Foundation: Taxpayers fared well in 2009 legislative session

Key wins are adoption of conservative budget and defeat of higher taxes

Taxpayers fared well this legislative session, according to the post-session assessment of the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

“The Legislature adopted a relatively conservative budget, needed eminent domain reform, and improved public school accountability, while cutting taxes for small businesses,” said Justin Keener, the Foundation’s vice president of policy and communications. “To taxpayers’ relief, they defeated the expansion of government-run health insurance and several tax increases. Texas remains poised for a bounce back from the global recession thanks to lawmakers’ actions to maintain our state’s competitive edge of low taxes and a reasonable regulatory environment.”

Keener praised the Legislature’s action to reduce the bite of the gross margins tax on small businesses. “While we would have preferred a rate reduction for all businesses, increasing the exemption to $1 million for the next two years and to $600,000 permanently will be a great benefit to the small and startup enterprises that are the backbone of the modern Texas economy,” he said.

While there was not much forward movement on taxpayer protections such as improving the state’s expenditure limit and building upon Texas’ position as a leader in financial transparency, taxpayers dodged several bullets in the forms of billions of dollars in proposed new taxes and fees. The Foundation cited the failure of local-option transportation taxes and the unemployment stimulus legislation as the two biggest bullets that taxpayers dodged.

“During difficult times, Texas families expect their governments to scrutinize their budgets and set priorities in the same way that they have to,” Keener said. “This is not the time to ask citizens to raise taxes and fees, especially when other alternatives are available. The House showed true statesmanship in vetting the tax plans and rejecting them.”

The Foundation also cited the defeat of legislation that would have expanded unemployment eligibility, thereby accepting federal stimulus dollars in return for a likely permanent business tax increase.

“Our research has shown that one-time federal unemployment funds often come with conditions that permanently increase employer taxes,” said Talmadge Heflin, Director of the Foundation’s Center for Fiscal Policy. “Gov. Perry was right to reject these funds, and thankfully the Legislature ran out of time before it could overrule him.”

Heflin praised the Legislature for adopting a budget that stayed within population growth plus inflation, and for not tapping the Economic Stabilization Fund. “The state should have almost $9 billion set aside next session to pay for any emergency situations or tax relief initiatives,” he said.

According to the Foundation’s Bill Peacock, director of the Center for Economic Freedom, eminent domain reform moved forward for the first time since 2005 with passage of HJR 14.

“If adopted by Texas voters, this constitutional amendment will stop local governments from using blight designations to condemn blocks of perfectly good homes and businesses for economic development projects,” Peacock said. “While work still remains to fully address the ramifications from the Kelo Supreme Court decision, private property owners came out ahead this session.”

Texas public school students and taxpayers saw improvements. “The Legislature made considerable strides in education by preserving and expanding Texas’ teacher merit pay program, as well as providing for a meaningful accountability program to better prepare children for work or college,” according to Foundation education policy analyst Brooke Terry.

Despite these advances, Terry said many public school children will suffer due to the Legislature’s inability to lift the arbitrary cap on charter schools.

“More than 17,000 Texas children are on a waiting list to enter a charter school and we are very disappointed that the Legislature failed to lift the cap,” Terry said. “Texas charter schools have demonstrated amazing results by inventing new models to educate students and prepare them for success in college and the workplace.”

Charter schools are public schools supported by legislators in both parties. However, legislation to raise the arbitrary cap on charter schools and to help effective open-enrollment charter schools expand was vehemently opposed by the teacher unions.

"Major bills fail every session leaving work unfinished, yet industrious Texans still go about their business. This session will be no different," Keener said of the sunset legislation for the Texas Department of Insurance and the Texas Department of Transportation. "The governor and the Legislature have several options before them and we encourage them to take a measured approach when evaluating them."

Justin Keener is Vice President of Policy and Communications for the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

The Honorable Talmadge Heflin is Director of the Center for Fiscal Policy at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Heflin served 11 terms in the Texas House of Representatives and chaired the House Appropriations Committee in 2003, leading the Texas Legislature’s successful efforts to close a $10 billion budget deficit without a tax increase.

