Against a persistent backdrop of brutal budget cuts, shrinking revenues and heightened expectations, K-12 educators in Nevada continue to explore and implement innovative solutions to the challenges they face in the state’s schools. “We’re in the new normal now with the expectation that we’ll have to do more with less,” says Heath Morrison, superintendent of Washoe County School District (WCSD). The district’s financial situation has been in a freefall for around five years during which $123 million was cut from its state revenues. District officials expect a shortfall of around $40 million next year and perhaps as much as an $80 million deficit in 2013-2014.
The financial picture is equally grim in Southern Nevada where Dwight Jones, superintendent of Clark County School District (CCSD), says that reduced funding, unparalleled growth and changing demographics have come together over the past several decades to form the perfect storm for his school district. “We inherited big challenges,” he explains. Between 1991 and 2011 enrollment in the district increased from 129,000 to 308,500 students and the number of schools from 154 to 357. “We’ve become a metropolitan urban school system,” says Judi Steele, president of the Las Vegas based Public Education Foundation (see related sidebar).
Accountability
With less money to work with, school districts continue to look to accountability and efficiency to help make their dollars go further. “School districts have to get more in return on investment. We have to be very accountable and more focused on what we’re getting for our money,” Jones explains. WCSD has partnered with American Productivity Quality Center of Houston to learn how to use business performance management practices in running the school district. “We’ve brought a tremendous amount of business practices into our district,” Morrison says. Those practices include using key performance indicators to measure success. In the interest of efficiency, Nevada school districts have also been forced to trim their sails by reducing personnel and services, increasing class sizes and deferring purchases of equipment and supplies.
As school districts struggle with decreasing revenues, they also continue to be criticized for low performance scores on certain kinds of surveys. Although the data and methodology might be questionable to school officials, the negative results still cause concern. Nevada recently was given a C- on the 2012 Education West Quality Counts survey that measures key indicators of education system quality. Because the survey used three-year-old data, however, educators are frustrated that it doesn’t show recent improvements in such things as graduation rates.
Renewed Dedication
Whether it’s caused by dismal survey results, lack of money or the synergy between the two, at the end of the day school officials have renewed their dedication to improving the state of K-12 education in Nevada by embracing new thinking, innovative processes and ambitious goals. CCSD has jumped into action with its “Ready by Exit” pledge that ensures students will leave the district prepared to enter the workforce, join the military or enroll in higher education without remediation. According to Jones, the district will accomplish this by doing the following:
- Monitoring academic growth to ensure each student is on the path to graduation.
- Empowering and supporting schools to make needed changes.
- Making early childhood literacy the backbone of their efforts.
- Investing in teachers, principals and staff.
- Harnessing technology to better engage students.
Jones says one of the most important successes so far is finding out the exact status of all students regarding their path to graduation. Those who are not on target are given opportunities for mentoring, online tutoring or attending an academic boot camp. Of around 10,000 seniors who were identified as being in jeopardy in September, approximately 6,000 are now on track. “We’ve got kids in the pipeline and we’ll redesign the pipeline,” Jones says. “To make sure we graduate more kids we have to rebuild the whole system.”
In his quest to build a better K-12 education system, Morrison says he has boiled his focus down to looking for efficiencies, embracing creative innovation and implementing disruptive change. Recent successes include raising the graduation rate from 56 to 70 percent in the past two years by providing tutoring, remedial programs and a personalized plan for progress for students that need extra help. Although he says he’s not satisfied yet with 70 percent, he’s happy that the rate is going up at such a healthy rate. Other notable successes include increasing the number of students taking and becoming proficient in algebra and in those who take advanced placement courses in the eleventh grade.
Recognizing that many students are ill prepared for work or higher study following high school, WCSD is working with economic developers and business leaders to provide educational experiences more closely tied to specific employment needs. The district will be launching academic signature programs that will focus on areas of specialization that include renewable energy, healthcare and technology. WCSD is also partnering with companies such as Microsoft and Apple to design and provide personal learning devices that could reduce or eliminate the need for textbooks. “Kids want technology in their hands 24/7. That’s where they are,” Morrison says. “The technology will enhance the teacher.” Disruptive change in the future may include a school calendar that more resembles year-round study with a shorter summer vacation and longer winter and spring breaks that would allow for accelerated programs in between regular study blocks.
While public school officials face the nuts and bolts of daily management, policy makers and others interested in education suggest a variety of broad-based solutions that they believe will help improve education overall in Nevada. These include school choice, vouchers, tax credit programs, merit pay and tax reform.
School Choice
As public education continues to come under fire for poor performance, some parents, policy makers and critics say competition in the form of school choice would help raise standards and overall quality. “The education system is monopolistic. You can keep pumping money in, but we need more accountability,” says Geoffrey Lawrence, deputy policy director at the Nevada Policy Research Institute. “Charter schools offer a lot of hope.” As offered in Nevada since 1997, public charter schools are autonomous independent entities available to students tuition-free through a combination of state and private funding. Although they are exempted from some regulations governing public schools, they must adhere to accountability, curriculum and performance requirements.
