The following letter to the editor ran in today's edition of the Gazette Newspaper.
The Gazette’s recent editorial, “Preserving local control over school funding,” misses the point. The issue is not local control — it is accountability in the use of state funds. If the state gives Montgomery County additional funding for education, that money should be spent on our schools. This year, our schools supposedly got $60 million in increased state education aid. But the county used $40 million of it to cover a cut in local funding. Instead of the state money supplementing local funding, it was used to supplant local funding.
Just consider the issue through a different lens. Montgomery County pays a disproportionate share of state taxes. The state sends a great deal of educational aid to high-need districts. The state money is intended to supplement what those districts can provide on their own for their schools. How would we feel if Baltimore city or Prince George’s County took millions of dollars in state education aid and used it to reduce what they spend on their schools so they could spend those local tax dollars in other areas? I expect most Montgomery County taxpayers would be outraged.
If we wouldn’t tolerate other counties diverting state education aid for other purposes, we can’t defend the practice here. The state Board of Education said recently that the current law “is becoming not only unworkable, but subject to manipulation.” We should heed that warning. Counties should have local control over the use of local tax dollars. But if a county gets additional state aid for education, it should be spent on schools, and not used to reduce local funding for schools.
Doug Prouty, Rockville
The writer is president of the Montgomery County Education Association
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Paying To Teach: Somebody Noticed
Many thanks to Julie Rasicot of Bethesda Magazine who recently put up a blog posting pointing out that teachers regularly dig into their own pockets to buy supplies for their classrooms and their students. Teachers might want to add comments to her posting to share their personal stories and keep the conversation going.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogs / Education Matters / July-August 2011 / Paying to Teach
By Julie Rasicot
Imagine showing up at the office after summer vacation and finding out that you have to shell out about $500 for supplies so you can do your job. Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it?
But that’s pretty much the expectation among teachers in the Montgomery County Public Schools. Like their colleagues across the country, MCPS teachers spend hundreds of dollars out of pocket every year to buy classroom supplies..... click here to read the full blog posting on BethesdaMagazine.com.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogs / Education Matters / July-August 2011 / Paying to Teach
By Julie Rasicot
Imagine showing up at the office after summer vacation and finding out that you have to shell out about $500 for supplies so you can do your job. Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it?
But that’s pretty much the expectation among teachers in the Montgomery County Public Schools. Like their colleagues across the country, MCPS teachers spend hundreds of dollars out of pocket every year to buy classroom supplies..... click here to read the full blog posting on BethesdaMagazine.com.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Back To School Media Campaign
Educating the public about the needs of our schools is an important part of our work. The Maryland State Education Association's back to school ad buy began online last week, with ads going up on Facebook and across the web via Google Display Ads. All of the online ads will run through August 31; the Google ads send users to this document, “Three Challenges to School Funding in Your Community,” which discusses MOE, shifting pensions, and the drop-off in federal aid. MSEA’s back to school radio ads joined the fray this week, and will run in the Washington and Baltimore Metro areas, along with Southern Maryland and the Eastern Shore, through September 4.
Check it out!
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Fix Maintenance Of Effort
MCEA has often described the State Maintenance Of Effort law as "the simple notion that increased state education funding should be spent on our schools" and not used to enable counties to reduce their local school funding to spend the dollars elsewhere. Today's Gazette reports that State Delegate Bonnie Cullison of Aspen Hill "expects to introduce legislation next year that could require counties to apply for a waiver from Maryland’s “maintenance of effort” law for education spending if certain economic conditions are met. Her bill also would set a floor for just how low per-pupil spending by a county could be, based on a new formula."
Just this past May, the State Board of Education issued a ruling that, in part, said "We again urge the General Assembly to address the flaws in the (Maintenance of Effort) statute because the law is becoming not only unworkable, but subject to manipulation". Let's hope our other state legislators join this effort to fix Maintenance of Effort.
Gazette
Published: Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Montgomery lawmaker seeks to protect education funding
by Andrew Ujifusa and erin cunningham
Staff Writers
A state lawmaker from Montgomery County wants to force the government entities that fund schools to apply for waivers from education spending requirements.
Had such a law been in place this year, the Montgomery County Council would not have been able to reduce school system funding as much as it did a move that reduced the base from which future budgets will be derived.
Del. Bonnie Cullison (D-Dist. 19) of Aspen Hill expects to introduce legislation next year that could require counties to apply for a waiver from Maryland’s “maintenance of effort” law for education spending if certain economic conditions are met. Her bill also would set a floor for just how low per-pupil spending by a county could be, based on a new formula.
