Private School : Facts and Studies

Private School Statistics at a Glance
PK-12 Enrollment (2011-12)	5,268,000 (10% of all US students)
# of Schools (2011-12)	30,861 (24% of all US schools)
Enrollment Source: National Center for Education Statistics (see table) School Source: National Center for Education Statistics (see table)

Where do private school students go to school?
	Years 89-90	Years 11-12
Catholic	54.5%	42.9%
Nonsectarian	13.2%	19.8%
Conservative Christian	10.9%	14.0%
Baptist	5.8%	4.5%
Lutheran	4.4%	3.6%
Jewish	3.2%	5.5%
Episcopal	1.7%	2.1%
Seventh-day Adventist	1.6%	1.1%
Calvinist	0.9%	0.5%
Friends	0.3%	0.4%
Source: National Center for Education Statistics (PSS Report)

---

FAQs About Private Schools

How many private schools are there in the United States? How many students attend them? What's the average tuition? These are just a few of the frequently asked questions we get at CAPE. Here are some answers. (Unless otherwise noted, all data are from the National Center for Education Statistics.)

Schools and Students

There are 30,861 private schools in the United States, serving 5.3 million PK-12 students. Private schools account for 24 percent of the nation's schools and enroll 10 percent of all PK-12 students.

Most private school students (80 percent) attend religiously-affiliated schools (see table 2 of the PSS Report). And most private schools are small: 86 percent have fewer than 300 students (see table 1 of the PSS Report).

Tuition

Average Private School Tuition: 2011-12
	All Levels	Elementary	Secondary	K-12 Schools
All Schools	$10,740	$7,770	$13,030	$13,640
Catholic	$6,890	$5,330	$9,790	$10,230
Other Religious	$8,690	$7,960	$16,520	$8,160
Non-Sectarian	$21,510	$18,170	$25,180	$22,440
Source: Table 205.50 Digest of Education Statistics, 2013 Tables, National Center for Education Statistics.

Family Income

Where do the children of the wealthy go to school? The U.S. Census Bureau has data on the social and economic characteristics of students enrolled in the nation’s schools during the month of October 2012. It turns out that of the 8.8 million families with children in grades K-12 with annual incomes of $75,000 or more (the highest income bracket measured), 83 percent have children only in public schools and 13 percent have children only in private schools. (Four percent have children in both types of schools.)

Visit the U.S. Census Bureau Web site for detailed tables on school enrollment for October 2012. Table 8 provides data by family income.

Community Service

In March 2000, the National Center for Education Statistics issued a report entitled Service-Learning and Community Service Among 6th- Through 12th-Grade Students in the United States. According to the report, "Involving America's students in community service activities is one of the objectives established under the third National Education Goal for the year 2000,which seeks to prepare students for responsible citizenship."

The report notes a significant difference in levels of community service between public school students and private school students. "For both 1996 and 1999, students attending church-related private schools(42 percent for both years) and non-church-related private schools (31percent in 1996 and 41 percent in 1999) were more likely to say their schools required and arranged community service than students attending public schools...(14 percent in 1996 and 17 percent in 1999)."

 info/data via: www.capenet.org

TN teachers would lose money under pay plan, critics say

Article Via: June 21, 2013 - By Lisa Fingeroot, The Tennessean

Tennessee teachers marshaled their forces and House Democrats hurled insults at Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman on Thursday over concerns that teachers will lose money if the state adopts a controversial plan today to require merit pay.

The pay plan, part of a drive to boost student test scores, would eliminate traditional salary increases for teachers based solely on years of experience and advanced degrees. The state Board of Education is expected to approve it today.
Members already gave the proposal a nod of approval in April when Huffman presented it.

The Tennessee Education Association, the state's only teacher union and largest professional organization, opposed the pay plan from the beginning and has been assembling a group to show opposition at today's meeting. TEA also has been distributing a pay chart supporting its claim that teachers would lose money under the plan.

