I found the
Seattle Times Sunday editorial on education funding in the state
interesting. It calls for additional funding aligned with identifying
key priorities.
Both
gubernatorial candidates are also calling for additional funding to meet the court
demands. They also say that they can do
this without raising taxes, something that I have commented about in previous
posts. The editorial does not take a
position on the tax issue, instead waiting for a Joint Task Force on Education
Funding to present their options.
The
editorial does however, call for legislators to identify priorities before
providing additional funding.
The conversation about money rightly begins with a
conversation about education goals. Outcomes cannot be divorced from the
resources used to pay for them. Credible strategies for addressing kindergarten
readiness, high school dropout rates and college/career preparation should top
the list of priorities.
I don’t
disagree with the need to identify priorities and those in the paragraph above
are certainly important considerations, as are preparing for and implementing
practices that ensure teachers and students meet the challenges in the mandated
common core initiative. I want to be
held accountable to meeting the needs of our young people and adults, but I also
want for us a period of time with no new mandates or accountability
targets.
The demand
is high enough, we need high support to balance that demand. Support may include additional funding, but it
must also include a period of time with no new mandates. Common core, new teacher and principal evaluation
systems, and goals embedded in the NCLB waiver requirements are all mandates
from outside the system. Yes, we need
additional funding to meet the demands that are already placed upon us, but adding additional goals does not
make sense for our school system at this time.
No comments:
Post a Comment