“I’m concerned about what happened in the County Council this year and the approach they took to maintenance of effort,” said Cullison, who served as president of the Montgomery County Education Association (the county teachers union) from 2003 to 2009. “I want to make sure we have a law that ultimately honors what the county is responsible for.”
The state’s maintenance of effort law requires counties to spend at least as much per pupil on public schools as they did the previous year, in order to qualify for increases in state education funding aid.
However, counties can apply for a waiver from that requirement with the state Board of Education if they think they cannot meet that per-pupil amount.
This year, the County Council chose not to seek a waiver and make cuts to Montgomery County Public Schools from maintenance of effort levels. This decision allowed the council to set a new and lower per-pupil spending level that it believes will be easier to meet next year.
Instead of spending $1.497 billion on the school system, the maintenance of effort level for fiscal 2012 based on enrollment, the council spent $1.37 billion. That decision has resulted in a $26.3 million penalty in lost state aid to the school system for fiscal 2013.
The county is spending $1,400 less per student than two years ago. Council members have said funding schools at the higher level would hurt other government services.
This year six counties, including Montgomery, opted not to seek waivers, and did not meet maintenance of effort.
Education officials and county government have been unable to avoid fights about school funding the last couple of years.
Two years ago, the county’s Board of Education has threatened to sue the county government if it fell short of the funding target determined by the state. The relationship between the board and the County Council further deteriorated this year in regard to health care spending.
Cullison said she still is formulating the details of her plan, and isn’t sure what economic conditions would trigger a mandatory waiver request from a county.
She also said she hasn’t finalized the formula for minimum per-pupil county education spending levels.
Montgomery County Councilman Philip M. Andrews (D-Dist. 3) of Gaithersburg argued that any such law would unfairly tie the hands of local government, and incorrectly assumes that equal or greater funding would lead to better results.
“Any proposal like that, regardless of who proposes it, is based on a false premise,” Andrews said.
© 2011 Post-Newsweek Media, Inc./Gazette.Net
Just this past May, the State Board of Education issued a ruling that, in part, said "We again urge the General Assembly to address the flaws in the (Maintenance of Effort) statute because the law is becoming not only unworkable, but subject to manipulation". Let's hope our other state legislators join this effort to fix Maintenance of Effort.
================================================
Gazette
Published: Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Montgomery lawmaker seeks to protect education funding
by Andrew Ujifusa and erin cunningham
Staff Writers
A state lawmaker from Montgomery County wants to force the government entities that fund schools to apply for waivers from education spending requirements.
Had such a law been in place this year, the Montgomery County Council would not have been able to reduce school system funding as much as it did a move that reduced the base from which future budgets will be derived.
Del. Bonnie Cullison (D-Dist. 19) of Aspen Hill expects to introduce legislation next year that could require counties to apply for a waiver from Maryland’s “maintenance of effort” law for education spending if certain economic conditions are met. Her bill also would set a floor for just how low per-pupil spending by a county could be, based on a new formula.
“I’m concerned about what happened in the County Council this year and the approach they took to maintenance of effort,” said Cullison, who served as president of the Montgomery County Education Association (the county teachers union) from 2003 to 2009. “I want to make sure we have a law that ultimately honors what the county is responsible for.”
The state’s maintenance of effort law requires counties to spend at least as much per pupil on public schools as they did the previous year, in order to qualify for increases in state education funding aid.
However, counties can apply for a waiver from that requirement with the state Board of Education if they think they cannot meet that per-pupil amount.
This year, the County Council chose not to seek a waiver and make cuts to Montgomery County Public Schools from maintenance of effort levels. This decision allowed the council to set a new and lower per-pupil spending level that it believes will be easier to meet next year.
Instead of spending $1.497 billion on the school system, the maintenance of effort level for fiscal 2012 based on enrollment, the council spent $1.37 billion. That decision has resulted in a $26.3 million penalty in lost state aid to the school system for fiscal 2013.
The county is spending $1,400 less per student than two years ago. Council members have said funding schools at the higher level would hurt other government services.
This year six counties, including Montgomery, opted not to seek waivers, and did not meet maintenance of effort.
Education officials and county government have been unable to avoid fights about school funding the last couple of years.
Two years ago, the county’s Board of Education has threatened to sue the county government if it fell short of the funding target determined by the state. The relationship between the board and the County Council further deteriorated this year in regard to health care spending.
Cullison said she still is formulating the details of her plan, and isn’t sure what economic conditions would trigger a mandatory waiver request from a county.