Bill Peacock is Director of the Center for Economic Freedom at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

Brooke Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin. More information can be found on the Foundation’s website, www.TexasPolicy.com.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas PolicyCast: 2008 in review

This week, we are pleased to bring you a roundtable discussion featuring the policy team at the Texas Public Policy Foundation looking back at 2008 and previewing the 81st Texas Legislature.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas PolicyCast: Capped out of charter schools

In August, the Texas Public Policy Foundation published a report that found that tens of thousands of school children were on waiting lists to attend Texas charter schools. Last month, the State Board of Education granted the final charters it is allowed under current law. What does the future hold for charter schools and these children? For that, we talk with Brooke Terry, education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Legislature should eliminate cap on charter schools

State Board of Education awards final charters allowed under current law

AUSTIN – Today’s issuance of the last school charters allowed under current law makes it essential that the Texas Legislature repeal its cap on charter schools.

“Restrictions imposed by the Texas Legislature now deny tens of thousands of students the opportunity to enroll in their preferred public school,” said Brooke Dollens Terry, education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “The Legislature should get rid of its arbitrary cap on charter schools and provide parents with more public school options for their children.”

The Texas Legislature has capped the number of open-enrollment charters at 215, of which 209 entities had active charters. After two charter operators voluntarily consolidated under another charter to free up two additional slots, the State Board of Education issued the final eight charters at its meeting today. Yesterday, Sen. Dan Patrick filed legislation (SB 308) that would repeal the charter school cap.

In August, the Foundation released a report, “Calculating the Demand for Charter Schools,” which compiled the first-ever, Texas-specific waiting list for charter school enrollment. The report concluded that while 89,156 students attended 355 open-enrollment charter school campuses during the 2007-08 academic year, at least 16,810 children were on waiting lists to attend a charter school – including 7,415 in the Houston area; 5,896 in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex; and 2,110 in the Rio Grande Valley.

“If we value free markets and competition, we should allow as many public schools to open as students will attend,” Terry said. “And by the tens of thousands, Texas public school students and their parents want an alternative to their government-assigned campus.”

Terry emphasized that charter schools are public schools that predominantly serve students who are behind academically upon entering the charter school. Sixty percent of charter school students come from low-income families, and 81 percent are ethnic minorities.

“Many of these parents understand that traditional public schools have failed their children,” she said. “Rather than writing these students off, we need to encourage new options that meet these students where they are so that they can receive the education they’ll need to be productive citizens.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Foundation: Don’t lock children out of charter schools

AUSTIN – Tens of thousands of Texas school children will be locked out of the school that can best meet their needs once the State Board of Education hits the Texas Legislature’s cap on charter schools later this week.

“The State Board of Education has done what it can to promote competition and innovation in Texas public schools,” said Brooke Dollens Terry, education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “But restrictions imposed by the Texas Legislature will deny tens of thousands of students the opportunity to enroll in their preferred public school.”

The Texas Legislature has capped the number of open-enrollment charters at 215, of which the State Board of Education has issued 209. The State Board of Education’s Committee on School Initiatives is expected to recommend the final six charters at its 1 p.m. meeting today, with the full board expected to approve those charters at its 9 a.m. meeting tomorrow. Both meetings will take place at the Texas Education Agency headquarters, located at 1701 N. Congress Avenue in Austin.

In August, the Foundation released a report, “Calculating the Demand for Charter Schools,” which compiled the first-ever, Texas-specific waiting list for charter school enrollment. The report concluded that while 89,156 students attended 355 open-enrollment charter school campuses during the 2007-08 academic year, at least 16,810 children were on waiting lists to attend a charter school – including 7,415 in the Houston area; 5,896 in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex; and 2,110 in the Rio Grande Valley.

“If this cap is not lifted, the waiting list will grow, preventing even more students from attending a public charter school,” Terry said.

Terry noted that charter schools are public schools that predominantly serve low-income and minority students who are behind academically upon entering the charter school.

“Many charter schools focus on students who have fallen through the cracks of the public school system,” she said. “Rather than writing these students off, we should increase the range of educational settings and options available to them so that they can receive the education they’ll need to be productive citizens.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas PolicyCast: Paying for results

Teacher incentive pay programs in Texas school districts have produced higher test scores, higher state accountability rankings, improved teacher morale, and less teacher turnover. This according to a new report released this week by the Texas Public Policy Foundation, with generous support from the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation. On this edition of Texas PolicyCast, we talk with the report's author, Texas Public Policy Foundation education policy analyst Brooke Terry, about the history and role of incentive pay in Texas public schools.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Students benefit from teacher incentive pay

By Brooke Dollens Terry

Higher test scores, higher state accountability ratings, improved teacher morale, and lower teacher turnover prove that students are benefiting from teacher incentive pay in Texas.

