Don't show me the money

So here's a link to a blog post about the teachers union in Leominster, Massachusetts turning down an $856,000 grant to improve the district's AP program. The thorny part of the proposal (I guess) would have provided incentive bonuses for AP teachers. I can't blame the blogger for being baffled or repelled by a decision that would result in the rejection of money for education.

Yet I want to set aside the objection about paying teachers at different rates for a moment. That may have been the union's primary concern, and it is worth debating, but it is not my concern. I am more troubled by the drive to make as many students as possible AP. Suppose we create a cash incentive for teachers to recruit AP students. We'll certainly have more students take it (teachers can flatter and cajole to sell a program just as well as any other salesfolk) but will the students be well served? Consider the following.

How many students will be over-recruited, over-programmed, and over stressed? As it is, some kids are driving themselves too hard. Do you know any coaches who lean on kids to participate? Any extra-curricular programs that require long practices, late practices, or early morning practices? Any kids who complain that they don't have time to complete all their obligations but they just can't figure out what to quit? Is it possible that the problem will be exacerbated when we pay teachers by the number of kids in their courses? How much more pressure will be on these kids when the teacher sees them as incentive payments rather than learners?

Maybe the classes are more important, and should take priority, but that's currently in the hands of the kids and their parents. I have heard from many parents (and coaches) that sports or arts are the passion that keeps their kids in school; without them, the student would give up. We can offer an intense academic equivalent in the form of AP classes, but to pay teachers extra for higher enrollment is to incentivize recruitment, leading to the over-commitment of our most ambitious, motivated students. It might teach them how to set limits, but probably only after they crash and burn. It's just a bad idea.

Quadruple E Bonds

Senator Lawrence Bliss (D-SP & CE) emailed a description of the upcoming bond referenda. [Yeah, spellcheck prefers referendums, but that just doesn't seem right to me.] The two-year bond package will total $150 million, about 10% of which will be used for energy upgrades at the state universities, community colleges, and MMA. Almost half of it will go to transportation, and the rest is apportioned to transportation and three of the Es: energy, economy, and environment. The fourth E (education) isn't in this (except for post-secondary energy projects) but neither was it slashed very deeply following the federal stimulus payments. I wish the bonds included an infusion of money for renovations, upgrades, and maybe even construction of existing K-12 schools, but summer has me feeling grateful for what we have rather than grumpy about what we don't.

Senator Bliss points out that the state allows no more than 5% of the total budget to go to debt payment. Under that rule, Maine could increase its debt by a maximum of $500 million; the $150 million proposed is well below that. He further points out -- well, here let me just quote him:

In 2008, according to Moody's Investor Services, Maine ranked 35th lowest in the nation with respect to net tax supported debt per capita, and 36th lowest in the nation with respect to debt as a percent of income. Maine's tax- supported debt burden per capita is $618. The national median is $889.

Reasonable folks may reasonably disagree about what this means. I have no doubt that some of my friends will say that Maine, as a hinterland state, should be 45th or higher in per capita debt. Poor states need to attract wealth but cutting the cost of living and working in them, they'd argue. Other friends have told me that we'll lose a race to the bottom, but that we'll be all the poorer for having raced at all. Cold, poor, cheap, and degraded. None of my friends has a monopoly on wisdom, but in this case I'll side with those who support the bonds. We'll never grow the economy without decent transportation and energy infrastructure, and without a sound economy, we'll never afford to protect the environment, fund education, maintain our public safety and criminal justice systems, and promote our own health and welfare. I hope you'll join me in voting yes on these bonds.

Let's Negotiate

As I think about contract negotiations next year, the warm glow of the budget referendum fades quickly.

Jessica Kaplan will once again head up the negotiations team. I'll serve ex officio. We're soliciting self-nominations for service. I believe the team we have served us well this year, but in keeping with past practice (if not constitutional obligations), the seats on the committee are wide open.

Ideally, we'd love to have two representatives from middle schools and two from elementary schools. I am concerned that the high school not be over-represented. That said, folks from the high school are also welcome to submit their names for consideration.

Wednesday -- Give Blood?

I appreciate Jeanne Crocker's simple and direct instruction regarding the time after the fulfillment of professional responsibilities on Wednesday:

End-of-the-year staff off-site celebrations should remain alcohol-free during school hours on Wednesday.

Last year I made a case for giving blood rather than drinking, at least until after the formal hours of a normal school day. You can read it here if you like, or you can just get the conclusion right here. Please wait to drink alcohol until the regular school day is over. If you really feel that you can't, you probably really need to.