She also said she hasn’t finalized the formula for minimum per-pupil county education spending levels.
Montgomery County Councilman Philip M. Andrews (D-Dist. 3) of Gaithersburg argued that any such law would unfairly tie the hands of local government, and incorrectly assumes that equal or greater funding would lead to better results.
“Any proposal like that, regardless of who proposes it, is based on a false premise,” Andrews said.
© 2011 Post-Newsweek Media, Inc./Gazette.Net
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Matt Damon defends teacher tenure in testy exchange
Watch the video of Matt Damon's comments about teacher tenure on Yahoo.com!
Actor Matt Damon got into a tense exchange with a journalist from the libertarian Reason TV site after she asked him whether teachers with tenure would lack incentive to work hard at their jobs.
The journalist argued that Damon has an incentive to work hard as an actor because he lacks job security, while teachers do not.
"You think job insecurity makes me work hard?" the actor asked in disbelief. "A teacher wants to teach. Why else would you take a sh*tty salary and really long hours and do that job unless you really love to do it?"
Damon was speaking at Sunday's Save Our Schools rally, where thousands of teachers and educators descended on Washington D.C. to protest the Obama administration's education policies. The rally wasn't organized by either of the major teachers' unions, according to the Washington Post's Valerie Strauss, but was a grassroots protest against the focus on standardized testing, No Child Left Behind, and what protesters say is the scapegoating of teachers for problems such as childhood poverty.
Damon was asked by his mother, a child development expert, to speak at the rally. You can read his speech here.
By Liz Goodwin, National Affairs Reporter, Yahoo.com
Actor Matt Damon got into a tense exchange with a journalist from the libertarian Reason TV site after she asked him whether teachers with tenure would lack incentive to work hard at their jobs.
The journalist argued that Damon has an incentive to work hard as an actor because he lacks job security, while teachers do not.
"You think job insecurity makes me work hard?" the actor asked in disbelief. "A teacher wants to teach. Why else would you take a sh*tty salary and really long hours and do that job unless you really love to do it?"
Damon was speaking at Sunday's Save Our Schools rally, where thousands of teachers and educators descended on Washington D.C. to protest the Obama administration's education policies. The rally wasn't organized by either of the major teachers' unions, according to the Washington Post's Valerie Strauss, but was a grassroots protest against the focus on standardized testing, No Child Left Behind, and what protesters say is the scapegoating of teachers for problems such as childhood poverty.
Damon was asked by his mother, a child development expert, to speak at the rally. You can read his speech here.
By Liz Goodwin, National Affairs Reporter, Yahoo.com
Lesley Johnson Recognized for National Board Work!
Congratulations to MCEA Board of Directors member Lesley Johnson, who was recently highlighted in a story in the Gazette newspaper about her work supporting candidates for NBPTS (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards) certification. Leslie was recognized for being a presenter at this year's national NBPTS conference, held last month in Washington DC. Way to go Lesley!
Go to the NBPTS Program page on the MCEA website for more information on the joint MCEA-MCPS program to support national board candidates.
Go to the NBPTS Program page on the MCEA website for more information on the joint MCEA-MCPS program to support national board candidates.
Why Educators Support the Dream Act
Many thanks to the Maryland State Education Association for this concise FAQ sheet on why educators support the Maryland Dream Act:
What the Dream Act is and what it isn’t
The Dream Act IS about opportunity to achieve the dream of a college education by making such an education more affordable.
The Dream Act is NOT a scholarship program. The state is NOT spending resources to pay the way of undocumented students to attend college; rather, it is charging a rate that is more affordable (in-state rather than out-of-state).
Why does MSEA support the Maryland Dream Act?
MSEA supports the Dream Act for two significant education policy-related reasons:
The Dream Act also provides new access for military families. The Act creates in-state status for active duty military families residing, domiciled, or stationed in Maryland, as well as veterans who register within four years of discharge.
Finally, as an economic initiative, this legislation requires families of any students who qualify under the Act to pay Maryland taxes. Such a requirement will increase reported income and tax rolls. More students attending community college also could result in revenue the state would not have received otherwise.
Who else in Maryland supports the Dream Act?
Dozens of community, government, religious, and advocacy groups have supported the passage of the Dream Act, including: Baltimore City Council; Prince George’s County Public Schools; University System of Maryland; Baltimore Jewish Council; Greater Baltimore Urban League; Maryland Association of Community Colleges; Maryland Catholic Conference; Maryland Interfaith Legislative Committee; NAACP of Maryland; Progressive Maryland; and Service Employees International Union Maryland State Council. See a full list of organizations and government entities supporting the passage of the Dream Act.