House Democrats amped up the opposition Thursday when they called a news conference to oppose the plan and throw their support behind the union.

"It's hard to find a commissioner in the history of Tennessee that has assembled a more broad track record of complete failure than Commissioner Huffman," said state Rep. Mike Stewart, a Democrat from Nashville. "Everything this guy has done - every experiment he has tried has so far - has ended in failure, so it's shocking that we would still be listening to this same person."

Stewart was joined by several other Democrats, including state Rep. Gloria Johnson, a teacher from Knoxville, who said she vehemently opposes the pay plan because it eliminates most raises for years of experience and advanced degrees. That's like breaking a promise made to teachers who have been working for years on getting advanced degrees, the Democrats said.

Johnson said many experienced teachers also worry that bonuses would be unfairly distributed.
Huffman responded to the criticism in a written statement. "It is unfortunate that some groups and elected officials are presenting inaccurate information," he wrote. "It is against Tennessee law for any school district to cut a teacher's pay. Additionally, this administration has added more than $130 million in state money for teacher salaries over the past three years. We will continue to look for ways to increase teacher pay, decrease state mandates, and increase local control of school decisions."
Under the plan, no teacher could earn less than he or she currently earns, and the step pay raises usually received at six years and 11 years of experience are included as safeguards.

Huffman said the plan is not a pure merit pay plan because each district can determine how it will differentiate pay. For example, Tennessee certified only 50 chemistry teachers last year, and districts might use a larger salary to attract a chemistry teacher.

While the TEA's chart shows the state-mandated base pay of teachers staying almost flat except for the two step increases, it does not include any amounts for the bonuses and raises that could be earned under Huffman's plan.

Mixed reaction from teachers Teachers from Trousdale County, where a differentiated plan is being piloted, expressed support for the way they are paid.

"I think it's a great plan," said fourth-grade teacher Chris Freeman. "I think it rewards teachers for doing a superb job. It's tailor-made for me. I'm in charge of my own destiny. I control my own children and my own scores."

His colleague, Laura Wilson, chose not to join the alternative plan. "I was scared to take a risk," she said. She admits to being disappointed, however, when she realized she lost about $4,000 in bonuses by not being in the plan.

Rutherford County special education teacher Jennifer Tidwell is so concerned about all the changes being made for teachers that she is considering another profession.

"It's like you're running and kicking sand and not getting anywhere," she said. "They keep moving the goal."

Tidwell's students tend to have individual education plans that can include very simple tasks that cannot be tested. She worries that her achievements might go undocumented for determining pay raises.

"That's what I am kind of afraid of," she said. "I don't have a problem with merit pay, but I have a problem with the way (achievement is) measured."

In Trousdale County, special education teachers are hard to find, so they are rewarded with a bonus every year for working in the system. High school chemistry and physics teachers also are rewarded.
"We're kind of like a guinea pig," said system Director Clint Satterfield. "I think the main goal is to improve teacher quality, because if we improve the quality of the teacher, we will improve the outcome for students."

The Business of Education

Published on Mar 16, 2015 via Global Education & Skills Forum

For many investors and companies, education represents a high growth industry and unlimited potential and opportunity. In this panel, speakers question what models represent the best returns for both investors and society.

"A Good Budget For Schools"

 Article Via: The Editors, Observer - April 2015

New Yorkers protesting Mr. Cuomo on NYC Public Library Steps

Whatever else may be said about Gov. Andrew Cuomo, nobody can ever complain that his budgets are late. He and his colleagues in the Legislature delivered another on-time spending plan in late March, and this one contained no dramatic tax hikes and no spending sprees. As these things go, that makes for a pretty good document.

But there was more to it than that. Budgets may be filled with dense prose and eye-glazing numbers, but they are also intensely political statements reflecting the priorities of the governor and, to a lesser extent, of the Legislature as well.

This year’s budget contained plenty of good news for those who wish to shake up the status quo in public education in New York and continue the process of revolutionizing how our children are taught and what should be expected of those who teach them.