The American Red Cross Blood Services opens at noon and closes at 7:00 PM on Wednesday. It is conveniently located right behind the Great Lost Bear, which is a nice place to get a burger and spinach salad to rebuild your iron level after donating.

Secretary & Treasurer Re-elected

Eighty-one members voted in the election of the SPTA secretary and treasurer. Every ballot had a candidate marked for each race, and the overwhelming winners were the uncontested incumbents, Gail Ryder and Jerry Hunter respectively.

Yet there were three write-in candidates with one vote each -- Jamie Watson, Kate Porter, and Julie Pitt. I share the confidence that their colleagues place in them -- I hope they will consider being candidates for president or vice president next year.

Gail Ryder's transfer to Dyer notwithstanding, the high school has a disproportionate share of the officers in the SPTA. The treasurer of the SPTA has been held by a high school teacher longer than I've taught in the district -- long enough for my hair to turn gray. With the exception of a single but critical term by Scott Patashnik (we are all still in your debt, Scott), one has to go back to Gail's time at Small School to find a president outside SPHS.

We're blessed right now with an exceptionally wise and experienced UniServ Director, Brian Kilroy. MEA is ready and willing to train and support anyone who wants to become an officer in the local. From my own perspective, more experienced folks (especially if they are spread throughout the buildings) will strengthen the organization tremendously. Consider this an early call for presidential and vice presidential candidates for next year.

Thank you, voters. Thank you, colleagues.

The So Po school budget passed, 1452 - 752. The school bond for critical maintenance at the high school and two middle schools passed, 1259 - 961. I am gratified by the solid margins. Let's take a moment to enjoy this success. [pause]

Now that the moment has passed, let's remember what Han told Luke after he shot down his first Imperial fighter: "Great! Don't get cocky, kid."

Surprising Myself

Okay, it is a gorgeous Saturday and I am inside, taking a quick (I hope) break from grading. That's all right, I'll make up for it on some gorgeous weekdays in July. [I'll also take a couple of cross school seminars in July, but enough of that.]

The thing I want to mention is that I just sent a couple emails to state senators, urging them to oppose the charter school bill. I had been fairly ambivalent about this, but a couple of points and a couple of old reservations turned my thinking.

First, MEA has been saying that this is not the time to shift funding from core programs (ie. existing schools). True that. Alternative schools with experimental models would be nice, but taking the money out of existing budgets is not something we can afford in a downturn like this, even if it is only the per-pupil cost following the pupils that leave. The marginal cost of a single student is not as much as the per-pupil cost of EPS, so charter schools still yield a larger than proportional loss to existing public schools.

Second, I don't think the bill is really necessary. When Portland wanted an alt ed school, it opened Casco Bay. When the state wanted a math and science magnet school, it opened MSSM in Limestone. With the RSUs forming, schools in those districts have some capacity to create other programs if they want. Towns that opt out of RSUs need to accept the consequences -- good and bad -- of their decisions. The state can create whatever programs they want and local districts can create schools within the existing laws governing schools. The charter school bill is really just an end run around legislation that is in place to protect students from fools and mountebanks.

Third, speaking of mountebanks, any charter school bill that I ever opened would definitely not include the creation of them by post-secondary institutions. There are good ed profs out there -- I have been fortunate to study with a couple of them -- but there are also a lot of impractical idealists who have read a lot about "learners" but don't seem to know anything about kids.

Fourth (am I allowed a fourth?) I get frustrated at the propaganda that schools' supporters crank out to make it look like their programs are working. The PPH printed a puff piece on Casco Bay High that would have made Goebbels blush. To claim that they are getting better results for less money per pupil when they pay no building costs is a ridiculous comparison. I'll bet we could claim that the PPH is a profitable company too, as long as we didn't include electricity, heat, water, and building maintenance. We'll only see more spurious statistical shenanigans if we start chartering schools all over the state and it will be harder and harder for parents to know where their kids will be best served. [NB. CBHS has done well by the students it serves, but the PPH's effort to paint a pretty picture would irresponsible. Apples to apples, folks.]

I have a lot of sympathy for the public school choice movement. If Deering's 4x2 schedule or Cape's shorter classes appeal more to a SoPo kid than our 80-minute rotating schedule, enrolling out-of-district should be free and easy. I ain't afraid of the competition. But I don't want to enable a lot of bad programs to spring up, draining money from existing schools in order to fund the kooky experiments of educational theorists. If an idea has real juice (like Casco Bay or MSSM) let its supporters pitch it to existing districts, foundations, or the Legislature.

And if you feel like contacting your state senator about the charter school bill, you can begin at this site.