The Morning Call has an article featuring short opinions by various Lehigh Valley leaders whose institutions are impacted by the state budget (read the article here).
Among the leaders is Nazareth Schools’ superintendent Vic Lesky.
He notes:
Unfortunately under Pennsylvania's current educational funding system, where a student resides determines his or her access to a quality education. There are school districts in Pennsylvania with the ability to spend $12,000-$14,000 per student per year, while other school districts are limited to $6,000-8,000. Yet these students are expected to meet the same educational standards with fewer resources.
Quality requires a level of adequate funding, but to think more funding will guarantee better results is a misnomer. Yes, funding levels are important, but more important is how these funds are being spent. Is the spending classroom based, or going to other areas? If we are hiring more teachers and have less students, one has to wonder if we are utilizing our staff efficiently. If we offer block scheduling at the high school and a teacher is in the classroom 3 of 4 blocks, are they only teaching 75% of the day, and is this enough given a 7.5 hour work day? If benefits are rising and impacting our expenses, should the district be paying for the entire family medical plan, when many companies do not even provide full coverage for the employee, let alone the family? Pension costs are beginning to cripple districts, isn’t this similar to what we saw happen to nearly all the traditional union strongholds – such as the steel, automakers, etc.? What are we doing to change that inevitable course?
Debt service, NASD currently pays millions in debt service. Why do public institutions have to hire private carriers, who make millions off taxpayers, when the state could provide these loans at no to low interest and save taxpayers statewide millions of dollars.
Schools are evaluated within a vacuum, not in comparison to what is happening in the private sector all around them, which leads right into the final point Lesky makes: “I do believe it is time educators and politicians together, in the best interest of our students, take a serious look at how we conduct the business of education in Pennsylvania.”
Personally, I think one of the greatest flaws of education is that it is not treated as a business. Educators and politicians together will not fix these problems, in fact they’ve gotten us to the point we are at today.
Education is a closed system. Teachers become administrators. On the way to that point they are trained by fellow educators through in-service programming or advanced degrees. Even on the Board we find former educators, spouses of educators, etc.
The reality is that our schools need to behave and be treated more like private businesses, and this will result in hard decisions. At the same time, I don’t expect this to happen because it will be in the hands of politicians and educators and both rely on the taxpayer to support them, it is what they know and it impacts their decisions and behavior. A broader perspective is needed and that can only come from those outside these institutions.
8 comments:
It's unfortunate that you did not include his remarks in their entirety, or link to the article directly as you do with almost everything else. Dr. Lesky's ideas make a lot of sense.
For those who would actually like to read the full article and form their own opinion, it can be found online at http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/anotherview/all-i.7175411feb12,0,430152.story
Sorry, not intentional to miss the link, obviously intended to do it by virtue of the placeholder for it, and as you note I always do with everything else.
I never include the entirety of quotes, that would be unfair to the person who actually took the time to record/report them.
Thanks for noticing the hotlink was missing and including it in the comments for everyone.
Although there are many problems in today's schools, I do not understand why you would think schools should be run like private sector businesses. Many businesses are having financial difficulties due to the recession, why wouldn't school districts be experiencing the same thing? Not to mention the amount of corruption and book cooking in corporate America. Just because a business is in the private sector does not mean it is well run. Unions in schools are extremely strong, which is why pensions health care etc.. are becoming a problem. One way to change this may be through state legislation. Currently teachers in public schools are forced to pay union dues whether they join the union or not.
I believe interest rates on school loans are very low due to the fact that they are unlikely to default. On one hand you want schools to be more like private sector businesses, yet you want their loans to be serviced by the government? If you truly believed the private sector is better, loans should continue through the private sector.
You also say education is a closed system, which is generally true, but so are some businesses. I have seen a number of businesses that train their employees and promote from within. In addition, schools often hire outside firms to for accounting, population predictions, etc...
Well over half of the schools budget is spent on teachers, staff and administration. Although in difficult financial times it is easy to bash them, I would not want my kids to be treated as a business product. Many of the additional costs over the past ten years have been due to increased accountability from No Child Left Behind and Federal Requirements for students with disabilities. These increased regulations require more classroom help and more administration to comply.
For you to write that teachers are only working when they are in the classroom is an insult. Preparing a good lesson takes hours of preparation. When employees in corporate america are preparing for a meeting I am sure they are not doing all of it on their own time. Many teachers are graduating college tens of thousands of dollars in debt, does $38,000 dollars a year for a beginning teacher really sound so ridiculous? Although throwing more money at education is will not guarantee the system will improve, if it is wisely spent, it will improve.