The goal of teacher incentive pay programs is to increase student learning in the classroom. Research has conclusively found that the quality of the teacher is the most important factor in improving student learning. Therefore, it makes sense to use financial incentives to attract the best and brightest individuals to enter the classroom, reward the best teachers annually, and keep the best teachers from leaving the profession or moving into administration.

Some schools use a variety of strategies to attract and keep the best teachers teaching such as: paying math and science teachers more money with shortage stipends since there is a math and science teacher shortage; rewarding teachers who demonstrated their effectiveness through large gains in student learning with a large financial bonus; and encouraging teachers with a financial stipend to take on a difficult teaching assignment in a low-performing school.

Since Texas has the largest incentive pay program in the nation, many policymakers are understandably looking to Texas for answers. Does incentive pay help good teachers stay in the profession? Has incentive pay helped improve teacher morale at the school? Are students learning more?

Houston ISD, Texas’ largest school district and America’s seventh largest, uses a performance pay plan called ASPIRE to reward teachers based both on school and individual teacher performance. This year, Houston teachers will have a chance to earn an extra $10,000 in bonuses under the district’s pay-for-performance plan.

Thus far, Houston ISD credits its pay-for-performance plan as a key factor in more teachers choosing to stay and work in the district, less turnover, higher student test scores on the state’s standardized test, almost double the number of schools with the two highest state accountability ratings over the previous year, and improved teacher morale.

In 1995, Lamesa ISD, a small school district in West Texas, was the first Texas district to implement a teacher incentive pay plan. This year, teachers and school administrators are eligible to earn an additional $2,400 a year for improving student learning in core subject areas (reading, writing, math, science, and social studies), meeting student attendance targets, increasing the number of high school graduates, and achieving one of the top state accountability ratings.

Lamesa ISD reports tremendous gains in test scores at the elementary, junior high, and high school levels. The increase in reading, math and science scores for Hispanic, African American, and economically disadvantaged students is impressive. The district also reports improved morale among teachers and uses the incentive pay plan as a recruiting tool.

The early results of incentive pay in Texas are promising. Yet most school districts still use an outdated and ineffective model that compensates teachers regardless of results in the classroom. Giving all teachers an across-the-board pay raise tied to a uniform salary schedule will not produce similar student achievement gains to Houston and Lamesa.

Nationwide, 93 percent of all public school districts use a salary schedule to pay its teachers. The salary schedule treats all teachers the same whether they teach math or physical education; whether they are extremely effective or merely mediocre teachers. It rewards years of experience or seniority over effectiveness, does not take into account labor market trends or teacher shortage areas, and does not reward teachers for teaching in difficult situations such as low-performing schools.

Changing the teacher compensation structure to include pay-for-performance bonuses would send a signal to teachers that gains in student learning are rewarded over seniority. It would also give average teachers a financial prod to improve their skills and performance in the classroom.

In addition, if teachers want to be paid on par with other professional jobs and treated like professionals, then they need to be paid in similar manner as other professionals. This means paying some teachers more than others for teaching subjects in high demand like physics or calculus and paying teachers extra for taking on a difficult assignment.

The current salary structure is broken and throwing more money at it won’t fix it. Instead, lawmakers need to support compensation structures that treat teachers like professionals, target local needs, and reward and retain the best teachers. Only then will we see large gains in student learning and move towards closing the achievement gap.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Waiting for Rescue

By Brooke Dollens Terry

If public charter schools are really so bad, then why are tens of thousands of Texas students standing in line for admission?

The State of Texas, which prides itself on everything being bigger and better, does not have enough room for every student who wants to attend the public school of their choice. Last year, at least 16,810 Texas students were on a waiting list to attend a public charter school. Imagine the entire Pearland school district on a waiting list.

This large waiting list demonstrates a tremendous parental and student demand for educational options besides their government-assigned public school.

Houston’s regional waiting list was the largest, with 7,415 students waiting to get into a charter school last year. The Dallas/Fort Worth region had 5,896 students on a waiting list, while the Rio Grande Valley had 2,110 students on a waiting list.

Most Americans are unfamiliar with charter schools. In fact, only 20 percent of Americans can correctly identify a charter school as a public school, according to a Center for Education Reform national poll.

Charter schools, while subject to less government regulation, are public schools funded with public funds. Charter schools cannot charge tuition, teach religion, discriminate, or cherry pick students.

Charter schools serve more students who are academically behind their peers than traditional schools, with many focusing on hard-to-serve students and students at risk of dropping out. As a result, charter schools serve a higher percentage of minority and low-income students than traditional schools. In Texas, 81 percent of students in charter schools are minorities, compared to 60 percent in traditional public schools.

