Schools struggle to adopt legislative reforms


School children watch from the gallery as lawmakers debate an education reform bill in April 2015. Photo by Roger Crowley/for VTDigger

Over the past three years, the Vermont Legislature has approved significant education reforms – Act 77, Act 166 and Act 46 — and now implementation of all three laws is converging.

Each new law requires a major shift in the way schools deliver education, and schools are struggling to meet 2016 deadlines for implementation of Act 77, Act, 166 and Act 46.

Some school administrators are saying the changes are coming too fast — and at a high financial cost to local school districts.

Under Act 46, the state’s 277 school boards and local districts must develop merger plans; Act 166 mandates public school pre-K programs; and Act 77 requires public schools to provide students with personal learning plans and access to early college courses.

New variable spending caps imposed by the Legislature in the coming year could make it difficult for schools to implement all the changes in 2016.

That’s because many local districts are in a tough spot. Two of the laws — public school pre-K and early college (known as “dual”) enrollment — cost money to implement. The third law, Act 46, the school district consolidation law, puts a cap on local school district spending.

The spending threshold in Act 46, known as Allowable Growth Percentage (AGP) is meant to keep statewide school spending rates to just 2 percent. Each district is allowed to grow their budget by a prescribed amount between 0 and 5 percent based on how much was spent in the previous school year.

When districts exceed the threshold, taxpayers will be whacked by a big penalty under Act 46: The projected local tax doubles for every extra dollar spent.

A number of districts will automatically hit the threshold because of a 7 percent increase in health care premiums next year.

Other districts will reach the spending cap when they implement mandatory pre-K and dual enrollment programs.

Jay Nichols, superintendent of Franklin Northeast Supervisory Union, said it’s an understatement to say that school boards and staff are feeling a tremendous amount of pressure as they try to execute the three pieces of sweeping legislation at once under spending constraints.

“There is a lot of stress on school boards, they are under as much pressure as I’ve ever seen them under,” Nichols said. “There is also more pressure on staff and personnel than ever before, not because any of these things [new policies] are bad. They are all good, but we need time and resources to do them well.”

The Legislature is, in effect, asking school boards to spend much less and do a lot more — in a short time frame, Nichols says.

House and Senate leaders say they will consider changes to the cap, including raising the threshold or building in an exemption for health care costs. Gov. Peter Shumlin has said he will recommend repeal of the threshold or a one year moratorium on implementation.

It’s unclear whether the proposals will be enough to ease anxiety about the implementation of reforms.

Ned Kirsch, superintendent of Franklin West Supervisory Union, says the new laws are “monumental pieces of educational legislation” that will take schools time to absorb — culturally and financially.

“All have merit for many reasons,” Kirsch said. “All of them cost money. ​All of them take incredible amounts of time to understand and to implement. Perhaps the Legislature can examine the efficacy of implementation practices that ​ask schools to make such rapid change and redesign of systems, all at ​one time with threat of penalties and caps looming over their​ heads.”

The implementation of the three laws will likely play out differently, community to community, according to Jeffrey Francis, executive director of the Vermont Superintendents Association.

That’s because the state’s existing governance structure, which has “277 individual school districts,” is dysfunctional, Francis says. Consequently, each district has “dissimilar capabilities and resources.”

Francis says rolling out pre-K and early college programs would have been easier if the state had dealt with how districts are organized and governed first. Act 46, the state’s school district consolidation law, forces school districts to merge into larger units. The goal of the new law is to help communities share educational resources and costs.

“I wish that we had contended with the Act 46 initiative first because it is intended to create school systems that are better able to respond to the inevitable pressures that come as we try to do better and better for our children,” Frances says.

The simultaneous implementation of all three laws is “challenging for our systems to respond to,” he said.

Act 77: Worth the Wait

School districts were already digging into Act 77 – also known as the flexible pathways bill – when Acts 166 and 46 were later passed. Act 77 includes an Early College Program that began in 2014 and provides early college admission for students who get a full year of college credit while completing their senior year of high school.

The state picks up 87 percent of the tab and the college must accept the payment as full tuition. There is also a dual enrollment component that allows high school juniors and seniors to take two college courses a year, as well as a career ready component.

Initially, the plan was for the state to pay full freight in 2014 and 2015, and then share the cost with local high schools in 2016. Since then, the state has offered to continue full payment to relieve the burden on communities.