Many supporters of charter schools say that because they are largely free of influence from teachers’ unions, they are more apt to out-perform traditional public schools. Results of research concerning this are mixed, however. A variety of educators also support the concept. “We do support charter schools,” says Lynn Warne, president of the Nevada State Education Association which represents 28,000 member teachers in the state.
Morrison also gives a thumbs-up to them, but has concerns about the quality. “I want them to be of the highest caliber possible. Not all charter schools are better,” he said.
The charter school movement in the state received a huge boost of support during the last session of the legislature when Senate Bill 212 established the State Public Charter School Authority which takes the place of a subcommittee of the State Department of Education in governing charter schools. The authority is expected to foster a more efficient and favorable climate for establishing schools as well as improve the quality of oversight. Nevada currently has 31 charter schools with around 8,000 total students in attendance.
Some school districts in Nevada also support in-district school choice by allowing open enrollment registration which allows parents to apply for their children to attend a school other than one they would be assigned to because of their residence. CCSD saw an increase in open enrollment applications from 1,200 for the 2011-2012 school to 1,318 for the 2012-2013 year. Districts also provide choice through an eclectic array of career and industry based programs within their traditional school structure that enable students to focus on specific areas of interest and expertise. “There’s a lot of choices out there for parents,” Warne says.
Vouchers
Although charter schools seem to attract cheerleaders across the board, school vouchers are a much more vexatious issue. Vouchers are designed to allow parents to send their children to whatever public or private school they choose by using all or part of the tax funding set aside for the children’s education. One of the biggest criticisms of vouchers is that they could be used for private education. “We don’t support vouchers because it takes money away from the public schools,” Warne explains. Morrison says he accepts the concept of vouchers, but emphatically insists that they be available to everybody and that they be in affect for the full school year. “I don’t have an issue with a voucher as long as it’s on a level playing field. They should have to accept everybody and can’t just kick kids out if they misbehave. They need to keep them for a full year,” he says.
Tax Credit Programs
Yet another mechanism that could be used to provide parents with a choice of both private and public schools is analyzed in the Public Education Tax Credit Program as developed by the Cato Institute of Washington, D.C. The program will cut taxes on any individual or business that pays for the independent schooling of an eligible child. Similar plans exist in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island which allow tax credits to individuals or businesses who donate to scholarship-granting-organizations that then fund a child’s education.
The program is founded upon the premise that non-public schools can operate less expensively than traditional public institutions, which in theory would save money plus provide parents with choices. The fiscal impact would depend upon the level of migration of students from public to independent schools. “It could save the public school system {in Nevada} $1 billion over ten years,” Lawrence says.
Central to the issue, however, is determining exactly how much money is spent per pupil. The Nevada Plan requires the legislature to determine and to provide funding for “basic support,” which is $5,263 per student for 2011-2012 and will increase to $5,374 in 2012-2013. These figures exclude spending from federal sources, certain local taxes and around $150 million that flows from the state’s class-size reduction program. Figures reported from the U.S. Department of Education typically include those amounts which can cause the figure to escalate by thousands of dollars. According to the latest numbers reported by the federal department, Nevada spent $10,377 per pupil in fiscal year 2008. In assessing the financial impact of a tax credit program in Nevada, the CATO study used $10,019 as the per-pupil figure along with around $8,000 as the annual tuition in private schools. The difference between the two represents the savings in the cost of educating one child.
Merit Pay
Similar to bonuses awarded to employees in the business world, merit pay is touted as an obvious way to reward educators who excel in their jobs. Support for the concept over the years has come from those who point out that negotiated salary schedules that are based upon years in the district and levels of education don’t make provisions to recognize those teachers who perform above and beyond the norm. To adequately provide for this, merit pay that is tied to either student or teacher achievement has been suggested. Although the state legislature has supported the concept in the past, economic reality dictates that merit pay is not likely to be at the top of the funding queue in the very near future.
Tax Reform
Clearly a thorny issue for almost everyone, tax reform is viewed by many as the most needed avenue for educational improvement. “The biggest challenge is funding,” Warne suggests. “In Nevada we’ve never really properly funded it. Education has taken a tremendous hit.” Reflecting on how Nevada depended upon gaming and construction for many years, Morrison worries whether the current tax structure can continue to support Nevadans. “Gaming can’t come back to the level it once was,” he says. “The tax structure is not appropriate for the needs of the state today.” On the other hand, Lawrence believes that educational reforms are more directly related to student achievement than per-pupil spending and that merely throwing money at the situation will not achieve the desired results. “There is no strong correlation between spending and outcomes,” he says. The District of Columbia spends more than any state, but reports the worst test scores, for example. Also, ten of the 12 states that spend less than Nevada have higher test scores.
Into the Future
As we look to the future we can be somewhat encouraged because of the high interest exhibited in Nevada’s schools and the variety of viewpoints that are entering the debate. “There’s an amazing focus on education,” Warne says. She is heartened by the collaborative efforts that are taking place with teachers coming to the decision making table. “Educators are seen as experts now,” she says. Jones cites the importance of community and business involvement in making needed reforms. “We’re sure trying and I’m grateful how the community has stepped up,” he says. With some gains already in hand, Morrison enthusiastically anticipates more to come. “We’re proud of what we’ve done, but we have a lot of work yet to do,” he says.
