 |
| Superintendent Chip Kimball |
National study compares academic achievement per dollar spent
Redmond, Wash. – A national study of school district efficiency placed Lake Washington School District among those in the state of Washington with high achievement and low cost. Return on Educational Investment: A district-by-district evaluation of U.S. educational productivity gave Lake Washington its highest rating on “Basic ROI,” a measure that compared academic achievement per dollar spent, adjusting for concentrations of low-income, non-English-speaking and special education students.
The Center for American Progress study reviewed standardized test scores and expenditures for school districts with more than 250 students nationwide. Within each state, it placed school districts in three tiers for adjusted cost per student and achievement. Lake Washington was placed in the top tier for high achievement and the top tier for lowest cost.
The achievement scores were based on average scores for state standardized tests in reading and math in fourth, eighth and tenth grades. All data was from 2008, the latest year for which financial information was available nationwide.
The report’s authors encourage caution in interpreting individual district evaluations. The quality of data collected varies from state to state and even district to district. However, these calculations are the first to provide a return on investment benchmark for public schools.
“As a district, we have worked hard to use taxpayer dollars wisely, focusing on where they can make the most difference for student achievement,” noted Dr. Chip Kimball, superintendent. “In their statewide comparison, it shows that we are on the right track.”The study identified specific attributes shared by the most productive school districts nationwide. They included:
· A focus on outcomes
· Strong community relations
· A willingness to make tough choices
· A priority on quality instruction
· Smart use of data
“The five attributes identified in this study are all areas we have been working on,” noted Dr. Kimball. “The budget cuts of the last few years have forced us to make very careful decisions, reviewing all expenditures and programs to make sure we are preserving those that make a difference in student learning. Our improvement processes have focused on quality instruction. And we are developing a new data dashboard to help us keep better track of where learning is happening and where students are struggling, down to the individual student level.”Lake Washington received the second highest rating of the six possible levels on two other rankings, an adjusted return on investment index that uses a regression analysis to predict how much a district should have spent and a predicted efficiency rating, which measures whether a district’s achievement is higher or lower than would be predicted after accounting for its per-pupil spending and concentration of low-income, non-English-speaking and special education students.
LWSD Press Release, 1/26
abridged
Dr. Kimball should read Howard Frazier’s post to the Redmond Blog from Jan 25th. Mr. Frazier’s letter references a study done by the CATO Institute that shows that accurate and reliable information about how public school systems spend money is difficult if not impossible to find. It compares what NCES (National Center for Education Statistics) says was spent with actual spending and finds that NCES spending figures are always less than true costs. The Center for American Progress article cited by Dr. Kimball uses NCES data in its study to show that LWSD is a good value for what is being spent. But wait, didn’t the CATO study say that the NCES data used in the CAP study was unreliable? Rather than argue about the validity of these studies, why doesn’t the Lake Washington School District publish more detailed summaries and reports about how money is being spent. They spend millions and millions of dollars and then publish an annual budget report that barely contains any real numerical data. It’s not clear that the school board has any idea of how and where the money is being spent, either. Most of the time, they’re just given a small summary to read and approve. Try finding the answer to a simple question like, “How much does the district spend on natural gas and electricity each year?” followed by “How much does each school spend on natural gas and electricity?” or “How much did the district spend on maintenance and improvements at Juanita High School in 2009-2010?” Or, “How much of the money earmarked for the gifted programs is actually spent on testing thousands of students who are vying for the 30 or so openings in the Quest program? How much is spent on MSP (formerly WASL) testing each year? What about WebGrader/Standard Scores, enVision Math or the disastrously oblique Career Cruising? If the district can’t tell us where and how money is being spent, how can we (and a think tank on the east coast) evaluate whether the district is being financially responsible?
ReplyDeleteA sobering thought: A group of parents asked for supplemental instruction for students who had failed last year’s 4th grade MSP in math, reading and/or writing and were told that there was no money available. Got that – no money available to help students who couldn’t pass the state’s basic math and reading tests! It’s not what I would call a good return on investment. Would you, Dr. Kimball?