When a charter school has more applicants than room for new students, the school holds a lottery to determine which students may attend. Imagine parents, whose child is trapped in a low-performing public school, crying for joy that their child is randomly selected to attend a school with a track record of serving at-risk students with innovative strategies.

With tens of thousands of students dropping out of Texas public schools each year, it is ridiculous that state policy prevents students from obtaining an education in a setting that best meets their needs.

Some education associations, policymakers, and reporters fixate on a few poorly run and mismanaged charter schools as a reason to cap enrollment or limit student choice. Abuse of public funds is unacceptable – whether by a public charter school or a public school district – and the Texas Education Agency should always investigate and pursue such misconduct wherever it occurs.

But depriving thousands of students more educational opportunities because of a few bad actors makes no sense. It is like saying an exemplary school district should have its enrollment capped or be prevented from expanding because a different school district mismanages its finances and fails to teach its students.

Overall, charter schools are meeting the individual needs of many students in innovative ways with less government funding. Unfortunately, state lawmakers have capped the number of public (open-enrollment) charters to only 215. With 210 active charters, the cap may be reached this fall leading to more students waiting to attend a charter school.

Texas charter school enrollment is a drop in the bucket compared to traditional public school enrollment with only two percent of the more than 4.6 million students in Texas public schools attending a charter school last year. The last thing that Texas needs to do is stifle competition in the area of public education. Each and every child’s education is too important not to allow them the opportunity to attend a public charter school if they choose.

The Texas Legislature should eliminate the cap preventing new public charters from opening and allow charters to operate in a free market.

Ultimately, parents, not government, should decide where their child attends school. Until that day arrives, Texas has at least 16,810 students waiting for rescue.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Foundation publishes Texas charter school waiting list

Foundation publishes Texas charter school waiting list

Nearly 17,000 Texas students waiting to enroll in charter schools

AUSTIN – School will open on Monday, but nearly 17,000 Texas children will find the doors to their preferred charter schools locked, according to a report released today by the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

“Last year, at least 16,810 Texas students were on a waiting list to attend a public charter school,” said Foundation education policy analyst Brooke Terry. “Imagine the entire Pearland school district on a waiting list.”

The Foundation’s new report, “Calculating the Demand for Charter Schools,” is the first attempt to compile a Texas-specific waiting list for charter school enrollment. The report provides a statewide total (16,810) as well as regional breakdowns.

Terry said the reason so many students are unable to get into charter schools is because the Texas Legislature has capped the number of open-enrollment charters at 215. There are currently 210 active charters, and the State Board of Education is expected next month to grant the last five allowed under current law.

“If this cap is unchanged, the waiting list could get larger with more students being prevented from attending a charter school,” Terry said. “In 2009, the Texas Legislature should eliminate the cap so that new charters can meet the overwhelming parental demand.”

Terry noted that charter schools are public schools, and that many serve groups of students who are behind academically upon entering the charter school – such as high school dropouts or students at risk of dropping out because they are teenage parents, drug offenders, in foster care, or homeless.

“Many charter schools focus on students who have fallen through the cracks of the public school system,” she said. “Rather than writing these students off, we should increase the range of educational settings and options available to them so that they can receive the education they’ll need to be productive citizens.”

About the Texas Public Policy Foundation: TPPF is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin, Texas.

About Brooke Terry: Ms. Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Denying Dropouts a Second Chance?

How far should the state of Texas go to help high-school dropouts return to school and complete their diplomas? The Texas Education Agency wants to provide grants for a variety of dropout recovery pilot programs, but the public school lobby objects because non-government schools would be eligible to participate. In this week's commentary, Foundation education policy analyst Brooke Dollens Terry argues that Texas' dropout problem is so severe that any option that meets the needs of the students and helps them to complete their education is worth supporting.

----------

Denying Dropouts a Second Chance?

By Brooke Dollens Terry

Albert Einstein once said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. This sounds oddly familiar in the world of education policy. Throw more money at it and expect different results.

The public school establishment clings to the notion that schools can only get better if they get more money. Yet per student spending in Texas has almost doubled in the past ten years – growing from $5,282 per student in 1995-1996 to $9,629 in 2005-2006 – with little to show for it in student achievement on top of the thousands of students dropping out of school entirely.