The head of the city teachers’ union, Michael Mulgrew, announced that the governor had declared war on teachers. That’s a curious way to look at a budget that increases state spending on schools by $1.4 billion.

Included in the $142 billion spending plan are reforms that will bring greater accountability into the classroom—or else. Teachers will be evaluated based on student standardized test scores, as well as observations, including one from an outside arbiter. Standardized test scores will count for 50 percent of a teacher’s evaluation.
Not surprisingly, the head of the city teachers’ union, Michael Mulgrew, announced that the governor had declared war on teachers. That’s a curious way to look at a budget that increases state spending on schools by $1.4 billion. Mr. Cuomo chose to look at the budget in a very different way. It was, he said, the most pro-teacher budget in state history.

The results of truly transformative educational policy are becoming so clear that even reactionaries like Mr. Mulgrew can no longer ignore them. As The New York Times showed the other day, Success Academies—the charters led by Eva Moskowitz—are achieving startling results thanks to greater accountability, flexibility and creativity in the classrooms. The teachers’ union, of course, has nothing but contempt for Ms. Moskowitz and her schools.
The governor is a good deal more open-minded on the subject, which is why the teachers’ unions ramped up their rhetoric against him during the late stages of budget talks. When it came time to round up votes, Mr. Cuomo outmaneuvered and out-politicked the teachers’ union. That’s no small feat.

Quietly but effectively, Mr. Cuomo has provided the adult supervision so desperately needed in Albany these days.
                                            It’s a record of achievement some other governors only wish they had.

Parents all over U.S. 'opting out' of standardized student testing

Via: CNN Digital Correspondent Kelly Wallace - April 24, 2015



Since one of my daughters is taking the public school state tests for the first time this year, I thought I paid fairly close attention to the debate surrounding the tests themselves, and the concern that schools are too focused on "teaching to the test."

 The high-stakes of standardized tests

I heard that some parents might engage in a form of civil disobedience and "opt out" -- they would refuse to let their children take the tests. I thought only a few were making that stand.

But then I learned from a friend whose daughter attends a Long Island school that only two kids in her third-grade class took the test. That means 20 or more of her classmates didn't. 

I saw local media reports about similar stories in other schools on Long Island, in New York City and its surrounding areas, and in upstate New York.

Something bigger is going on, I thought.

Just how many students opt out this year won't officially be known until this summer when the state education department releases test scores. But, according to one of the groups leading the opt-out movement here -- the New York State Allies for Public Education -- 156,000 students refused to take this week's English exam, and that's with just from 50% of the districts reporting their numbers.

With approximately 1.1 million students eligible to take the tests in grades 3-8 in New York, that means at least 14% of students are projected to sit out this year. According to the state education department, last year about 49,000 (4%) didn't have a known valid reason for not taking the English test and 67,000 (6%) didn't take the math exam.

"I'm ecstatic," said Bianca Tanis, a co-founder of the New York opt-out group. "I guess I'm not really surprised, because I think we could all feel this coming."

"For the past two years, parents have been lobbying the governor, the Board of Regents, the legislature, demanding a reduction in high-stakes testing, demanding to have their classrooms be returned and we've been ignored, and enough is enough," said Tanis. Her children, ages 10 and 14, are not taking the tests.

Adding to parents' anger and frustration were reforms pushed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo that would evaluate teachers more heavily based on test scores.

"So we were really left with no choice," Tanis said. "Rather than responding to parent concerns, he doubled down on the use of testing."

Opinion: Why Common Core tests are bad

The Board of Regents says the tests provide an "important source of objective information" to see where students are and what help they need but should never be the only measure of students' progress.

"Those who call for 'opting out' really want New York to 'opt out' of information that can help parents and teachers understand how well students are doing," said Merryl Tisch, chancellor of the Board of Regents, in a recent statement.

"We cannot go back to ignoring the needs of our children. It's time to stop making noise to protect the adults and start speaking up for the students," Tisch said.

