www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
________________________________________ THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT
January 24, 2005 - Vol. 5, No. 04
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Covering education news in Vermont and beyond...
Informative, provocative, unique...
Published by Vermonters for Better Education
VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.com
SPECIAL ALERTIS THE VT DEPT OF ED DOING AN END RUN AROUND THE STATEHOUSE -- "PASSING" ITS OWN EARLY ED LAW WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE LEGISLATURE?
The people of Vermont, through their elected representatives, did not approve passage of an early education bill last year, but that isn't stopping the Vermont Department of Education from moving forward with their own early education program using the failed bill as a guide.
The Vermont Department of Education has prepared early education rules which could encourage public schools to set up early education programs akin to those envisioned in last year's failed early ed bill, S.166. While that bill passed the Senate, it failed in the House after several serious concerns were raised about its lack of choice and potential cost.
The will of the people, however, is not a deterrent to the Vermont Department of Education. Staff there have drawn up draft rules (available at http://www.state.vt.us/educ/new/pdfdoc/board/packet_04_0114/item_O_EE.pdf) which would have the effect of encouraging school districts to use Act 60 funds for pre-school programs, despite the fact that the legislature may not have intended these funds to be used this way.
The VDOE rules provide a handy guide to how to use a weighted system for determining ADM (average daily membership) values for general population pre-K students and thus give school districts access to the state funds for those children.
Some school districts, in fact, have already set up pre-K programs, drawing on Education Fund money to support them. The VDOE will likely argue this is the reason the rules are needed - to clarify how schools can use the money. But the rules actually ENCOURAGE school districts to get into the pre-K business and set up new programs:
"If the proposed rules governing pre-K are passed, it is very likely that more school districts will explore how they can support early education and increase their ADM," the VDOE report says. "The current lack of clear guidance on pre-K ADM has deterred school districts from counting pre-K students for ADM purposes."
The VTDOE's weighted system appears to apply to ALL pre-K students, not just those deemed "at risk." However, as pointed out in last week's VER, the funding statute only talks about using Act 60 funds for "at risk" children:
<<(d) Funds received under this section which are attributable to an increase in student count due to the poverty ratio of the district shall be used by the district to provide learning readiness experiences for preschool age children or early reading and math experiences for school age children. These services shall be provided to children who are AT RISK (emphasis added) of not succeeding in the general education environment. School districts are authorized to work collaboratively to share resources or otherwise find ways to maximize use of funds received under this section.>> [Source: Vermont Statutes : TITLE 16 Education : PART 6 Financing; School Funds and Properties : CHAPTER 133. STATE FUNDING OF PUBLIC EDUCATION : Subchapter 2. General State Funding of Public Education : § 4011. Education payments.]
In fact, elsewhere in statute, ADM calculations ONLY refer to elementary and secondary level students, not to pre-elementary, or pre-k students. There is a provision for grants for pre-k programs, but that provision does not deal with ADM calculations that would allow school districts to turn on the money spigot as they attracted students to their doors.
This means Vermont taxpayers could be footing the bill for pre-K programs for all income level children if the rules are passed.
The very concerns that stalled S.166 last year will be completely ignored. Public schools will be able to set up pre-k programs, not offer parents in their communities choice, and possibly have a negative impact on private providers as the free public providers crowd the marketplace. In addition, school districts would have access to monies for purposes the legislature may not have intended, and the people of Vermont will not have had a chance to speak on this issue.
While there are legitimate concerns about how to maintain the programs already in place, those concerns could be addressed in a variety of ways, not by instituting a statewide early education program through the rule-making process.
The State Board of Education will vote on these rules at their February 15 meeting. Vermonters for Better Education, the publisher of this newsletter, is commenting in writing (our response is below).
Current State Board members and their contact information can be found at: http://www.state.vt.us/educ/new/html/board/membership.html. The following are their names and email addresses:
Diane Mueller (Chair)Or, you may send comments to the board through the Vermont Department of Education itself by emailing Carol King at carolking@education.state.vt.us or by calling her at 802.828.5101.
Dmueller@okemo.comLindy Caslin
caz1072@yahoo.comWilliam Corrow
wbcorrow@aol.comRick Manahan
RMan@together.netChris Robbins
Chris.Robbins@EHV-Weidmann.comLinda Cox (vice chair)
Cox@sover.netMarissa Cormier
misscee114@yahoo.comTom James
tomjames1@adelphia.netDeborah McDowell
DebMcDowell@compuserve.comSusan Schill
schills@sover.netIf you do contact the State Board, consider sending a copy of your comments to us at VTBetterEd@aol.com.