Although there are many problems in today's schools, I do not understand why you would think schools should be run like private sector businesses. Many businesses are having financial difficulties due to the recession, why wouldn't school districts be experiencing the same thing? Not to mention the amount of corruption and book cooking in corporate America. Just because a business is in the private sector does not mean it is well run. Unions in schools are extremely strong, which is why pensions health care etc.. are becoming a problem. One way to change this may be through state legislation. Currently teachers in public schools are forced to pay union dues whether they join the union or not.
I believe interest rates on school loans are already very low due to the fact that they are unlikely to default. On one hand you want schools to be more like private sector businesses, yet you want their loans to be serviced by the government? If you truly believed the private sector is better, loans should continue through the private sector.
You also write education is a closed system, which is generally true, but so are some businesses. I have seen a number of businesses that train their employees and promote from within. In addition, schools often hire outside firms to for accounting, population predictions, etc...
Well over half of the schools budget is spent on teachers, staff and administration. Although in difficult financial times it is easy to bash them, I would not want my kids to be treated as a business product. Many of the additional costs over the past ten years have been due to increased accountability from No Child Left Behind and Federal Requirements for students with disabilities. These increased regulations require more classroom help and more administration to comply. This should result in more competitive schools.
For you to write that teachers are only working when they are in the classroom is an insult. Preparing a good lesson takes hours of preparation outside the classroom. When employees in corporate america are preparing for a meeting I am sure they are not doing all of it on their own time. Many teachers are graduating college tens of thousands of dollars in debt, does $38,000 dollars a year for a beginning teacher really sound so ridiculous? Although throwing more money at education is will not guarantee the system will improve, if it is wisely spent, it will improve.
Justc,
Several points here:
1. I think there is a difference between having input and insight from the private sector and running the schools as a private sector business.
There needs to be a combination of the two and that can't occur in today's educational environment, because administrators come exclusively from within the system.
2. The outside firms brought in to conduct work with the schools are often education based and therefore do not have public sector clients, accounting is an excellent example because the codes required are state mandated.
3. Why should private equity firms take a percent of anything paid by taxpayers when the state could do it at no interest instead?
4. I never said that teachers are only working when they are in the classroom, I asked if we were getting the same efficiency from the same amount of staff under block scheduling compared to when we had an 8 or 9 periods a day.
5. Regarding salary, in August Board Minutes, a Step one long term substitute earned $44,057. Consider 180 day school year at 7.5 hours per day = 1350 work hours, that works out to $32.64 per hour.
Even if one assumed that a teacher put in 1.5 hours for every work day and spent 9 hours a day on average, the per hour salary comes to $27.20.
The private sector equivalent of $27.20 per hour is a salary of $56,576.
Then you need to consider benefits. Most private companies do not provide family medical, which currently costs over $1,000 per month, yet our school program does cover most of this expense.
Finally, the pension difference. A typical private sector position will earn a percent of income toward a 401K savings program, which as we most now know can take a tremendous hit due to the stock market, whereas the school pension program is guaranteed and results in receiving a salary of somewhere near 75% of the highest three year salary average earned during your teaching career.
6. Your last statement summarizes the entire point of my post "if it is wisely spent...", now that is the question!
NOC,
In response to:
1. In your original post you wrote " Personally, I think one of the greatest flaws of education is that it is not treated as a business."
2. May be true with accounting
3. The state does not currently have money saved to loan to schools so they would be paying interest on millions of dollars they loan to schools.
4. You wrote "they only teaching 75% of the day, and is this enough given a 7.5 hour work day? "
5. Subs in Northampton County only earn $75 -$90 per day, I am not sure how one could earn $44000+, but I am sure it did not come with benefits.
6. I agree
Justc,
Let's keep the context in tact, my remark about business was in response to having politicians and educators fix the system. They created the problem. I said we needed an influx of business.
Isn't it a failure of our system that public entities don't provide loans and instead turn it over to private enterprise allowing them to reap profit off of taxpayers for projects that 'must' take place?
The state doesn't have money for this because it hadn't occurred to anyone to save money in this manner, or a public entity lobbied to make sure it didn't happen.
Again in context, preceding the percent of hours working, I wrote, "If we are hiring more teachers and have less students, one has to wonder if we are utilizing our staff efficiently. "
Regarding point five, based on approved board minutes, a full time, long term, substitute teacher at step one, was approved to be paid $44,000+, this year, I'd find it hard to believe that the person received no benefits.
So the good Dr. has found fiscal religion, eh?
He was at the top of the heap during the spending and borrowing spree. He and his rubberstamp board offer 22% salary increases over the life of the contract. He is the one that had to keep up - no, make that one up the Joneses, with his latest shrine and reflecting pool to himself. He is the one that had to have the gym teacher/football coach at almost $90K combined.
Now ol' Vic is going to tell us how we've got it all wrong?
Laughable.
Post a Comment