Opting out across the country

New York is not an isolated case. Examples of the fallout from rigorous annual testing are popping up nationwide.

Earlier this week, some Atlanta educators were sentenced to prison time after a massive cheating scandal. Administrators and teachers were convicted of racketeering and other crimes related to inflating test scores of students from struggling schools.

In New Jersey, lawmakers recently approved a measure that would require schools to accommodate parents who opt out of testing by providing alternative activities such as independent reading for their children.

And in Indiana, the state's 2015 superintendent of the year recommended that parents home-school their children during the testing weeks instead of having them take the tests.

Opinion: Common Core promotes student success

"We've heard from almost every state in the country there's opting out going on," said Monty Neill, executive director of the testing reform advocacy group FairTest. "Last year, we probably heard from half."

Neill chalks up the growing movement to an increasing number of parents who believe there's too much testing and that's it's not educationally helpful.

"There've been a number of surveys in states as well as national surveys that are showing (frustration with testing) as a reaction among parents and the public generally, so there's a sense that this testing has just gone round the bend," said Neill, a former educator and school administrator who has been leading FairTest for nearly 28 years.

Also in the mix are parents' frustration with more rigorous academic standards called Common Core, which have been implemented in 46 states and the District of Columbia, and upon which the state tests are based.

Tanis, who is also a special education teacher, said there is "no flexibility" in the standards. And, she says, given the high stakes of the testing, "you are saying to teachers, OK, you have to fit in all these standards by April, and so the test starts driving the pace of instruction."

Speaking out on social media 

When I posted on my Facebook page that I was interested in hearing from parents who opted out and promised I would share their comments without identifying them, I got an earful: They say the tests are developmentally inappropriate, too long and difficult, and shouldn't be used to evaluate teachers.

Prison time for some Atlanta school educators in cheating scandal

"To me we are setting our kids up to fail. The reading passages are three levels above the child's current grade level," said a teacher and a mom of two who has opted out her kids for the past two years. "Many teachers have posted that their students were crying because they did not have enough time to finish the test and bubbled in random answers."

Another mom of two, who also opted out, argued that the tests don't benefit the children -- they only benefit the industry behind Common Core and the tests themselves.

"Unfortunately, these tests have nothing to do with determining the effectiveness of teachers," she said. "The more research I did, the more disgusted I became. It's all about money and our kids are pawns. It's very scary and it's unfolding before our eyes."

Tanis, the New York opt-out group leader, said the movement is not "anti-testing. We are anti-these tests."

Tanis said she got involved in the movement after she tried to keep her younger son, who has autism, from taking the test two years ago. 

While he loved school and had terrific teachers, he was still far below grade level and she didn't think it made sense to put a test in front of him that he couldn't read, "let alone even cognitively understand exactly why he was being given a test that was so far above his grade level."

She said that at every turn, she was told her son was absolutely obligated to take the test. The law is the law, she was told. It wasn't until other parents started refusing to have their children take it that she felt free, too, to refuse for her son.

 The great homework debate: Too much, too little or busy work?

"I think the awareness of how flawed these tests are, and the ramifications, have taken time for everybody to understand ... but the fact that these tests are abusive for students with disabilities and English language learners was really easy for people to see."

To that point, Tisch, of the New York State Board of Regents, has said that the tests actually help the most vulnerable children in our schools, whose needs were too often disregarded in years past.

"Without an objective measure of their progress, it was easy to deny special education students and English-language learners the extra resources they need," she said. "Opting out could cost us much of the progress we have made and damage the work that still needs to be done for our most vulnerable students."

In the middle of the debate are parents and teachers who feel there could be improvement to the Common Core and that schools should not be teaching to the test, while also believing the standards and the tests help kids learn to solve problems and think in ways many of us didn't when we were growing up.

