Local Control of Funding Distributions in Indianapolis Schools

Student achievement and low testing data have been identified as an educational problem in the Indianapolis public school systems. The problems surrounding student achievement and low test scores have been the projects for many stakeholders involved in the school system including politicians, local and state board members, school leaders and teachers. Politicians may also choose to use student achievement data to create additional funding, or use for other political leverages. How is the student data (student achievement and test score data) used by local and state leaders to create positive change within the public school system? What are the financial implications regarding this student data and how does it affect the school system? In the end, it should be the primary stakeholders being parents and teachers that determine how student data is used within the school system. This not being the case, the school leaders and teachers are held accountable for the student success rates based on financial decisions being made from outside the schools and school district.

Student achievement data can be used to influence the distributions of financial resources. This, in my opinion, is up the school leaders and not outside resources. If the schools cannot absorb financial decision responsibilities then the schools need to acquire the personnel that can fulfill these duties. The financial responsibilities, including funding distributions, of the local public schools can be provided from within the schools rather than from outside sourcing. Schools would need accurate data reporting in all areas of the school for a plan like this to work successfully. Accurate data collections of graduation rates, free and reduced lunch data, and transient student populations would have to demonstrate the need for funding. While financial distributions should not be the ultimate solution to a school problem such as student achievement and low testing data, it should be used for more awareness of the problems so planning can be created.

Using the school data found on the Indiana Department of Education web site (2007), the following information was provided by the annual school performance reports, the adequate yearly progress results, and the ISTEP+ results. This reporting will demonstrate the problems surrounding student achievement and low testing for students in the Indianapolis public school system.

Annual school performance reports

Each January, schools are required by Indiana Code (20-20-8) to provide school data, explanations of the data, and graphical representations of the data to the Department of Education. This data may be used for financial distributions and it closely tied to the NCLB requirements. While it is suggested that local schools retain the responsibility for its own financial decisions, the state is currently providing that service.

The goal of this school report is to inform the local school and state of the progress the schools are making in order to help the students learn more. Data can be broken down into groups including race, gender, income level and special education. This data may be used for financial decisions regarding the average amount used for each student in the school system. Inaccuracies in data reporting may hurt the school or enable a school department to receive more funding than is actually needed. It would benefit the school to be accountable for its own reporting based on the inaccuracies and misunderstanding from outside sources that may be collecting data.

One of the purposes of a school's accountability system is to include and inform the community stakeholders of the school's educational condition regarding student achievement and areas of need or improvements connected to the school. The act of inclusion and communication with the community demonstrates a civic responsibility by the school and may show returns including funding, volunteer efforts, community recourses, and community support. The school's accountability to the community is effective and necessary for the school's success.

An increasing number of newspapers across the state are cooperating with local school corporations to create special sections with local retail and institutional advertising to include both the legally required information and supplementary information published as news and information in an effort to help the public understand school progress. (Indiana Department of Education, 2007)

School administrators are also encouraged to prepare an effective presentation by discussing the possibilities provided by local newspapers. Newspaper advertising in a special section, for example, may provide the public with necessary information to be included in the school's community.

Adequate yearly progress

The adequate yearly progress (AYP) is used by the local schools each year to demonstrate areas of improvement, student achievements, and measure each year in terms of the achievement of goals. In these AYP reports, calculation changes may be used to consistently and continually raise achievement standards. The passing bar, for example, was raised from 58.8% in English and 57.1% in mathematics (2002), to 65.7% in English and 64.3% in mathematics (2005). Raising the passing bars helps the schools plan and reach their goals and provides appropriate funding to identified areas. If control over funding distribution is given locally, versus by the state or nationally given, then interpretation of data and autonomy remains within the school. Longitudinal studies may demonstrate that the appropriate/not appropriate amount of funding is going to the areas needing improvement and the appropriate/ not appropriate amount of funding is helping the schools meet its goals.

An advantage to AYP reporting is the breakdown of statistical reporting into groups, academics, or demographics. A school with local control over funding distribution would create a means to provide assistance for a failing demographic. Blacks (58%) and Special education students (43%) for example, had higher failing rates in English and language arts (2006). While these and other demographics are improving, local control over funding distribution may help rates increase in multiple ways unknown to state and national control.

If a school participating in the federal Title I program does not make AYP, schools with low-income families may not receive additional federal funding. While these students have been identified as at-risk students, additional funding may not be a solution to the problem. A very small amount of Title I public schools achieved AYP in 2005. If a Title I school does not achieve AYP for six consecutive years, then the school must go through Restructuring Implementation.

The school corporation must notify parents and impose one of the following actions: reopen as a charter school, replace all or most relevant school staff, contract with private management to operate school, allow a state takeover of the school, or use any other major restructuring of school governance. (Indiana Department of Education, 2007)

Some may agree that a failing AYP for six consecutive years offers too much leniency for the school and school system. One alternative in the favor of local control may be the reality of implementing a restructuring program in a timelier manner. Local control may provide school leaders to work within a four or five year time period. The reality of a Title I school finally achieving AYP after three or four years of failing, may require restructuring before a six year period.

Indiana statewide testing for educational progress-plus

The Indiana statewide testing for educational progress-plus (ISTEP+) is the state's test and testing procedures. Grades 3 through 10 take the ISTEP+ based on the premise that students should demonstrate competencies in reading, writing and math skill to be able to achieve a successful future.

For the past seven years, passing averages in mathematics in the public school district have been considerably lower than Indiana state passing averages. A consistent 23% to 28% difference between the two math scores with the public schools only gaining about one percent per year demonstrates the need for local control research. Students in this district have not been achieving the required mathematical skills needed for graduation and have not been prepared to enter the communities workforce. Local control, such as funding distribution, may help these schools achieve in areas identified as needing improvement.

Conclusion

The state and national programs controlling funding distribution and allocation of funds into identified areas needing improvement is an attempt to help schools and students achieve. These programs, while having the school's best interest in mind, may do better by relinquishing more control. The change by offering local control in the area of funding distribution may demonstrate faster and more accurate improvements. These improvements may be identified as helping Title I schools get the funding where needed and make adjustments to school areas such as curriculum or professional development in a timely manner. These improvements may also identify public school weaknesses such as the school leaders being able to handle local control in these areas. Local control of funding distribution is worth some time devoted to being researched.

References

Indiana Department of Education (2007). Retrieved from the internet, May 27, 2007 from

http://www.doe.state.in.us/