But the provision of Act 77 with arguably the biggest statewide impact is a new program known as Personalized Learning Plans. Schools are required to prepare a personalized learning plan for each student in grades 7-12 in current school year. Implementation, however, isn’t on schedule in many communities.

Nichols said the Agency of Education is working with districts to help them adopt the new program. Schools in the Franklin Northeast Supervisory Union are struggling to find time (and money) for teacher training.

“We are pulling teachers out to train with our curriculum folks three or four more times,” Nichols says. “First they have to identify key proficiencies in each content area then we have to figure out how to measure the proficiencies, with what rubric – that is a lot of work. We either have to bring teachers in in the summer or take them out of class and pay for substitutes.”

The schools in the Addison-Rutland Supervisory Union have found this transition has been smooth because the supervisory union is working with other districts in the region. Last year, Ronald Ryan, the superintendent and other administrators participated in a 10-day statewide training that became a catalyst for regional work on Act 77 implementation, according to Kristin Benway, director of special services.

Ryan is confident that the schools will make progress on personalized learning plans, but he said it puts an additional burden on teaching staff.

“There has been a lot of time commitment on the part of teachers, administrators and guidance counselors to have things available and up and running and working,” Benway said.

Ultimately, educators are excited about Act 77 and feel it will really improve schooling. “It will be a lot more fun to teach and certainly a lot more fun to learn,” said Nichols.

Universal Pre-K: Good Policy, Bad Timing

With the passage of Act 166, all Vermont school districts are responsible for providing 10 hours of universal pre-K, 35 weeks a year for all 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds who are not already in kindergarten. Pre-K programs were supposed to start this year, but policymakers allowed districts to delay implementation until the fall of 2016. Some districts went ahead with the original schedule.

While education officials agree that early education is important to the future success of children in the school system, implementing the new law under a swinging budgetary scythe is causing concerns.

In Addison-Rutland Supervisory Union, only one school district is operating a pre-K program. The rest must transition now and some administrators are wishing schools hadn’t waited as they bump up against the spending caps in Act 46.

Superintendent Ryan said that they could have implemented pre-K last year, but they decided to wait. “Now we have to deal with Act 46 and AGP coming into play,” Ryan said.

Budgets in the coming year will increase by $250,000 for new early education teachers and instructional assistants, and that additional cost could hurt districts that want to stay under the cap.

“In light of all the new demands going on this was not great timing when you have new initiatives,” Benway said. “Being asked to hold the line financially is really hard when you are looking at educating an additional 200 students and adding two new grade levels.”

Franklin Northeast is dealing with costs associated with teacher licensing and space requirements for the pre-K program. Due to classroom size requirements issued jointly by AOE and the Agency of Human Services, the supervisory union must retrofit classrooms at Richford Elementary School.

“Apparently, 3- and 4-year-olds have to have more space than a kindergartener or first-grader,” Nichols said.

To make room for the preschool children, sixth-graders will move to the high school. “It adds more to the workload for everybody and has a financial impact as well,” Nichols said

Kirsch, the superintendent of Franklin West, says pre-K costs are burdensome and he would like to see costs associated with Act 166 eliminated from the allowable growth caps.

“In order for our schools to comply with Act 166 we will need to build out our programs to meet the 10-hour requirement mandated in the law,” Kirsch said. “We are estimating the expansion will cost over $125,000. Clearly, ‘allowable growth’ does not allow for the necessary growth of our early education programs.”

Francis, the head of the state superintendents association, points to another complication. Act 166 fosters partnerships between public schools and private providers of early learning services, but “that has a significant cost associated with it.”

“There are places that have historically operated pre-K within public schools but because of the notion of universality and tuition payments to private providers, we find school districts operating pre-K and paying tuition in an arrangement that is not consistent from year-to-year,” Francis said.

Enrollment counts should cover the cost of expansion but when districts are both operating programs and paying tuition to private providers, the services often cost more, Francis explains. “So in terms of the measured dollars, Act 166 is a new cost obligation in some places.”

Addison Northwest Supervisory Union has not yet put pre-K programs in place. Canning said schools in the supervisory union could absorb 122 new pre-K students, and schools don’t have the capacity to serve them right now.

“The stress on our budget is the unknown,” Canning said. “We don’t know how many kids to plan for.” She expects the allowable growth provision to drive conversations about priorities for local school budgets.

