Editor’s note: This oped is by Rep. John Zenie, Chittenden 7-1, Colchester.
For the past two years I served on the House Education Committee. There were fundamentally two subject matters that drove all of our discussions. The first subject was about how we can improve on our excellent educational system so that our children can be more successful; they are our future. The second subject was about how we could reduce the costs of our educational system in light of ever increasing property taxes.
Almost every time the committee talked about one subject matter we had to ask how it affected the other. How do you increase school quality without increasing costs? How do you reduce costs and not negatively affect quality? This conundrum is not new but it is becoming ever more pressing an issue looking for some type of resolution.
The Vermont Department of Education and the Vermont Board of Education, with the help of legislators and other citizens, have completed some excellent work regarding the future of the educational system in Vermont. Please take the time to look at the Transformation and Strategy documents that can be found here: http://www.education.vermont.gov/new/html/mainboard.html.
To be able to transform our educational system and to get implementation of these strategies will require large investments. This is contrary to our desire to reduce the cost of education. So where is the proper balance and who gets to decide?
Most of us know that the responsibility of the educational system has been growing every year for decades. We not only expect our schools to teach fundamental reading, writing, and arithmetic to our children but also to expect our schools to make sure that they are fed, have clean clothes and that they are protected from harm from others including their own families. We now expect our schools to take on the responsibility that once belonged to parents, communities, and human services agencies.
Last year when the state passed S.13 for sexual predators we added more unfunded mandates to schools under “Health Education” in Title 16: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/fullsection.cfm?Title=16&Chapter=001&Section=00131
This is the mandate that schools teach our children on how to recognize and prevent sexual abuse and sexual violence. There is currently discussions going on regarding having the schools teach more about nutrition to help combat the obesity problem that now exists. Who will pay for that?
Then this year we saw the report on “Roots of Success” on how to have effective schools, http://rootsofsuccess.wordpress.com/report-materials/ which is wonderful information on how we can be doing better for all of our children. But can anyone put the price tag on one of this report’s required characteristics of: “The belief that school staff are ultimately responsible for students’ success and must therefore continually improve their practice”. If we agree with supporting this statement then we need to put boundaries on what “ultimately responsible for students’ success” really means as an expectation of our schools and have dollars to support it.
The mantra of lower enrollments equals lower costs is a false equation. We must add the additional responsibilities that we put on our schools in some kind of quantitative way to correct that equation. To have the schools do more with less funding will result in adverse effects. We can not have it both ways. We can not expect our schools to take over the responsibilities that use to be done by parents and communities and expect lower educational costs. I hope that the administration will lead these discussions and that the legislature will aid in the resolution as necessary.
