Editor’s note: This oped is by Sen. Susan Bartlett, D-Lamoille, a candidate for governor.
High quality educational opportunities are the key to the future.
Well-educated citizens have the knowledge and confidence to invent new products, start new businesses, be great employees, and to be active participants in their communities—be it as a basketball coach, a volunteer firefighter, a select board member, or a member of a local theater group. We owe it to our students to prepare them to compete in our rapidly changing world.
Act 60
Act 60 has worked to equalize spending among Vermont’s communities, thereby compiling with the Supreme Court’s Brigham decision and ensuring that all children have the same access to education, regardless of a town’s property wealth. However, changes must be made to the Common Level of Appraisal (CLA) to make our educational funding formula less confusing. I favor replacing the system with a statewide, three-year rotating professional appraisal.
Vermont must reduce spending statewide in order to reduce local school taxes.
Vermont is among the highest per pupil spending in the country, and Vermonters are frustrated by rising property taxes. It is important to understand that school taxes are determined not only by what we spend, but by what is spent across the state on education as a whole. In order to reduce taxes at the local level, we need to take a system-wide approach to reducing spending.
We can control spending and enhance educational opportunity in Vermont.
Here is what I would support as Governor:
* Larger School Districts – Vermont should have 16 school districts (as opposed to the current 307). The path to getting to larger districts needs to be paved by requiring all districts to implement best practices in administration over two years with the goal of creating larger districts in five years.
* Minimum-Maximum Class Sizes – Each district would adopt a minimum-maximum class size policy. This would mean greater job security for teachers, increased flexibility for staff planning, and reduction in costs associated with the hiring process. In addition, it would keep investments made in professional development within each district capacity help preserve some of our smaller schools.
* Critical Evaluation of Special Education – Our schools and our property taxes have become the deep pockets of special education/social services. We need to have our department of education define what truly belongs as an educational cost and what is a “social cost”. I believe it is correct to have education taxes pay for educational costs, and the general fund pay the social costs.
* Teacher Support and Training – I believe that the most significant progress toward the success of all children happens in classrooms with excellent teachers who base their work on research proven instruction and educational practice; for example, differentiated instruction as a method of teaching and workstations as a strategy to help all students to learn.
Additional information on these ideas included in an in-depth examination of the underlying issues is available at www.bartlettforgovernor.com.
Permalink |
Minimum-Maximum Class Sizes section makes little sense. Its not explained or even apparent how the benefits listed would accrue from setting class size limits. The last sentence of the paragraph doesn’t even make sense. This editorial simply states the obvious problem, proposes a solution then does nothing to describe how the solution addresses the problem. Vermont has the highest per pupil spending in the country and guess what? Vermont has the best public school education in the country to show for it.
Permalink |
We need to support mainstreaming!!!!!!!!! To save $$$$$ in Edu we need to cut Administration and leave paraprofessional, teachers, and class size alone!!!!!! Bigger class size is not in the best interest of everyone and has a negative impact on learnig and inclusion of people with disabilties!!!!! Segreation cost more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE NEED INCLUSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Permalink |
Yeah, we spend a huge amount of money per student in VT. In my school district I think it’s like $13,000 per student when the national average is about $7,000. And what we get is this……
I have a 17 year old currently in the public system. I have watched a group of kids her age grow up from Kindergarden to 11th grade. The ones who do all their homework pass. The ones who dont pass too. The ones who do well on their tests pass. And so do the ones that dont. The ones that never go to school, or go whenever they feel like it keep getting promoted to the next grade! How can that be? We have a great, expensive, quality system? I don’t think so. The teachers pass everyone along to avoid scrutiny from the state education board for failing too many kids they can’t seem to teach.
The system is a rip-off and needs to be changed.
Consolidate, spend less, and hire teachers that are not afraid to fail a kid if they won’t do their school work.
Permalink |
I think this form of appraisal reform is very much needed. Local control is all good but to have each town doing their own thing appraisal wise makes no sense. My town has a reappraisal every 25 years and Montpelier has one every 3, what sense does that make ? And teacher per pupil ratio in this state is nuts. in my opinion. Thanks.
Permalink |
PS VT does not have the best public school education in the country, we have failing schools and a lot of near failing. This with that per pupil spending number and teacher/pupil ratio.