"It's really a way of making children think for themselves and have teachers speak less and students become more responsible for their learning," said a teacher and a mom of two who didn't want to be identified. "I feel the teaching has become better because of what's expected. Where we go wrong is understanding that the Common Core is a guideline and we still have to meet the needs of the students where they are academically."

She also said parents -- rather than educators -- too often are the ones putting too much stress on students about the test.

What happens if students don't take the tests?

Under federal regulations, if fewer than 95% of students at a school participate in the state tests, that school could lose federal funding, according to the New York State Department of Education.

That message was reportedly conveyed by some school districts in letters to parents that said state aid could be withheld if too many children boycott the tests.

But Neill of FairTest says people don't believe that will ever happen.

"They don't believe the loss of federal money because it's basically not really true," he said. In fact, no school district to date in New York has lost money for not meeting the 95% requirement for student testing, according to a state education department spokesperson.

"They're trying to basically bully parents into toeing the line and at least in a lot of places, it's not working," Neill said.

How can we compete globally?

I posed the question to Tanis: If we don't have difficult tests and tough standards, how will we compete globally, against children from countries where rigor is the norm?

The United States has the largest number of patents per capita in the world, she noted. "So we are an extremely innovative society, and the system that they're imposing diminishes innovation, diminishes creativity." 

That may be the heart of the debate -- a debate that is likely only going to intensify because the opt-out movement is gaining in strength, and that means at some point lawmakers may have to start listening.

Do you think there is now too much of an emphasis on testing in public schools? Share your thoughts with Kelly Wallace on Twitter or CNN Living on Facebook.

Class of 2015 has the most student debt in U.S. history

 Article Via: Market Watch May 9, 2015

Getty Images - Lincoln Center Plaza, NYC

As college graduates begin to enter the real world this month, they can take cold comfort in the fact that just like the last several classes before them, they’ll have the most student debt in history.

The class of 2015 will each graduate with $35,051 in student debt on average, according to an analysis from Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of Edvisors.com, a website that provides information to parents and students about college costs and financial aid. That’s about $2,000 more than their peers who graduated in 2014, though the share of students graduating with debt remained roughly the same as last year at about 70%.

A combination of stagnant wages, declining federal and state funding to schools on a per-student basis, and rising tuition has meant that families “have only two real choices” when it comes to paying for college: borrow more or try to send their kids to a cheaper school, said Kantrowitz.

“More of the burden of paying for school is shifting from the government to the students,” he said. As a result, students’ average debt at graduation is going up year after year, even accounting for inflation. “It’s like clockwork,” Kantrowitz said.

Mark Kantrowitz/Edvisors.com

Families looking to avoid saddling their college graduates with high levels of debt have a few options, Kantrowitz says. One is to start saving immediately, even if it’s just a year or two before a student plans to enter college. “Every dollar you save is a dollar less you’ll have to borrow,” he said. Families can also opt to pay tuition in smaller installments over shorter periods of time, instead of a lump sum at the start of the semester, which could help to reduce the need to borrow.

Still, only a systemic fix like increased federal funding for students and schools will stop the average debt from creeping up, Kantrowitz said. That idea is unlikely to take hold any time soon; Senate Republicans passed a budget earlier this week that would cut guaranteed funding for Pell Grants and reverse the growth in other programs aimed at helping poor students afford college, as part of a plan to cut more than $5 trillion in spending and balance the budget, the Washington Post reported Thursday.

“Increasingly we’re pricing lower and moderate income students out of a college education,” Kantrowitz said.

Washington State Lawmakers Clash on K-12 Funding

Article via: May 12, 2015 - Education Week Andrew Ujifusa

Washington state lawmakers are struggling in a special session to agree on a strategy to pay for basic education. But as they try to build a system that bridges deep partisan divides over tax policy, they must also resolve to what extent greater state aid for K-12 will lead to reduced financial and political clout for local districts and union leaders.

Looming over the process that began April 28 is the state supreme court, which held the state in contempt last year over its failure to satisfy a 2012 decision that ordered legislators to reform and increase K-12 spending by 2018. Lawmakers must make significant strides toward meeting that mandate this year, or face court sanctions.

