Legislative Testimony

Home / Issues & Advocacy / Advocacy Services / Legislative Testimony

WRITTEN TESTIMONY
K-12 STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT GAP

TIMOTHY M. ALLWEIN
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
GOVERNMENTAL AND MEMBER RELATIONS
MARCH 26, 2007

Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to provide written testimony to the Subcommittee on Basic Education of the House Appropriations Committee.  The Pennsylvania School Boards Association represents the concerns of 501 school districts and over 1.8 million school children who attend our public schools.  I urge you to fulfill the state’s funding obligation under the Pennsylvania Constitution to provide a fair and appropriate education so that local school districts can close the achievement gap.

In Pennsylvania, where the Commonwealth provides on average 34% of funding to school districts, this funding discrepancy has created an often hostile environment between school directors, parents of special needs children, teachers, local taxpayers and, unfortunately, state legislators.  This is an interesting dichotomy as all of these stakeholders want to give children an equal opportunity for a good education.

The 2007-08 Governor’s Budget provides a level of funding that is at best a starting point for public schools.  An increase of 3.5 % for basic education funding and 3% for the special education subsidy causes the Commonwealth to fall well short of its funding obligation in providing an adequate level of state funding for public education because expenses continue to grow at a rate of 7-8%. Thus, school districts will fall further behind in the long run.

The bottom line is that there is strong support for holding school districts, their boards, and their administrators accountable for the achievements of students.  This accountability must be accompanied by a strong financial commitment on the part of both the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Federal Government.  This financial commitment is not solely more money; it is also a sincere attempt by the state and federal governments to look at the many requirements it imposes on school districts, especially those that have little or no impact on student achievement.

PSBA commends the House Appropriations Committee for holding public hearings on important fiscal issues facing the Commonwealth and the impact of the governor’s proposed 2007-08 state budget on those issues.  Investments aimed at closing the student achievement gap continue to be a priority for school districts, more so since the enactment of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in 2002. As you know, this federal law requires school districts to test the majority of its students, regardless of status, on state academic standards. Districts must ensure that all students, including certain percentages of students in subgroups consisting of students from poor families, students in racial minorities, disabled students and students who have limited proficiency in the English language meet the proficient standard. Schools and school districts failing to reach this mark, known as Adequate Yearly Progress, are identified for improvement and become subject to various sanctions, depending on how long it has been since their goals have been met.

Unfortunately, this federal mandate did not come along with adequate funding.  The shortfalls in funding from Washington for both NCLB and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) have compounded insufficient state funding and have resulted in a steady rise in local school budgets.  As many of you know, since 1980 the federal government has never come close to its promise of funding 40 percent of the costs for IDEA, which requires school districts to provide special education to thousands of Pennsylvania students. The federal government’s neglect has forced the state and local taxpayers to pick up the difference. According to the First Quarter Report of the Task Force on School Cost Reduction, spending on special education support services grew over 50% over the past ten years.  Expenditures on speech pathology and audiology services alone, increased by almost 140% according to this same report.

Nevertheless, school board members accept the level of accountability called for by both NCLB and IDEA and are doing all that is in their power to help all students achieve. But they need your help. Local resources alone cannot begin to adequately provide for the entire range of services and programs needed to help all children. As you begin budget deliberations, PSBA asks that you be cognizant of school districts’ fiscal abilities to address their students’ academic needs in efforts to close achievement gaps. Funding for programs and strategies aimed at closing the achievement gap are impacted by financial trends, namely, inadequate state funding per student and districts’ over reliance on the local property tax. Both at the state and local levels, we must find better ways to fund public schools. We believe that the idea behind Act 1 is the right one – move districts away from the local property tax. However, using a local tax shift to help finance property tax relief is not the answer for most of the state’s school districts. Those that are property tax poor are also likely to be income poor. And those that do not now levy any type of income tax will likely not see one approved by their constituents this May. We believe that in addition to the local shift and gaming, there must be increases in state levied taxes for the purpose of education. Property taxes can then be reduced to the same extent that other taxes are increased. Thus, those who can most afford to pay for education will be the ones contributing the most. 

In particular, the Commonwealth needs to recognize its responsibility to help districts improve the achievement levels of children through the education funding it provides for the two million K-12 public school students in Pennsylvania. We are happy to say that over the last decade, the Commonwealth has responded to the national call to help improve the education of all students. Through the creation of programs that allow for tutoring, professional development for teachers, increased use of technology and the Accountability Block Grant (ABG) program, which allows districts to choose from a menu of 11 programs all proven to raise student achievement or a 12th category, which allows districts to develop its own proven programs, you have shown your commitment to helping the 501 school districts in the Commonwealth help students meet their academic goals. In fact, the ABG program has been one of the most popular education programs ever offered by the Commonwealth, because it allows local districts to choose programs that are the best fit for their communities. This program has played no small part in increasing the proficiency levels of Pennsylvania’s public school students. 

Unfortunately, the latest budget proposal limits all increases in the ABG program to the establishment, expansion or maintenance of pre-kindergarten and full-day kindergarten programs. While PSBA supports programs aimed to serve our youngest children, this proposal does not recognize other proven student achievement programs that districts began three years ago, when the ABG program first began. In fact pre-kindergarten, which is one of the 11 allowable uses of ABG funds, has been utilized the least simply because too many districts need help in other places and because starting a new pre-kindergarten program is too expensive. Districts need space, must hire new teachers and pay them salaries and benefits and get the word out to parents about the program’s availability. Early childhood programs are too important to be competing with ten other items. Consequently, PSBA believes that initiatives to fund full-day and pre-kindergarten should be considered separately from the ABG program and that the ABG program should receive additional funds so that districts can adequately maintain and expand on the programs they offer with these funds.

The General Assembly has recognized that the cost to educate students and maintain valuable educational program increases from year to year. For the 2006-07 education budget, the General Assembly adjusted the foundation funding targets by increasing the per-student funding foundation to $9,030. PSBA maintains that the Commonwealth should be consistent in its recognition of increased costs for all school districts not only those that qualify to receive a foundation supplement.

Additionally, while PSBA supports the modest proposed increases in the basic and special education subsidies, the proposed funding does not match the Act 1 index under which school districts must now operate. The formula for districts’ basic education subsidies distributes funds based on districts’ aid ratio, while the distribution of special education subsidies assumes that 16% of students in all 501 school districts need special education services. The result of this distribution approach means that 170 districts will only see a minimum 2% increase in basic subsidy and districts that have more than 16% of students with special needs will have to eliminate or reduce other budgetary line-items to keep up with special education costs. In light of this reality, PSBA questions how districts can be expected to maintain educational programs aimed at raising academic achievement for all students, and thereby closing achievement gaps, if investments do not at the very least keep pace with the Act 1 index.

Ensuring an adequate and equitable source of funding and helping districts control costs are just two ways that the commonwealth can help school districts reduce costs, and, more importantly close the gap between different groups of students. PSBA looks forward to working with the House Appropriations Committee in the coming months to ensure that Pennsylvania’s school districts are provided with the tools they need to ensure the maintenance of student achievement strategies aimed at closing the achievement gaps. Thank you for your consideration of PSBA’s comments and your continued support of public education.

: