes."
ReplyDeleteWould there be any other purpose for trying to keep a school open! It's definitly not the large salary! Come on! You are the leader of South Dakota and should not be acting like that!
Governor Rounds commented “He does not seem to recognize the efficiency of one teacher in front of 20 students as opposed to one teacher in front of ten students.” Efficiency…..what about the well being of some of these students! What Governor Rounds does not understand is that a small classroom setting is what some kids need! All children learn differently ...but no matter how different they are, the more academic attention they get the better off they are!