Join the conversation

Earlier today, teacher/blogger Ken Bernstein offered his perspective of the current financial crisis, its impact on the nation's schools, and Congressional debate over the stimulus package that, after several iterations, seems to speeding towards adoption.

Now, Anthony Cody offers his account of the financial meltdown's effects on a single state, district and school.

Cody is a National Board Certified Teacher and secondary science coach in the Oakland CA city schools. He writes about education policy regularly at his blog “Living in Dialogue,” hosted at the Teacher Magazine website.

Anthony is a member of the Teacher Leaders Network and co-organizer of Accomplished California Teachers (ACT), a virtual network aimed at developing teacher leadership and influencing educational policy locally and at the state level.

When we hear about budget crises these days, the numbers are so immense that we lose track of their meaning where it counts, in the classrooms. California’s budget is up in the air, but the latest proposals from the Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, call for cuts of $10 billion, on top of a $3.5 billion cut already imposed earlier this year.

If California were a country, it would have the 8th largest economy in the world. However, even before its latest financial crisis, the state lagged in spending on education, recently dropping to 47th place in the US, adjusted for cost of living. (In absolute dollar terms, California falls at 25th place.) The proposed cuts are likely to drop us to dead last, subtracting another $1,600 per pupil – bringing us down to an average annual spending level of about $10,000 per pupil.

To see how this hits us on the ground, let’s take a look at one school in the Oakland Unified School District. Roosevelt Middle School is in the heart of the San Antonio neighborhood, halfway between Chinatown and the mostly Latino Fruitvale district. This is a very diverse community. Times have been tough here for a while, and foreclosed homes are for sale on many blocks. This school is a refuge for its students. After-school programs make it possible for students to go on bicycle trips or computer expeditions, and take part in art classes. Teachers stay late to tutor the students, many of whom are learning English.

This week I heard from William Alexander, one of Roosevelt’s students. He spoke out because he is concerned about how the crisis will affect him and his friends. He said “Education is the most important thing in kids’ lives. We dream about our future – that is what we think about before we go to sleep at night. We might want to be an artist, or a musician, or an architect. Kids need music classes to learn to play, art classes to learn to draw. How will they learn these things if everything is cut?”

William’s school is already affected by the meager funding that education receives in California. The turnover rate for Roosevelt’s teachers last year was 22%. More than a fifth of the teachers at his school were brand new this fall – and that is typical in Oakland. In fact, out of 2,195 teachers in the District, about 600 are in their first few years of teaching. These schools are already in crisis. How will students fare with even less opportunity to learn?

William also has reason to worry about art, music and after-school programs. To soften the blow of the budget cuts, the Governor is proposing fiscal “flexibility” for school districts. That means state appropriations of $55 million for GATE programs, $800 million for adult education, and $1.3 billion for k-3 class size reduction will be released to districts to spend as they like. Given proposed budget reductions, all of these programs will have to be cut. Class sizes will jump to more than 30, and more than 100,000 California teachers could be laid off.

For the past 30 years, the prevailing philosophy among some political leaders has been to cut taxes when times are good, because there is “extra” revenue, and to cut education when times are bad, because we must “live within our means.” In California this began in 1978 with Proposition 13, which reduced property taxes by an average of 57%, and put in place the requirement that any increase in local taxes must be passed by a two-thirds majority of voters. Statewide, California voters passed Proposition 98 a decade later to guarantee a certain proportion of state revenues to the schools. But when state finances hit shortfalls, school funding is cut nonetheless.

In more affluent communities like Piedmont, Palo Alto and Berkeley, voters have approved generous local property tax increases that go to their schools. People living in these areas can see the difference their tax dollars are making. And while it’s true that voters in Oakland have passed such measures as well, our community has not had the resources to match the school tax support provided by their wealthier neighbors.

Polls indicate that voters across California want education cut last. But it remains to be seen if there is a public willingness to find revenues to support the schools. Governor Schwarzenegger was elected on the basis of his promise to roll back vehicle registration fees, which subsequently cost the state billions in revenue. The California Teachers Association is prepared to test public support with a new initiative to boost state sales tax by 1%, the proceeds to go to schools and colleges.

The latest stimulus package from Washington may result in some part of this year’s budget shortfall being covered. If California schools get as much as $10 billion, that could just about make up for the proposed cuts for the coming year. That might allow us to hold our national spot as 47th in education spending for another year. But if structural solutions are not found to provide California schools with a steady source of funding that keeps up with the true costs of educating our children, students like William Alexander are going to need to learn to be architects or musicians some other way.