In some schools, that means cutting programs or staff in order to add pre-K and stay within each district’s allowable growth percentage.

Kirsch says that’s “robbing Peter to pay Paul.”

Act 46: A Necessary Time Suck

Act 46, arguably one of the most significant pieces of education legislation passed in Vermont in many years, sets a laudable goal for all students to succeed through the creation of sustainable governance units that encourage equal access to quality educational opportunities statewide at a price that parents, voters and taxpayers value.

“This work is very purposeful, but it is hard to accomplish those goals when you are both trying to build the plane and fly it at the same time,” Francis said.

Franklin Northeast, Addison-Rutland and Addison Northwest are in various stages of merger planning. Superintendents say they have spent hundreds of hours on the process since June.

Under Act 46, districts set up study committees and create a merger plan and articles of agreement that must be approved by the State Board of Education. Once a plan is in place, districts are to hold community forums before voting day. If voters approve, then the merger moves forward.

Nichols of Franklin Northeast says a supervisory union committee voted 8-to-1 to unify.
Under the plan, local school districts will be able to offer more programs to students and garner at least $3.5 million in savings over five years.

Jeff Francis

Jeffrey Francis, executive director of the Vermont Superintendents Association. Photo by Amy Ash Nixon/VTDigger

“I’ve spent a couple hundred hours on Act 46 myself,” Nichols said. Volunteer school board members have also spent hundreds of hours on the merger plan, and he said “it is taking a toll on those people.”

“If you allow the law to do what it is supposed to do it will create more educational opportunity for kids across the state, give more local control to those that think they will lose it because now they have no say at all,” said Nichols.

But Nichols says the timeline has been tough because they need voter approval by July 2016 in order to take advantage of tax incentives.

Addison-Rutland’s plan has been approved by a study committee and the State Board of Education. The vote for communities is set for April 12.

“It has taken a lot of time and energy on the part of the community as well as my office staff providing data and working with the communities to make sure we get that report submitted and the articles of agreement approved,” said Ryan. “It has not been an easy process. It is brand new territory for a lot of people.”

Ryan said the aggressive timeline is “tough,” and has required twice monthly meetings since July. “We are beginning our community forums next week and there are six of them in six towns,” he said. The school board also has to update communications in print and on the website during the process.

Ryan says merging the six towns will give students access to special programs and provide much more flexibility to move staff between schools.

In Addison Northwest, school boards are focused on equity for students in an environment of declining enrollments, Canning says.

“We are in an accelerated study school district …there is a lot of enthusiasm among my boards. It makes so much sense for our system to unify and share resources,” she said.

Canning said she has a “carousel” meeting plan that allows her to cut down the number of monthly meetings she normally attends from four or five to one. All the boards meet on one site and hold a supervisory union meeting before breaking up into smaller meetings. “It is a fast turnaround, but I don’t feel the stress,” she said enthusiastically.

Cap & Trade Offs

The convergence of the deadlines for Act 77, Act 166 and Act 46 under new spending caps has been complicated for schools.

“I would like to see the caps change,” said Canning, “it is a distraction right now to the work of the study committee. We are trying to find better ways to serve kids in a cost effective way and laying caps on top of the unification conversations going on aren’t doing any good.”

Francis recognizes that a desire for short term cost containment was behind the allowable growth provision in the law, but he insists that the real savings will be found through merging school systems.

“The caps aren’t useful to the implementation of Act 77, Act 166 or to Act 46, period,” Francis said.

He says lawmakers should give communities time to put reforms in place before demanding immediate cost reductions.

Nichols said he wouldn’t mind if lawmakers went on vacation. “If we actually focused on what we have right now for the next decade: expanding preschool numbers, providing rich options through Act 77, reorganizing governance structures to make sense and rid us of duplication, let us work on the things we feel passionate about that help all students learn.”

Tiffany Danitz Pache

Leave a Reply

12 Comments on "Schools struggle to adopt legislative reforms"


Comment Policy requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Be succinct and to the point. If your comment is over 500 words, consider sending a commentary instead.

We personally review and moderate every comment that is posted here. This takes a lot of time; please consider donating to keep the conversation productive and informative.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage a civil discourse among readers who are willing to stand behind their identities and their comments. VTDigger has created a safe zone for readers who wish to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation.