As states like Washington look at how to overhaul their funding formulas to smooth out inequities, there's a corresponding tension between state officials and local K-12 leaders about the strings that come along with greater support for some districts.

"What the districts really want is the increased commitment without increased control. But that's not going to happen," said Michael Griffith, the senior school finance analyst for the Denver-based Education Commission of the States. "Now I hear it constantly [from state lawmakers]: We're willing to spend more money, but we want to know what we're going to get for our money."

Broader debates about the proper relationship between the sources of school funding and authority over K-12 have been in the spotlight nationally since at least the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez. In that case, the court held that using local property taxes as a basis for financing schools was not unconstitutional.

The political landscape in Washington state is sufficiently complex that as lawmakers there push their own solutions and resist those from the other party, "we have Democrats complaining about Republicans raising taxes," said Frank Ordway, the chief lobbyist for the League of Education Voters. The Seattle-base group supports full-day kindergarten and charter schools.

Trends and Roadblocks

Recently, states in general have shown limited appetite for pushing school funding burdens onto their local districts.

From 1991 to 2011, on average, the percentage of total spending on public schools coming from local tax sources dropped by 5 percentage points, according to Jennifer Schiess, an associate partner at Bellwether Education Partners, a consulting firm based in Washington, D.C.

"The general trend over the last 20 years or so has been reduced reliance on local taxes in school funding—but it's not a dramatic trend," said Ms. Schiess in an email, citing data from the National Center for Education Statistics.

That doesn't mean the shift is easy in individual states. An Illinois bill introduced during the state's previous legislative session by Democratic Sen. Andy Manar would have altered the influence of property taxes by redistributing funds from wealthy to poor districts. But that bill has so far failed to pass, and it faces an uncertain future in this session.

And officials in Pennsylvania, faced with huge funding gaps between rich and poor districts because of property-tax disparities, are trying to craft a new funding system that might dramatically affect some districts' budgets, creating clear winners and losers in local school financing that could instantly divide lawmakers.

There, as in Washington state, any tax hike to pay for Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf's proposed spending increase for K-12 must first pass muster with GOP lawmakers.

Basic Obligations, More Revenue

The Washington state high court's 2012 ruling in McCleary v. State of Washington said that the state had fallen short of providing adequate resources for basic education. The court specifically called on lawmakers to meet prior commitments to fund class-size reductions in grades K-3, to provide full-day kindergarten, and to increase support for transportation needs and schools' materials and operating costs. Lawmakers increased basic K-12 spending by $982 million in the state's 2013-15 budget, but it did not satisfy the court.

The special session is set to last 30 days, although Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, can extend it. The state uses biennial budgets. Complicating the matter is that control of the legislature is split, with Democrats holding the House of Representatives and Republicans the Senate.

Washington currently has no tax on personal income or capital gains, and Democrats, including Gov. Inslee, want to change that in order to resolve the school funding fight.

The House Democrats' budget plan, released in March, includes a new 5 percent tax on capital gains as part of a blueprint for increasing K-12 spending by $3.2 billion for the 2015-17 biennial budget. Of that amount, $1.4 billion would be earmarked for K-3 class-size reduction and other obligations under McCleary. Gov. Inslee also proposed a new capital gains tax of 7 percent in his 2015-17 budget.
State Rep. Ross Hunter, a Democrat and the lead budget writer in the House, stressed in an April 30 hearing that he is more narrowly focused on adequate funding for basic K-12 education as called for in the McCleary ruling, and not on broader issues in play like setting basic teacher salaries at the state level.

"I view our need to comply with the state constitution as the state funding basic education. I don't think the court is requiring us, nor do I think it's a good idea, to limit communities from providing additional services," Mr. Hunter said.

The Democrats' plan also includes a cost-of-living pay increase for K-12 teachers, to the tune of $154 million, and would pick up a share of local school employees' health-care costs.

