AJC.com > Blogs > Get Schooled > Archives > 2007 > November > 30 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USIE2’s ‘Radical’ Plan
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Dean Alford, chairman of the governor’s long-running task force on school finance — commonly referred to as IE2 — gave a luncheon speech to superintendents and school board members (at the conference I’m attending) about where his group is in developing a new funding model for Georgia’s public schools.
Alford started with a hilarious story about how he once got on the wrong airplane when he was running late to the airport. Instead of going to Montgomery, he ended up in Las Vegas. When he finally returned to Atlanta, he discovered the group he was supposed to be speaking to was simply told: “He’s gonna be late.”
“That’s a little bit where we are in our process,” he quipped. “I’m working real hard to keep us on the right plane and going in the right direction.”
Alford told me afterward he’s hoping to present Gov. Sonny Perdue with formal recommendations next month. Then, if the governor approves, leaders in the General Assembly would take up “multiple” bills during the legislative session, which begins in January, to make the necessary changes.
The basic idea, which Alford explained with the aid of numerous charts and diagrams, is to create a more flexible funding system that allows school administrators to spend money where they want — rather than where the state tells them — as long as they meet academic goals.
Alford admitted local officials sometimes are confused by all the new lingo — contract model, anyone? — that he throws around as he talks about the idea. But he thinks any confusion can be overcome.
“It’s so brand new. It’s so different. In some ways, it is very — what’s the word I’m looking for — radical,” he said. “When you’ve dealt for so long under a ‘compliance model,’ it’s difficult to think about how you would function under a ‘performance model.’
“That is a whole new world,” he added. “But I think we can get there.”
The ultimate question: In an election year, when lawmakers have increasingly competitive agendas, will the task force’s plan fly?
Comments
By JustMe
November 30, 2007 4:57 PM | Link to this
If any move will reduce the political BS, then I am all for it.
I think that if this is done, possibly school systems will try to entice the ‘better’ teachers to come to their schools with better pay. This makes sense because theoretically, the student scores would then rise.
One problem that I see with this is that it reduces oversight of school system spending. Any corrupt school board members (Clayton Co?) can more easily manipulate the funds. This can also be said for any corrupt school administrators.
To solve the problem, the State should employee a team (or teams) of auditors that check for corruption in school spending. If corruption is found, there should be a very harsh penalty (jail time plus fine plus loss of certification). There is no second chance when corruption is involved, IMHO.
By Tony
November 30, 2007 7:04 PM | Link to this
The current funding formula’s fundamental flaw is that it is subject to political activity every year making it undependable for school systems to predict their fair share. During the last six years we have faced “temporary austerity reductions” in the wake of the budget crisis when Perdue was elected. Unfortunately, those “temporary” measures remain in place.
One of the analyses of the IE^2 committee involved trying to determine the base cost of running/staffing a school. This could theoretically help the state build a better funding formula.
The phrase “more flexible funding system” is very attractive. If we were actually able to direct resources to the areas of need, that would allow us to better solve problems that impede student learning. The scary thing about the idea of flexibility is the knee-jerk reaction that would occur with the legislature the first time a school system’s spending practices came into question. We would be right back to the “compliance model”.
By CLAX
November 30, 2007 7:36 PM | Link to this
Bridgett….The story about the plane mixup wasn’t THAT funny. Seriously, you must be a Republican!
By catlady
November 30, 2007 7:37 PM | Link to this
The heck with flexible funding: we first need relief from inflexible requirements!
By TL
December 1, 2007 6:30 PM | Link to this
The ‘new’ model may be new for Georgia, but it’s not new if you look around the country. Why don’t you ask how much this ‘new’ model cost the State? Go down that path a bit and see where it leads you back to. You’ll find the corruption, and it’s not (just) in Clayton County.
By ??? unclear
December 3, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this
More flexible for ‘administrators?’ What kind of administrators - central office, executive directors, or principals??? Or all???
And it’s flexible only if they meet academic goals. So those in the lily-white schools will be given much more flexibility, while those who NEED it - those in the inner city - will not be given it b/c the academic goals are next to impossible to meet (unless you cheat - which happens left and right). So here’s more frustration for those busting their as*es in downtown Atlanta - sorry, no flexibility in spending for you! And we wonder why the scores stay so low.
By Camille
December 3, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this
Hmmm, the chairman of the task force on school finance managed to take a wrong flight to Las Vegas when he only should have been doing to Montgomery?? There’s something wrong with that picture. Not a hilarious story at all.