Privacy policy
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Chaunce Benedict
1 year 19 days ago

A nice, lengthy puff piece explaining and advocating the official pro-consolidation policy positions of the Vermont Superintendents Association. No surprises here. The wheels and political shenanigans of edutocracy grind on.

edward letourneau
1 year 19 days ago

I’m on a school board. I tell people their taxes are really determined by the people under the gold dome — and if they want lower taxes, they need to vote everyone under the dome out of office. And I’m not wrong!

Todd Morris
1 year 19 days ago
I cannot understand why anyone would be surprised that VTs one sided government implements feel good policies that are simply not affordable. Any supporters of Obamacare please explain the following … “A number of districts will automatically hit the threshold because of a 7 percent increase in health care premiums next year”.. As far as universal pre-K…my children did not attend pre-K and they are doing just fine academically. We all know the problem is largely due to poor parenting but lets not point any fingers because we are all in this together. Can any member of the teachers union… Read more »
Ward Heneveld
1 year 19 days ago
This article provides striking evidence that there’s no comprehensive planning for improving Vermont’s education system. There’s lots of changes in the schools that could improve learning (the two examples in this article, proficiency teaching, quality assessments, IT use). This is accompanied by a useful reorganization law with way too little time to plan the transitions so that changes take into account the quality reforms that have started. And then there’s the ineffective legislated attempt to save money by capping budgets without considering the caps’ impact. When will Vermont’s leaders in education realize that we need to take the time to… Read more »
1 year 19 days ago

Near or at the top of my legislative wish list has and continues to be our lawmakers taking ownership for the laws they have passed. I have been very pleased to see Representatives Olsen and Sharp spending a lot of time crisscrossing the state not only taking personal responsibility for their part in passing Act 46 but also in helping to explain where the law came from and what it does.

We need more legislators to do the same with any piece of complicated legislation.

Jamie Carter
1 year 18 days ago
“but also in helping to explain where the law came from and what it does.” A.) what does it do? B.) why should they need to explain it ? Shouldn’t it more or less be evident to the average VTer? I wouldn’t be so quick to applaud Mr. Olsen or Mr. Sharpe just yet. It seems what they did was create a law that was constructed poorly enough so that it has very quickly been called out as needing adjustments from lawmakers on all sides and the Governor. In less then 6 months of it’s passage it was clear the… Read more »
Tom Launder
1 year 19 days ago

Increase the student to teacher ratio towards the national average, and pass healthcare increases onto teachers, just like everyone else.

Peter Chick
1 year 19 days ago

Please read and understand all legislation before voting on it. Thank you.

Sandy Gregg
1 year 19 days ago

Why is the State picking up the tab for high school students to take college courses? Why isn’t that student’s per-student cost pro-rated so that one college course cost is one-fifth? Please do not tell me taxpayers are paying twice for these students, once at the local level, and again when State taxes are collected! Can anyone tell us how this is funded? Thanks.

Ann Manwaring
1 year 18 days ago
“Why is the State picking up the tab for high school students to take college courses?” The State, in this case, means the Education Fund (which is two-thirds supported by property taxes), not some other broad based source of revenue. This program is called Flexible Pathways, and it requires Local School Boards to offer it to students as part of their curriculum. That means that it is included in the budgets that are presented to local voters for approval. The same is true for the other new initiatives discussed in this article, Universal Pre-K, Personalized Learning Plans and the incentives… Read more »
George Cross
1 year 19 days ago

Making major changes in education takes time, energy and money. This has been proven time and time again. One of the major flaws in Act 46 was the inclusion of monetary “carrots” for fast action. If the changes advocated are as good as advertised, there really was no need for financial incentives to hasten compliance. All these incentives will do is reward those districts which were already well underway to consolidation and those that act hastily ignoring the unanticipated consequences of such action. Neither group will provide a good road map for those who follow.

John McClaughry
1 year 13 days ago
This is the kind of thorough, accurate, informative article that really builds a reporter’s reputation. Thanks, Tiffany and Digger. For twelve years now I have tried vainly to explain, with data, that because universal preschool absorbs the increased money and spreads it over the entire preschool age population, nine tenths of that population receives taxpayer financed day care with no lasting educational benefits whatever, “For those – notably liberals – concerned about closing the achievement gap between at-risk kids and all other kids, universal preschool won’t do it. It will just eat up the funding that might do it. It… Read more »
Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Schools struggle to adopt legislative reforms"