'Fundamentally Inequitable'

But Republicans who run the state Senate and want no part of a new tax on capital gains or income are exploring a change to the relationship between existing local and state taxes designated for schools, in order to meet the state's K-12 obligations to all districts.
In part, their budget proposal relies on $3 billion in estimated additional revenue generated from the state's existing tax system over the 2015-17 budget period. About $1.3 billion of that funding would go toward satisfying the McCleary ruling.
Republican Sen. Bruce Dammeier argued that state lawmakers must no longer shove 30 percent or more of the funding responsibility for schools onto districts, since in such a system, wealthy districts and local unions drive up teacher pay in their districts, while teacher salaries elsewhere fall far behind.
Mr. Dammeier's plan for changing local levies is technically revenue-neutral. But it would increase the state's common schools levy while simultaneously lowering state property taxes, and moving what the senator says would be $1.5 billion in new revenue for the state into the K-12 budget. Roughly 40 percent of districts, many of them relatively wealthy, would effectively experience a tax hike in Mr. Dammeier's plan.
And he said that requiring basic teacher compensation to be set at the state level, with possible enhancements for teachers in certain areas with high costs of living, would help lawmakers fulfill their obligation to fund basic education that includes fair and reasonable teacher salaries.
"Our system is fundamentally inequitable right now," Mr. Dammeier said. "Our students' education is not supposed to be dependent on their zip code."
But the 86,000-member Washington Education Association has decried plans to set teacher compensation at the state level, calling it an attack on local control of schools.

Getting the Votes

Any plan to satisfy McCleary and fix school funding should ensure a net revenue increase, but also shore up the state's control over basic education funding, such as changes to how local property taxes work, according to state Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn.
Mr. Dorn has his own plan to satisfy McCleary that would create $2.2 billion in new spending.

"I'm not promoting one or the other," he said of the competing House and Senate tax plans. "I'm just happy if we can get new revenue."

Yet Mr. Dorn's plan would also ask the court to extend the deadline for meeting the requirements of the McCleary ruling to 2021. And Mr. Ordway of the League of Education Voters cautioned that the court will likely not tolerate anything less than "specific and real" commitments in any budget deal.
"Neither one of them really want to do the things that are hard for their party politically," Mr. Ordway said.

Vol. 34, Issue 30, Pages 1,20-21

Dallas Superintendent addresses budget

 

Published on Jun 1, 2015 - video via Dallas ISD

 

Dallas ISD Superintendent Mike Miles sat down with a local news outlet to address a report, which the district considers to be inaccurate, about budget and misapplication of funding. During the discussion, Miles also addressed information about how the district will work to fund academic facilitator and counselor positions impacted by changes in the availability of specific federal funds.

No school district would lose money under Ohio Senate's budget

 Article via: Patrick O'Donnell, The Plain Dealer, June 8, 2015

COLUMBUS, Ohio – Every school district in Ohio should receive at least as much money from the state for the next two years as they do now, Ohio Senate officials said today as they released their proposed state budget for the next two years.

Sen. Chris Widener, a Springfield Republican, said the new budget will "hold harmless" every district for the next two years, with none seeing a cut in money from the state compared to this school year's amount.

Along with many districts seeing increases, Widener said, at minimum "All schools essentially receive what they are receiving this year."

That's even including reductions in the complicated and much-debated reimbursements for the  now-defunct tangible personal property tax, Widener and Senate President Keith Faber said.
That reimbursement is a hot-button issue for many districts, including Solon, who have urged the state to continue the reimbursements permanently. The state ended that tax that many districts relied on in 2005 to reduce the tax burden on some businesses.

The Senate budget proposal is the latest step in the two-year budgeting process that has already had proposals from the House and from Gov. John Kasich. If the Senate version passes, leaders of the House and Senate will meet in conference committee later this month to find a compromise.
The budget that both houses of the legislature agree on will then go to Kasich for approval.
Our early look at the Senate spreadsheets of how each district is affected shows that 18 of Cuyahoga County's 31 districts will have little change - increases of less than one percent - by 2017.

