Taming Maine's School Governance Hydra

Lindsey Luebchow — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:00:00 -0400

The Maine legislature passed a school district consolidation plan last week—but in a form dramatically watered down from Governor John Baldacci's original proposals. Maine has one of the most complicated, decentralized school governance systems in the country, and as a result spends far more than the national average on school administration.

By reorganizing the system into larger districts (while also maintaining a degree of local control), the consolidation legislation could lead to a much more efficient system that sends more education funds directly to Maine's classrooms—but only if Maine's school districts agree to participate. Ed Money Watch hopes that local communities will recognize the benefits of consolidation as they decide whether or not to adopt the legislation's reforms.

Maine is an Administrative Mess

Take a look at Maine's school districts in New America's Federal Education Budget Project database, and you'll get an idea of how confusing and inefficient the current system is. Maine's public education system encompasses a variety of different administrative units: municipalities, school administrative districts (SAD), community school districts (CSD), regional school unions. The SADs are groups of municipalities that pool their resources into a school; the CSDs are another type of group of municipalities that pool a different set of resources; the unions are groupings of school administrative districts that share only the costs of a superintendent and the superintendent's office, but maintain their own separate budgets for everything else. And they are all called "districts."

Confused? So are we. We ran into numerous difficulties attempting to figure out how federal funding is distributed to these various units for the EdBudgetProject.Org database (not to mention their demographics, student achievement, etc). One district (Monhegan Plt School Department) enrolls only seven students, and many others enroll between 10 and 20 students. To be sure, some Maine school districts are small because they are located in rural, geographically isolated areas where few people live. But other districts are simply smaller than is necessary or efficient. Because these districts spread fixed educational costs, such as administration and facilities, over so few students, they take money away from the classroom.

According to Education Week, there is one school district administrator for every 750 students on average nationally. In Maine, there is one district administrator for every 350 students. Maine spends $346 per student for administration—compared to the national average of $195 per student.

Cost-Saving Proposals

Numerous reports demonstrate that Maine's sprawling school administrative system needs reform, and that reorganization could produce substantial cost savings. When Governor Baldacci entered his second term, he made this reform a priority. His original consolidation proposal would have reduced Maine's school system from 290 administrative units to 26 regional districts, and put the savings back into schools.

This mandatory consolidation plan encountered great resistance across the state, because many residents feared losing local control of their schools. Over the past year Baldacci worked with legislature to alter the plan to make it politically viable. Many, many iterations later, the legislature finally passed a version last week. The legislation will eliminate financial barriers and disincentives that prevent small school districts from reorganizing and will create incentives for districts with fewer than 2,500 students to do so. In contrast to Baldacci's original plan, the legislation would make consolidation voluntary, rather than mandatory, and would not go as far in eliminating inefficient administration. Baldacci is not happy with the result, but he will likely sign it into law after the long battle.

Under the pending bill, local voters must approve any school district reorganization. Reorganization plans are developed locally by the participating districts, which can maintain some degree of local control over school governance. The participating districts negotiate the size and composition of the school board, and in addition to the board they can create "local school committees and specify their powers and duties." Districts that do not pursue consolidation must submit a plan to the state for reducing administrative costs. In addition, districts that don't reorganize will face financial penalties, specifically reductions in state funding and an increased chance of rejection for school construction projects.

Reorganization as a Positive Reform

Parents may be concerned about how reorganization into bigger schools may affect student achievement. One recent study found that there is no relationship between school district size and student outcomes in Maine. Moreover, parents should consider how the substantial cost savings will improve the academic opportunities at many schools, for example by freeing up funds to hire specialized teachers, buy advanced technology, etc.

Communities will have to approve reorganization plans by referendum by January 30, 2009. Ed Money Watch hopes that all local districts will develop plans for administrative reform, whether it be through reorganization or other economies of scale. Maine voters should set aside any knee-jerk responses to consolidation and seriously consider the benefits of reorganization.

More Money, Lower Achievement in Durham, North Carolina

Lindsey Luebchow — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:00:00 -0500

Durham, North Carolina. It's a medium-sized, old tobacco and textile city best known for housing Duke University. Most national media coverage of Durham focuses on the ivory tower that is Duke, its highly-ranked undergraduate and graduate programs, and of course Duke's basketball team. Rarely does anyone outside North Carolina get an accurate (or any) picture of the city itself and its own educational issues.

In the shadow of an elite institution of higher education, Durham’s K-12 public education system is struggling and often failing to educate its students. Only six schools out of 45 made Adequate Yearly Progress (met No Child Left Behind achievement goals) last year. Some 19 of Durham’s 26 Title I elementary schools are in school improvement status, meaning they have failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress for at least two consecutive years. Only 56 percent of Durham students graduate from high school.

There are obviously a lot of factors contributing to Durham’s poor achievement levels and high drop-out rate. But let’s take a closer look at the money going into Durham’s schools and see how its funding compares to similar districts in North Carolina.

Durham is spending $8,269 per pupil, which ranks 29th out of 115 school districts in North Carolina. About $519 of that spending comes from the federal government in the form of a NCLB Title I grant and IDEA special education grant.

What’s happening in districts with a similar size and poverty rate? Using the Federal Education Budget Project’s Comparison Tool, available at Ed Budget Project.Org, you can compare Durham to other districts in North Carolina and other districts nationwide.

The most similar district to Durham in North Carolina—in terms of size and poverty rate—is Gaston County Schools, a district in the South-Central Piedmont region of North Carolina next door to Charlotte. Both have around 32,000 students, and 17-18 percent of those students live in poverty.

But Durham is spending $1,782 more per-pupil than Gaston County. And the money isn’t translating into higher achievement—Gaston County is doing better on North Carolina’s No Child Left Behind achievement test, the ABCs Test, with 82 percent of 4th graders deemed proficient in reading and 93 percent proficient in math, compared to 75 percent and 88 percent in Durham.

So what’s the story here? Well, it could be that Durham is experiencing a different type of poverty than Gaston County that makes teaching low-income students more difficult. Maybe Durham can’t attract high-quality teachers because of its location, run-down school facilities, or unattractive working conditions.

Or maybe this is an example of what President Bush likes to call the "soft bigotry of low expectations" for minority students: Durham’s schools are 72 percent black and Hispanic, while Gaston County’s schools are 28 percent.

Whatever the combination of factors causing Durham to perform more poorly than its peer school districts while also spending more money, it’s a question that should be raised and discussed by schools, parents, policymakers at the local and state levels.

There are conversations going on in Durham about teacher recruitment and retention, school choice, pre-kindergarten, and the achievement gap, among other issues. But action and results are another story.

Durham isn't the only community of concern. There are many places in the country where not enough of these conversations are taking place. Check out the funding going to your local school district, or any school district in the country, and take a look at their comparative performance by going to New America’s Federal Education Budget Project at Ed Budget Project.org.

Efficiency

Taming Maine's School Governance Hydra

More Money, Lower Achievement in Durham, North Carolina