What is NEA's position?
The federal Dream Act is strongly supported by the National Education Association. While it does some different things than the Maryland version of the Dream Act, it is a model that has led many of our state and local leaders and members to learn more about the issue and support it at both the federal and state level.
How will the Dream Act affect other college applicants?
The Dream Act applies to access to community college first, which is open enrollment, so no slots of Maryland students are at risk. Students who complete 60 credits at a community college and qualify for acceptance to a four-year public college/university also do not impact other in-state applicants. The legislation specifically addresses this issue by indicating the in-state:out-of-state ratio maintained at each college/university should count students admitted under the Dream Act towards the out-of-state allotment. Students admitted under the Dream Act cannot be counted in the ratio of in-state students and therefore are not taking seats at our four-year institutions from other Marylanders.
What is the financial impact of the Dream Act?
The fiscal note indicates the Dream Act calls for an increase in state aid for community colleges of $778,400 for the next fiscal year. The fiscal note does not reflect estimates of how this act will assist in the collection of tax dollars or a net increase in students paying tuition who would not have otherwise been able to afford and attend.
What are the long term effects of the Dream Act?
To learn more about the Maryland Dream Act, and to find out how you can help support it, go to the CASA de Maryland website.
What the Dream Act is and what it isn’t
The Dream Act IS about opportunity to achieve the dream of a college education by making such an education more affordable.
The Dream Act is NOT a scholarship program. The state is NOT spending resources to pay the way of undocumented students to attend college; rather, it is charging a rate that is more affordable (in-state rather than out-of-state).
Why does MSEA support the Maryland Dream Act?
MSEA supports the Dream Act for two significant education policy-related reasons:
- Students who qualify under the Dream Act must graduate and have spent three years in a Maryland high school. Thus, not only does this legislation put an affordable college education within reach, it also encourages graduation from high school.
- Prioritizing high school and requiring graduation also helps address achievement gap issues that persist with at-risk and immigrant populations.
The Dream Act also provides new access for military families. The Act creates in-state status for active duty military families residing, domiciled, or stationed in Maryland, as well as veterans who register within four years of discharge.
Finally, as an economic initiative, this legislation requires families of any students who qualify under the Act to pay Maryland taxes. Such a requirement will increase reported income and tax rolls. More students attending community college also could result in revenue the state would not have received otherwise.
Who else in Maryland supports the Dream Act?
Dozens of community, government, religious, and advocacy groups have supported the passage of the Dream Act, including: Baltimore City Council; Prince George’s County Public Schools; University System of Maryland; Baltimore Jewish Council; Greater Baltimore Urban League; Maryland Association of Community Colleges; Maryland Catholic Conference; Maryland Interfaith Legislative Committee; NAACP of Maryland; Progressive Maryland; and Service Employees International Union Maryland State Council. See a full list of organizations and government entities supporting the passage of the Dream Act.
What is NEA's position?
The federal Dream Act is strongly supported by the National Education Association. While it does some different things than the Maryland version of the Dream Act, it is a model that has led many of our state and local leaders and members to learn more about the issue and support it at both the federal and state level.
How will the Dream Act affect other college applicants?
The Dream Act applies to access to community college first, which is open enrollment, so no slots of Maryland students are at risk. Students who complete 60 credits at a community college and qualify for acceptance to a four-year public college/university also do not impact other in-state applicants. The legislation specifically addresses this issue by indicating the in-state:out-of-state ratio maintained at each college/university should count students admitted under the Dream Act towards the out-of-state allotment. Students admitted under the Dream Act cannot be counted in the ratio of in-state students and therefore are not taking seats at our four-year institutions from other Marylanders.
What is the financial impact of the Dream Act?
The fiscal note indicates the Dream Act calls for an increase in state aid for community colleges of $778,400 for the next fiscal year. The fiscal note does not reflect estimates of how this act will assist in the collection of tax dollars or a net increase in students paying tuition who would not have otherwise been able to afford and attend.
What are the long term effects of the Dream Act?
- In-state tuition has long term economic and fiscal benefits for Maryland
- The Maryland Dream Act will encourage students and families to invest in the state's economy
- Maryland students attending college are more likely to stay out of poverty, own a home, and raise more highly educated children
To learn more about the Maryland Dream Act, and to find out how you can help support it, go to the CASA de Maryland website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)