Koch: “Scribblings,” an occasional newsletter from the Legislature

Editor’s note: This piece is by Rep. Thomas F. Koch, R/D, who represents Barre Town in the Vermont House of Representatives.

Eight years ago, I began my first issue of “Scribblings” with the following description:

“Scribble” 1: to write hastily or carelessly without regard to legibility or form 2: to cover with careless or worthless writings or drawings

In an effort to maintain better contact with Barre Town residents when I’m not out looking for votes, I thought I’d write an e-mail newsletter commenting on happenings in the Legislature. I won’t promise to write it every week, or even every two weeks, so I’ve described it as occasional. I hope it will be useful, but I don’t want to take myself too seriously with it, so I’ve called it “Scribblings” and include a couple of dictionary definitions of the verb from which “scribblings” is derived. Whether this turns out to be “worthless” I’ll leave for your judgment, which I invite you to communicate to me as you wish.

Over the last eight years, “Scribblings” has been far better received that I had ever imagined, and I plan to continue to write it during this biennium. It has, indeed, been an “occasional” piece, to the point where every once in a while someone will ask if I’ve stopped writing it, or when the next “Scribblings” will appear, or whether the inquirer has been “dropped from the distribution list.” The truth is that I write “Scribblings” when I feel I have something significant to report, not because I feel bound to a schedule or deadline. Please feel free to copy it, re-circulate it, criticize it, and most importantly, respond to it so that I have the benefit of your thinking as I attempt to “represent” you in the Legislature.

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

The General Assembly convened on Wednesday, Shap Smith of Morristown was re-elected as Speaker of the House, John Campbell of Windsor County was re-elected as president pro tem of the Senate, and Peter Shumlin was sworn in for a second term as governor.

Gov. Shumlin confined his inaugural address to a single topic: education. He quite correctly made the link between education and job growth. He described several instances of Vermont businesses that would like to expand, add new jobs, pay more taxes, and increase their profits, but cannot find qualified workers in Vermont’s present workforce. He cited by name more than 15 prosperous businesses around the state which are hiring and willing to pay good wages, but which are unable to find suitably trained, skilled workers here in Vermont. Particularly lacking in our high-tech economy are workers with strong math skills.

The governor laid out the challenge in three short paragraphs:

[T]echnology has dramatically changed the tools available for teaching and learning. It has changed the nature of work. The high school degree that brought success and a lifetime job in the old economy, ensures a low-wage future in the tech economy. Success in the new economy depends on an educated workforce with skills beyond high school in science, computer technology, engineering and math.

I ask you: is Vermont prepared to meet this challenge? Are we ready to harness this opportunity so critical to our future prosperity?

The plain truth is, we are not.

He cited a few basic facts. Current estimates are that over 60 percent of job openings over the next 10 years will require educational skills beyond the high school level, but only 45 percent of ninth-graders will ever continue their education beyond high school! Furthermore, the percentage of high school graduates who continue into college decreases rapidly with lower family incomes. And all this despite the fact that we spend more money per pupil than all but two of the other states.

The governor proceeded to lay out his recommendations, making four main points, and adding a few specifics to each main point. Let me summarize his recommendations, to which I will add some of my own reflections in italics.

First, he recommends that we strengthen our commitment to universal early childhood education. Stating that 90 percent of a child’s brain is developed in the first 36 months of life, he asserts that “the earlier we invest in our children, the healthier, more productive lives they will have,” and further, that “every dollar we invest in early childhood education saves seven dollars in the future.” To implement this goal, he proposes: (1) to redirect $17 million from the state’s share of the earned income tax credit to make high-quality childcare affordable to low-income Vermonters; (2) to offer start-up cost assistance and then continued support for communities to initiate public pre-school programs; and (3) to use schools as full-service health centers for students.

I need to learn a great deal more about the details of these proposals. The earned income tax credit is one of the most successful anti-poverty programs for working Vermonters that we have ever developed, and it has broad support across the political spectrum; taking about two-thirds of the state’s contribution to that program and diverting it to support child care programs raises, at least, the question whether this is the right funding source. In addition, the governor did not offer a funding source for start-up assistance for communities. And finally, I have long believed that one of the reasons schools have difficulty accomplishing their educational mission is that we have too often turned them into social service delivery vehicles; the governor’s proposal exacerbates that trend.

Second, the governor states that “students can’t learn when they are hungry,” and although many children are eligible for free lunches under the federal school lunch program, many others who are just above the poverty line are eligible only for reduced-price lunches. The governor proposes to supplement the federal program so that all “low-income” children will receive free lunches. He promised to include funds in his FY2014 budget (the budget we will be considering later this year) for this purpose, but he did not say what the cost will be. We will no doubt learn that later this month when he delivers his budget address.