In fact, more than 131,000 Texas students did not graduate with their class in 2006. This statistic is even more appalling considering the fact that African-American and Hispanic students are much more likely to dropout. Broken down by ethnicity, 57.7 percent of African-American students, 54.6 percent of Hispanic students, and 75.9 percent of white students graduated with their class in 2006.

A recent proposal from the Texas Education Agency to provide grants for dropout recovery pilot programs has drawn fire from the public school lobby. Under TEA’s proposal, the grants would provide funds to a variety of educational settings including public schools, charter schools, universities, and some private schools, if they do one thing: get dropouts, or those at risk of dropping out, back into school to work on their diploma. This arrangement would not divert funds from public schools, but establishes a bounty for bringing kids back to complete their education.

The fundamental question, then, is should the state put a priority on getting dropouts back into school by paying any educational institution that can convince the student to return?

For the public school establishment it seems the answer is a resounding “no!” These education groups show their true colors as they wield political power to protect their self-interest rather than meet the needs of students that public schools have failed to reach. Most disappointingly, many in the public school lobby seem satisfied if they lose funding due to a student dropping out of school, but object to allowing those funds to follow a student to their classroom setting that rescues them from dropping out.

As Texas struggles with a dropout crisis, policymakers should also explore new solutions to catch those students who continue to fall through the cracks. Dropouts desperately need a second chance at an education and should be given a variety of options – be it in a public, charter, virtual or private school – that meets their individual needs.

The public should demand that the state do something to address the dropout crisis and reject those who defend and protect the status quo that has so obviously failed to meet this need. Instead of dismissing dropouts as impossible to serve, we hope dropouts will be given the opportunity for this second chance through a variety of innovative approaches, and we hope public schools step up to the plate along with other educational settings as they compete to bring these students back to school.

If experience has taught us anything, it is that doing the same thing just isn’t good enough.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin. She can be contacted at bterry@texaspolicy.com.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Foundation praises new English/Language Arts curriculum

AUSTIN – The Texas Public Policy Foundation applauds the State Board of Education for its vote today to raise the rigor of the state’s academic standards in English and language arts.

“It is obvious that too many Texas public school students aren’t learning the basics with our current curriculum,” said Foundation education policy analyst Brooke Terry, who testified before the SBOE in favor of the curriculum changes. “We are glad the new curriculum will emphasize grammar and writing skills.”

According to Terry, Texas public schools fail to adequately prepare many students for college or the workplace. A 2006 survey by the Conference Board found that 81 percent of employers viewed recent high school graduates as “deficient in written communications” needed for letters, memos, formal reports, and technical reports.

During the fall of 2006, 38 percent of students at two-year public colleges and 24 percent of students at four-year public college needed remedial education to be able to do college-level work. The Commission for a College Ready Texas reports as many as 50 percent of Texas college freshman are enrolled in remedial education compared to 28 percent across the United States.

“Passing an English/Language Arts curriculum that clearly outlines expectations should help schools better prepare students with their reading and writing skills,” Terry wrote to the SBOE earlier this month. “We support higher standards and believe the proposed English/Language Arts standards will help our students succeed.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin, Texas. The Foundation’s research on education policy is available on the Foundation’s website, www.TexasPolicy.com.

- 30 -

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Foundation applauds Georgia school choice law

AUSTIN – The signing of a universal school choice law in Georgia should encourage Texas lawmakers to provide parents and students with more educational choices here, according to the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

Yesterday, Gov. Sonny Perdue signed legislation that creates both individual and corporate tax credits for contributions to “Student Scholarship Organizations,” which are privately-run, non-profit organizations that award private school scholarships to children enrolled in Georgia public schools.

“There are nearly two dozen school choice programs operating across the country, with Georgia’s and Louisiana’s being open to all students,” said Foundation education policy analyst Brooke Dollens Terry. “They are observing what we did in the Edgewood ISD pilot here – school choice benefits both the children who exercise their school choice, and the children who remain in the public schools.”

Taxpayers are eligible for dollar-for-dollar income tax credits up to $1,000 for individuals; $2,500 for married couples filing jointly; and 75 percent of a corporation’s tax liability. Taxpayer contributions may not be earmarked to a particular child. There are no demographic restrictions on which students may be awarded scholarships, but the tax credits are capped at $50 million per year.

“Georgia is the latest state to embrace the idea that parents are better equipped than the public education lobby or government bureaucrats to select the best educational environment for their children,” Terry concluded. “Texas owes it to its families and its future to follow suit.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin, Texas. Additional research on school choice is available on the Foundation’s website, www.TexasPolicy.com.