VBE'S LETTER TO SBOE MEMBERS
January 24, 2005
State Board of Education
State of Vermont
Montpelier, Vermont 05601Dear State Board of Education Members:
At your February 15 meeting you will consider draft early education rules (Attachment O from your January 18, 2005 meeting packet materials) that would allow school districts to count early-education students in their Average Daily Membership (ADM), thus giving these school districts access to Education Fund monies for pre-K programs.
Vermonters for Better Education, a nonprofit education reform organization with approximately 3,000 supporters on our mailing list, strongly encourages you to reject these rules and to direct the Vermont Department of Education to develop rules that only deal with "at-risk" children (i.e., children living in poverty or in homes where English is a second language). The following are our reasons for requesting your action:
** We believe the draft rules are in violation of statute pertaining to how Education Funds should be used. The education financing component of statute talks about ADM formulas for "elementary" and "secondary" students, not for general population pre-K students:
§ 4010. Determination of weighted membership
(a) On or before the first day of December during each school year, the commissioner shall determine the average daily membership of each school district for the current school year. The determination shall list separately:
(1) resident pupils being provided elementary education; and
(2) resident pupils being provided secondary education.
(b) The commissioner shall determine the long-term membership for each school district for each student group described in subsection (a) of this section. The commissioner shall use the actual average daily membership over two consecutive years, the latter of which is the current school year. ...
(c) The commissioner shall determine the weighted long-term membership for each school district using the long-term membership from subsection (b) of this section and the following weights for each class:
Grade Level Weight
Elementary 1.0
Secondary 1.25** When the statute does focus on pre-K students, it mentions using funds for "at risk" students:
"These (learning readiness) services shall be provided to children who are AT RISK (emphasis added) of not succeeding in the general education environment."
** If ADM calculations are to be used for general pre-K programs, we firmly believe the people of Vermont should have to give their approval, through their elected representatives, of such a plan, and this should not be done through the rule-making process.
** In fact, a 2001 survey by the Child Care Fund of Vermont found little support for the use of education funds for child care (and by extrapolation, early education programs). According to their survey, around 70 percent of respondents supported increasing cigarette or hard liquor taxes, but there was "significantly less support for increasing the sales tax or USING DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FUNDS (emphasis added)." In other words, respondents to this survey were wary of extending the use of education funds to programs dealing with children outside the compulsory-education requirement.
** The draft rules do not allow parents to choose where to use the ADM dollars at the pre-school of their choice without going through administrative roadblocks. It is our experience that when parents have to request choice from a school district, their requests are often denied. For true choice to occur, ADM dollars must follow the child automatically, without the parents having to ask permission.
** We are deeply disturbed that the VDOE would generate these draft early education rules because they bear such a striking resemblance to an early education bill, S.166, which failed in the legislature last year. The bill failed because of legitimate and pressing concerns about the initiative's lack of choice and its potential cost. The VDOE rules completely ignore these concerns, thus brazenly ignoring the will of the Vermont people whose voice is articulated through their elected legislators.
Because the Vermont Department of Education answers to you, the State Board, we respectfully request the following:
1. That the draft rules on early education be rejected,Thank you for your consideration and for the hard work you perform for the children and taxpayers of the state of Vermont.
2. That any rules concerning early education programs only concern themselves with "at risk" children as directed by Vermont statute,
3. That any rules concerning early education programs for at-risk children contain a choice component that allows ADM money to follow the child to public or private providers, and
4. That the Vermont Department of Education be directed not to design rules for ANY PROGRAM in the future if a similar program was defeated in the legislature.Sincerely,
Libby Sternberg
Executive Director
Vermonters for Better Education
VERMONT BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE A PARTNER TO THIS PROCESS?
In previous issues of the VER, we reported that the Vermont Business Roundtable supported S.166, the early education bill that failed last year. The VBR took exception to this characterization, pointing out that they don't support specific legislation, but merely support "principles" on various issues, including early education.
The draft early education rules that bear such a striking resemblance to S.166, however, were put together with the help of "partners," a list of which is included with the Vermont Department of Education's draft rules document. Who's on the list of partners? Well, Maxine Brandenburg and Tim Volk, who are both identified as Vermont Business Roundtable representatives. Also on the list are the usual education establishment folks - representatives from the VSBA, the VSA, and the VT-NEA.
So either the VBR doesn't know its name is being used to promote a program, or they do support S.166 in rule form but not in legislative form.
* * *
The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.
SubscribeRemove
..
..
..
..