Solon and Cleveland are among those 18, once state aid increases and decreased tangible personal property tax reimbursements are considered. A few will see sizeable increases in dollars of state aid per student. Garfield Heights and Maple Heights would receive about $800 more per student.
Overall, the 31 districts in Cuyahoga County would experience a 3.2 percent increase in state money over the next two years, from $760.2 million for the 2014-15 school year to $784.8 million in 2016-178.Money for the 579 districts in the other 87 counties would increase 8.6 percent from $6.67 billion to $7.24 billion.

Here are some other highlights of the plan, as portrayed by Senate leaders this morning:

• Schools would receive $935 million more over the next two years than they do this year.: $351.5 million more for 2015-16, then continuing that increase and adding $233 million more in 2016-17.
• More money would go to low-wealth districts and extra dollars are targeted at transportation and technology needs for rural districts.
• Leaders envision eventually eliminating all tangible personal property tax reimbursements over time, despite claims from some districts that the state promised in 2005 to replace money they lost when that tax was halted.
• The number of districts on the so-called guarantee will be reduced from 198 now to 100 by 2017. These are districts receiving more money now than the funding formula would give them. An unofficial "guarantee" that they will not see losses has the state giving them extra money beyond the formula to keep state aid flat.
• The number of districts "on the cap" will drop from 238 now to 138 by 2017. These are districts who would receive even greater increases from the funding formula, but limits on how much increase a district can receive block them from receiving the full amount.

Private school credit card bill passes Texas Legislature

Original post on Tuesday, May 26, 2015 via The Courier

 

House Bill 1881 passed the Texas Senate and is headed to the governor’s desk for signature. This bill allows pre-K-12 private schools to allow parents to pay for their children’s tuition through a credit or debit card instead of absorbing the fees in their school budget. State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, R-Southlake, is the bill’s author and state Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, is the Senate sponsor.
“H.B. 1881 provides a new avenue for parents and guardians to pay for their child’s tuition at private and parochial schools,” said Senator Creighton. “This means private schools can use every dollar they can in the classroom and no longer absorb the cost incurred by processing fees. State government should always look for opportunities to remove road blocks in the day-to-day lives of our citizens.”
Currently, private schools are not allowed to charge these fees as a way to offset some of their expenses and their counterparts — public schools, public and private colleges and universities, are allowed to pass along the fee.

“This is an issue brought to me by several constituents,” Capriglione said. “This bill will give parents flexible payment options, as well as help private schools cover their costs, which is important for large and small schools alike. H.B. 1881 is mutually beneficial for parents and schools, and I’m pleased it has passed the Legislature.”

House Bill 1881 is supported by the Texas Private Schools Association, representing more than 800 accredited private schools and 250,000 students throughout the state.

Helping Ease The Burden (Tuition Payments)

Every Player Counts

William Shakespeare once said many intellectual things.  Fortunately, what he wrote is still relative in today's climate and culture. So to rephrase what Bill said to fit this day and age, there's a big world around us.  There's a lot going on, we all have a part to play. We enter by way of our birth, and exist by way of our death. As we contribute to the stage we all are charged with something to contribute. As we contribute, it is our duty in some way, shape, or form to help educate those who are around us.  Whether that is our own children, our nieces and nephews, our neighborhood kids, students in our classrooms, kids on the baseball team, a colleague learning a new job, at some point we all enter the realm of educating another person.  Now, for some, this roll is fulfilled through a vast sea of training, mentoring, shadowing, witnessing, experimentation, and through our calling in daily vocation. But as William Shakespeare said, we play many parts.  This blog seeks information by educators, for educators. Content shared by topic, by reproduction, and occasionally through originality. Okay, so yes, I had to prepare this as part of an assignment. But, as  I continue with my part to play, helping educate another is the card I shall continue to contribute.