- 30 -

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

What America can learn from Finland

Teenagers in Finland recently earned the distinction as being the smartest students in the world. Finnish 15-year-olds outpaced 56 other countries, including the United States, on the PISA tests in math, science, and reading.

Naturally, researchers, policymakers, and parents want to know why. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal examines Finland’s school system and reveals some surprising findings:

• Children don’t start school until age seven. There is no school pre-k or kindergarten. This is in strong contrast to the United States, where most states have a publicly funded and growing pre-k and kindergarten program for children ages four and five.

• They spend $1,200 less per student than the U.S. Finnish schools spent $7,500 per student per year compared to the U.S. average of $8,700. Somehow, they manage to do more with less.

• High teacher quality and no teacher shortages. While the U.S. struggles to find enough math and science teachers to fill its classrooms, Finland has more than 40 applicants for each teaching job. All Finnish teachers have master’s degrees. Teachers compete to teach in Finland. Yet, higher teacher salaries doesn’t account for the higher quality because Finland has similar teacher salaries to the United States.

• No sports teams, marching band, or prom. Finland schools focus on teaching, not extracurricular activities. In contrast, many American schools (and parents) get carried away with the success of their athletic or extracurricular programs at the expense of learning.

The American education establishment continually lectures us that the way to improve student learning is by hiring more teachers, paying them larger salaries, and starting children in public school at earlier ages. Finland establishes that everything they tell us is wrong.

- Brooke Terry

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Texas’ School Accountability System Fails Students

As Texas homeowners write their checks for property taxes this month, most assume that the local public schools they fund are doing a good job educating students. After all, parents looking to the state accountability system for answers on the quality of their local school find that only 3.4 percent of public schools were rated “Unacceptable” last year.

What parents and taxpayers don’t realize is that the academic standards used to rate schools are ridiculously low.

In 2007, a school could be rated “Academically Acceptable” with only 40 percent of students passing science and 45 percent of students passing math. Surely, parents and taxpayers would not consider more than half of Texas school children failing core subjects like math and science as “acceptable.”

Yet, more than half of Texas public schools and three fourths of Texas school districts were rated “Academically Acceptable,” according to the Texas Education Agency.

Residents across the state may be shocked to discover that many of their local schools are not doing a good job teaching the basics, especially in math and science. For example, in Arlington, a mere 53 percent of Morton Elementary School students passed science; 45 percent of Roquemore Elementary students passed science while 56 percent passed math; and only 49 percent of Sam Houston High School students passed science while 57 percent passed math.

In the Austin area, only 47 percent of students passed science at Manor ISD’s Decker Elementary, while 57 percent of students passed math. In nearby Del Valle, only 61 percent of high school students passed science and 52 percent of students passed math.

Residents in Houston’s Alief school district might be surprised to learn that bare majorities of Elsik High School students passed science and math, while only 57 percent of Hastings High School students passed science and a scant 54 percent passed math.

Astonishingly, the state deemed all of these schools “Academically Acceptable.”

Texas cannot afford to have large numbers of students ignorant in core subject areas, and taxpayers should not tolerate it. State lawmakers must make significant changes to the state accountability system, including raising the rigor and academic expectations for both schools and students.

The conventional grading scale for students sets a score of 70 percent as the bottom end of the acceptable range. Schools should be held to a similar standard, with at least 70 percent of students passing reading, writing, history, math and science to be rated as “Acceptable.”

Another way to raise the rigor of the system is to reduce the large numbers of students exempted from testing. Last year, almost 70,000 students were exempted from the TAKS or other state tests. The accountability system needs to hold teachers and schools responsible for every child’s performance by closing these loopholes.

The system also needs to be simplified. Schools and districts must track and report performance on as many as 36 measures. Today’s accountability system focuses too much on inputs and not enough on outcomes and results. To move in this direction, state lawmakers should decrease the overall number of indicators used to evaluate schools and districts and make sure the system gives schools and districts credit for student improvement and growth over the year.

Other helpful changes to the state accountability system include aligning the state and federal systems by using common definitions where possible and making the system more transparent to parents and the community.

The purpose of a state accountability system is to evaluate school performance and provide that information to parents and the public so they can determine the quality of a particular school or district. The current accountability system fails in this regard and needs to be redesigned.

With tens of billions of dollars spent on public schools, Texas taxpayers deserve a better and more accurate accountability system; one that is easy to understand, useful, and actually holds schools accountable.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below