Tracy Novick: It’s Time to Fix the Education Funding Issue

Saturday, February 18, 2012

Tracy Novick, GoLocalWorcester Education Contributor

..it shall be the duty of legislatures and magistrates, in all future periods of this commonwealth, to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them; especially the university at Cambridge, public schools and grammar schools in the towns...

The above was written by a Worcester schoolteacher in 1787. His name was John Adams, and he was writing the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Massachusetts is unusual: it is the only state in the union to mention public education (and at some length) in its original state constitution. Given our history, this is not surprising. Massachusetts is home of the first public school, established in 1635 by the settlers of Boston, the school which became Boston Latin, and educated five signers of the Declaration of Independence and four Massachusetts governors. Harvard (first College, then University), was established a year later (the “university at Cambridge” mentioned above) to educate the colony's ministers. In 1642, the Massachusetts Bay Colony made “proper education” compulsory, at least for the English boys of the colony.

The American Revolution gave new impetus to public education of not only boys, but of the girls who would raise the next generations of new Americans. While previously girls might only have been taught to read (to read their Bibles), now writing was added, and education at the public expense expanded (though irregularly). As enshrined in the state constitution, education is the responsibility both of the state legislature and of the local governments.

So, how are we doing with that?

Not so hot, as it happens.

In 1993, with only hours to spare before the court finding that the state was not adequately funding education, Governor Weld signed the Education Reform Act, which substantially overhauled the funding of education in Massachusetts.

It has not seen a major overhaul since.

In fact, it is an open secret that any move to reconsider the funding of education will never make it out of committee, where in fact House Bill 153, proposing an adequacy study, sits right now.

The Legislature is right to be concerned: a recent report by the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, “Cutting Class: Underfunding the Foundation Budget's Core Education Program,” found that the foundation budget statewide is underfunded by at least $2.1 billion. Among the largest gaps:

Special education. Special education in the state foundation budget is one number that is assumed: it is not based on actual district need. This was done intentionally—the Legislature feared giving districts reasons to “find” special education students—but the flat rate of 3.75% in-district and 1% out-of-district is wildly out of line with actual need, which is closer to 20%. As we are, since the federal government began requiring it in 1973, educating children in our schools who never previously would have been there; as modern medicine has brought children to school age who never would have lived that long; as more children are diagnosed with needs that would simply have been missed; need is going up. We are glad to have these children, but as need goes up, so does cost.
Health insurance. As in every section of the economy, health insurance costs have climbed at a rate far beyond the cost of inflation. While the changes made to health insurance in the state last year will help with this cost, it is not enough.
Inflation. While there is an inflation factor in the budget, it was not implemented the first year, and it has not been consistently implemented in every year since. As such, there is a built-in underfunding of inflation, which is the only line that allows for cost increases.

These massive gaps mean that every district in the state, when it looks at actual versus state-mandated education costs, starts budget calculations at a loss. The foundation budget is not a number that realistically funds the education of a student in Massachusetts anymore, if indeed it ever did.

Districts have been managing this structural deficit in two ways:

1. In districts that have greater public support for public education, communities fund their schools at a level above the minimum required by state law. Statewide, districts average 15% funding over the minimum required. There are districts that spend up to 50% more than mimimally required, and most spend something. Worcester, which for the past ten years has gone over 1% over foundation only once, is in the bottom fifth in spending statewide.

2. Most districts, whatever their support for public education, have underspent in various accounts. In lower income districts, the foundation budget calls for a small teacher-student ratio; that has not been implemented in many areas. Technology and supplies, both of which directly hit instruction, are chronically underfunded at the district level; MassBudget estimates that most districts spend 50% less than the foundation budget calculates for spending in supplies and technology.

It is past time for the Legislature to stop hiding its head in the sand in hopes that the education funding issue will somehow disappear. It will not; it will only grow worse. It is past time for a full adequacy study, including not only the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, but also all local districts, the Massachusetts Association of School Business Officers, school committees, superintendents, parents, and teachers statewide.
Our Constitution calls for nothing less.