Hawaii's Board of Education is preparing for its annual review of the weighted-student formula that determines how much money each public school gets to spend as it wishes, a process considered even more challenging this year amid state budget cuts.
Michael Strembitsky, the Canadian educator who pioneered the concept, has more than a passing interest in Hawaii's results, given that he lives on Maui half the year and advised the state as a consultant in 2003.

The weighted student-formula (WSF), which Hawaii implemented as a result of 2004's Act 51, allocates funding directly to schools per pupil, starting with a base amount and adding extra (the “;weight”;) for factors such as poverty, rural isolation and English-language capability.

Membership of this year's “;Committee on Weights,”; which will make recommendations for the 2011-12 school year, will be announced on April 15. The panel will schedule public meetings to hash out the formula and make recommendations to the Board of Education, which holds final approval.

Strembitsky, 75, who retired in 1994 after 22 years as superintendent of the 76,000-student Edmonton Public Schools district, has over the past 16 years advised U.S. agencies and school districts about a results-driven system that — if done right — can improve school success and satisfaction across-the-board, for students, parents, teachers and principals.

Two keys, he said, are to align all resources for school-level functions with the schools — rather than at district or state offices — and to have an absolutely transparent process for deciding and allocating the weighted-student formula. Question: Let's start with education funding.

ANSWER: For me there are two distinct issues: One is how much money you have; the other is how to best use that money.

My experience has been that if you use the money that you do have in a way that you can garner staff support and public support, you're more likely to garner support for more money. Right now, across the country, there is a growing coalescing of forces against throwing more money after what is perceived as not working. ... My experience has been that if we can switch the model of “;It's not working, therefore we need more money,”; to “;We're doing the best job we can with what we've got, and if you want to invest more, we'll do even better”; — that's how you get the best results.

Q: You believe in a well-executed weighted-student formula. Why is it so important that the money is controlled at the school level?

A: Because no department in central is responsible for kids. No two schools are alike. The students are different, the staffs are different, the buildings are different. They need different things. What we did literally was turn the system right-side up. The opposition is invariably from the existing power structure. ... Once the schools get their allocation, they expend it. You don't need pieces of paper coming back to this office or that office having to sign off. Right now, a lot of people justify their existence based on, “;Look at all the work I'm behind; I've got all this paper.”; All that disappears. Then the issue becomes, what will these people do?

Q: How can Hawaii make its weighted student formula work despite the budget crisis?

A: While more money helps, money is not the reason why it can't be done. The main thing is to align all resources for school results with the schools. Over a period of time, you need to get to a threshold before it is effective — 65 to 70 percent (of all education funding) is a minimum threshold. If you don't get there and do it the right way, it won't succeed.

Q: How do you settle on the per-pupil formula?

A: The main thing is that how it's distributed needs to be transparent to everybody. That doesn't mean that everybody will agree with everything, but at least they know. And they know that all the money is out there. I've had people say, “;It wasn't working, so we put more money into it,”; and my question was “;Where did that money come from?”; (The district) was holding back money that should have been there in the first place.

Q: When you talk about aligning the resources for school results, that's everything — salaries, fringe benefits?

A: Exactly.

Q: What about other stuff — maintenance, legal services, food service, that sort of thing?

A: You need a road map of what is still being held centrally and what is being held in the schools. What is being held centrally, then central should be responsible for. And so, for example, if you hold back legal money, and there's nothing wrong with that, then at that point, schools need to know that when it comes to legal services, it'll be provided to them (from the central district budget, not the school's per-pupil allocation).

Q: And with salaries and benefits, is that actual or average?

A. Average. ... When we did this we went with the average, and the reason for that is that nobody ever pretended that a teacher who gets paid twice as much is twice as good or can handle twice as many children. People will say, “;But (some) teachers make more money,”; and I say, “;Yes, and if teachers were paid what they should be paid in an open market, then you go with actual salaries.”; But what teachers are paid is not an open market. It is a negotiated market in which you say all of the teachers in Hawaii as a collective are worth this much money and here's how the money will be spread among the teachers. Mostly people get more money based on training and based on years of service, neither one of which correlates very highly with effectiveness. ...

Q: Do you think “;categorical funding”; budgeted for a specific purpose should go into the weighted student formula?

A: Yes. Some people get so upset about the categorical funding, saying it can't go to the schools because “;We've got mandates to follow.”; I say, then let the schools get to realize what those mandates are and they have to follow them. And you'd be surprised how much more flexibility the schools can come up within those mandates. But that brings into question a whole new dimension, which is that if schools have been delegated the authority for these things, then somebody has to be able to monitor and supervise these schools to see that the mandates are followed.

Q: You obviously have great faith in principals and teachers to manage the money, but you also see the need for some central functions?

A: Oh, definitely. A number of places I've worked, people talked about schools having autonomy, but we talked about it as having delegated authority. You have the authority to do the right things, but there will be a system in place for monitoring and, if necessary, intervention.

For me, it always has been, and it continues to be, about children getting the education they deserve and the public getting the quality for the (tax) money they put in.