So I have two questions to start. What definition of “low-income” is he using, and what other benefits do the people who qualify under this definition already receive? This proposal needs careful consideration; it may be a much-needed improvement, but it may also be one more program piled on top of many other programs, many of which are just as uncoordinated today as they were 20 years ago.

Third, post-secondary education must be made more accessible and more affordable for all Vermonters. To do this, the governor makes three concrete proposals: (1) Increase dual-enrollment programs. Let Vermont high-school students take college courses “with the money following the student,” which means that statewide property tax money that normally supports a high school would be used to pay tuition for the courses a student from that high school is taking at college. In addition, expand the existing program that Vermont Tech has, in which a student can simultaneously complete a senior year in high school and a freshman year at VTC. (2) Create a Vermont Strong Scholar’s Program, whereby a student graduating from a Vermont college with a degree in science, technology, or math can have the final year of tuition repaid over a period of years if the student agrees to stay and work in Vermont after graduation for a set period of time. (3) Increase the state appropriation to the State Colleges and UVM by three percent, to be used entirely for financial aid and scholarships for Vermonters.

In general, I think these proposals have a good deal of merit. My own grandson participated in the simultaneous senior year/freshman year program at VTC, and I have seen its advantages. For qualified students, it saves a year of college expenses and allows a student to complete college a year earlier and enter the workforce that much sooner.

The Vermont Strong Scholar’s Program is similar to a program proposed several years ago by Gov. Douglas, but the Legislature had little interest in supporting it; perhaps Gov. Shumlin will have better luck.

And Vermont’s support for its institutions of higher learning has long been the lowest in the nation, and increased support is certainly in order; one must question whether a three percent increase is sufficient, but in tight budgetary times (aren’t they all?) it may be all the state can afford.

Fourth and finally, the governor urges us to do a better job of focusing education on career readiness. Toward this end, he proposes: (1) that schools develop “personal learning plans” that travel with each student from elementary through high school, in order to “tie educational goals to career opportunities, making school more relevant,” and “to increase our students’ individual options while fostering a connection between school and career;” (2) that all ninth graders take algebra and all 10th graders take geometry, so as to improve on Vermont’s dismal record that shows that only 36 percent of 11th graders are grade-proficient in math! (3) that we use our 17 career and technical education centers around the state to create Vermont Innovation Zones that will focus on skill sets needed in the communities and areas served by each center and allow students and adults to update their work skills.

I have deep reservations about the first of these proposals. It reminds me of two women who met on the street; one had her two young children with her, and her friend asked how old they were; the first woman responded, “The doctor is four, and the lawyer is two!” It is quite possible to direct a child’s career choices at too early an age, and I am inclined to believe that children are best served by requiring them to take quality, challenging courses across a very broad range of disciplines, allowing them to concentrate on career development at a later and more appropriate time. Indeed, I have even been critical of colleges that require applicants to declare a major at the time of application.

As to the second proposal, all I can do is stand and cheer! Of course, students should take algebra and geometry — and English (with grammar, spelling, and punctuation coming before creative writing), and American history, and science, and civics! This is a proposal that is long overdue.

And finally, the third proposal is just common sense; I’m surprised (and disappointed) if it’s not already happening.

Those are the governor’s principal recommendations. He also indicated that there would be many conferences and planning sessions to further his goals of assuring that Vermont’s education system will create quality jobs and revitalize Vermont’s economy. What will come of those efforts remains to be seen. (In fact, what will come of his immediate proposals remains to be seen, though there should be widespread support for several of those proposals.)

Of particular note are some of the things that the governor did not say.

First, although he noted that Vermont is near the top of the states in spending per student, he did not make any proposals that might actually reduce that per-student spending. Since Act 60 was adopted in 1997, our student population has dropped by nearly 20 percent, but our total spending has nearly doubled! And during that time, Vermont’s student/teacher ratio has continued to drop so that our current student/teacher ratio of roughly 11:1 is the lowest in the nation. We will never reduce our per-student spending unless we increase our student/teacher ratio, and even changing that ratio so we are second in the nation instead of first will save millions of dollars!

Second, although the governor has recommended several programs that allow the money to “follow the student,” he did not mention doing that for public school choice programs, or otherwise expanding school choice programs. These programs have been the subject of discussion for a number of years, but a robust parental choice program still does not exist. It is beyond question that some students will do better in one school than in another, and to be bound to a school simply because of one’s town or city of residence does not serve students well. Expanding parental choice should be on the table along with the rest of the governor’s recommendations.

Finally, the governor shows no signs of affirming home school programs, which are constantly under attack by people who think public education should be the only item on the menu. There was a time when I was not an enthusiastic home-school supporter, but I have seen the outstanding results achieved by many home-schooled students, and I have revised my views. I would hope that in the many discussions to come — now that the governor has set the agenda for this session — the Legislature would take some steps toward recognizing the legitimacy of properly executed home schooling.

Tom Koch can be reached by email at Tkoch@leg.state.vt.us.