DOE working to fine-tune weighted student formula
THE
Star-Bulletin's Aug. 31 story "DOE chief wants to scrap new plan" did not accurately represent my position on the weighted student formula.
I do not want to "scrap" the WSF (or "build a whole new funding system from scratch," as the story stated). Rather, I want to take some time to ensure that WSF includes those factors that most relate to student achievement.
To do that, we need to slow down the process just enough to examine such factors from a school and educational perspective, and make certain that the formula reflects their appropriate value. Our efforts are to make WSF succeed, not to abandon it.
The Star-Bulletin's Sept. 3 editorial, "School funding problem should not slow progress," warned that our deliberations "should not be used to negate a legislative mandate intended to direct money to students most difficult to educate." I agree. However, a warning was not necessary since we are working to fulfill the legislative mandate, not to negate it.
I continue to fully support Act 51, the Legislature's Reinventing Education Act of 2004, which includes the mandate to allocate funds to schools using the weighted student formula.
The intent of WSF is to allocate funds to schools based on the specific needs of each school's students. To do that accurately and fairly, we must first determine the actual cost of educating students with various needs.
We already know that it takes greater resources to provide the same educational opportunities to students who are economically disadvantaged, who require special education services or who have limited English-language skills. However, we are not yet certain about the full set of factors affecting student achievement, or how much additional funding might be necessary for each identified special need.
My proposal is to examine those questions more deliberately and methodically to develop a funding formula that is targeted on student achievement.
The weighted student formula we adopt still will result in funding gains at some schools and losses at others. Those differences will be less controversial if the formula is accepted as fair and justifiable with respect to establishing greater equity in educational opportunity for all students.
For the 2007-08 school year, to provide a sense of continuity and stability for our schools, I've asked the Board of Education to basically follow the current WSF allocation formula for one more year.
The BOE, recognizing that the current formula was a work in progress and to help schools transition into the new funding method, had correctly limited the effects of WSF in this first year of implementation to 10 percent of its calculated adjustments. For example, if the formula would reduce a school's budget by $100,000, in this first year that school's loss was limited to just $10,000.
My proposal is to continue the WSF transition plan at a slightly higher rate of 15 percent. Assuming that we will continue to receive a $20 million appropriation to ease the transition to the weighted student formula, only four schools would experience an actual funding loss at the 15 percent rate, and most schools would consider the funding effects manageable.
In the meantime, the DOE, with substantial input from school-level educators, will analyze school budget and student achievement information to produce recommendations that the BOE can use to fine-tune the weighted student formula.
Prior to this, a Committee on Weights did a commendable job under demanding time constraints in 2005 and 2006 to develop and refine the initial formula.
Both the BOE and Committee on Weights have requested that the DOE provide more analysis on "what is the relative cost" to educate a student and on "what does it take" to operate a school.
My proposal is to invest the time and energy in answering those questions, to conduct a careful analysis of what is working in Hawaii and to align school budgeting with student achievement.
Patricia Hamamoto is superintendent of the state Department of Education.