Home

EDUCATION RESOURCES
Educators' Bulletin Board • New Teachers Page • Quality Educator Interactive (QEI)   • 'IDEAS' for Your Classroom • Online Courses • NEA Grants • Our Favorite Links • More
EDUCATION NEWS
Headlines • At the Capitol • Collective Bargaining • Great Schools feature articles • Press Room • OnWEAC In Print • Columns • More
ISSUES
School Funding • 'No Child Left Behind' • Vouchers • QEO law • Teacher Licensing • Health Care • National Board Certification • Tax Gimmicks (TABOR) • More
ONLINE SERVICES
OnWEAC Direct • OnWEAC Store • Share Your Photos • Parents Place • Personal financial services • OnWEAC Savers' Club • More
ASSOCIATION LINKS
UniServs & Locals • ESP • WTCS • Student WEA • WEAC-Retired • Professional Development Academy • WEA Credit Union • Member Benefits • WEA Trust • NEA • WEAC Jobs • Contact Us • More
MEMBERS ONLY SITE
OnWEAC Savers' Club • Cyberlobby • Change My Demographic Information • Leadership • Organizational Documents • More
QUICK CLICKS
What is WEAC? • Great Schools • Calendar of Events • Site Map • Contact Us

SEARCH OnWEAC

Why superintendents want changes in educational funding

Based on responses to this year's questionnaire and previous ones, there appear to be at least four factors that explain why superintendents favor changes in educational funding:

1. Enrollment Decline: Fifty-five percent of districts participating in this study will be losing students in the next few years. Under Wisconsin's revenue caps law, the amount of money a district loses, as a result of declining enrollment, often is disproportionate to the actual savings that are realized. For example, if a district loses two students at each grade level (for a total of 26 students), this does not mean that the district can eliminate one teaching position. In addition, many of the costs of operating a school system, such as heating, transportation, lighting, or maintenance, are not reduced just because there are one or two fewer students in each classroom. In fact, costs in these areas have tended to increase during the past several years.
   
   
2. Decline in Educational Quality: While expectations for public schools are increasing in this state and throughout the country, most superintendents in Wisconsin say that the quality of education in their district has dropped since the revenue caps law went into effect. Furthermore, the majority of superintendents expect quality to be lower in the future.
   
   
3. The Long-Term Effects of Complying with the Revenue Caps: Districts have been complying with the revenue caps since 1993. Although some superintendents report that they have done so with minimum damage to programs and services, most say this is not the case. It also is important to note that the effects of cuts in programs and services since 1993-94 have been cumulative. This has been especially harmful in districts that have had declining enrollments.
   
   
4. Referendum Option is not Endorsed: Most superintendents believe that use of a referendum to exceed the revenue caps is not a realistic choice. Although many say they "appreciate" the option and others say that they have made use of it, nearly all state that it is too time-consuming and burdensome and should not be required in order to meet what they say are reasonable and necessary operating expenses.
   

Enrollment Decline

In previous studies, declining enrollment districts reported more cost-cutting actions than districts with increasing or stable student populations. Furthermore, superintendents from districts that have lost students also have been more critical of the revenue caps than superintendents with stable or increasing student populations. These are important points because more than one-half of superintendents (55%) say that their district is projected to drop in enrollment during the next 4-5 years (see Table 1).

This does not mean that districts with increasing enrollments are immune from the revenue caps. For example, a fast-growing district, requiring new buildings and added staff, also can have serious problems under the revenue caps law. This explains why superintendents from districts experiencing significant growth express concern about the negative effects of the caps.

Table 1
Projected changes in student enrollment over the next four to five years (2)
% of districts	expected change (mean)	expected change (median)
increase	16%	+6.7%	+2.5%
stay about the same	28%	--	--
decrease	55%	-7.9%	-5.5%

The majority of districts now must confront the problem of complying with the revenue caps as student enrollment drops year after year. This probably explains why 73% of all superintendents agree with the statement, "The fiscal viability of my district will be in serious jeopardy if there are no changes in the revenue caps in the next 3-5 years." Superintendents from districts with declining or stable enrollments are even more pessimistic. For these districts, 79% expect their district's fiscal status to worsen (see Table 2).

Table 2
Relationship of enrollment projections and perceptions of future fiscal viability
The future viability of district will be in jeopardy
projected change in enrollment	strongly agree/agree	neutral	strongly disagree/disagree
increase	49%	26%	26%
stay about the same	79%	13%	8%
decrease	79%	14%	7%
averages for all superintendents	73%	16%	11%

When asked about future educational quality, 88% of teachers say that quality will decline over the next several years if the current trends in revenue, enrollment, and student demographics continue. Eighty-eight percent of teachers also say that the overall quality of education in their district has fallen since the revenue caps were implemented.

Decline in Educational Quality

Superintendents were asked several questions about how the revenue caps have affected, or will affect, future educational quality.

When asked what effects the revenue caps have had on their district's educational quality, 71% say they have been negative. Likewise, when asked about future educational quality, 81% say that they expect quality to drop.(3) In districts projected to lose students, 89% report that quality will decline. Even in the 44 districts where enrollment is expected to increase, 41% of superintendents project a decline in quality (see Table 3).

Table 3
Relationship of enrollment projects and perceptions of educational quality
projected change in enrollment	percent who say future quality will be lower
increase	41%
stay about the same	76%
decrease	89%
averages for all superintendents	81%

Hiring and Retaining Staff

Teachers were asked how likely they were to apply for a school administrative position in the next three-to- five years. Among all teachers, only 7% indicate that they are "very likely" or "likely" to do so. In contrast, eighty-seven percent say "not too likely" or "not likely at all." Among teachers younger than 45, 11% say "very likely" or "likely," compared with 79% who say "not too likely" or "not likely at all."

Superintendents also express concerns about their district's current capacity to hire and retain quality staff. Fifty-five percent say that the revenue controls have made it more difficult to hire and retain quality teachers. Forty-two percent say the same about administrators, compared with 39% for substitutes and 35% for educational support professionals. Only two administrators (1%) say the effects have been "positive" (see Table 4).

Table 4
Effects of the revenue controls on hiring and retaining quality staff
job classification	very positive/ positive	no difference	very negative/ negative	don't know
administrators	1%	55%	42%	1%
teachers	1%	42%	55%	1%
substitutes	1%	60%	39%	1%
ESP	1%	63%	35%	1%

Teachers were asked if they would go into teaching again based on what they know about the revenue controls, the QEO, and other factors. Forty-one percent say yes, compared with 40% who say they would not. Nineteen percent are uncertain. When asked how long they will continue to teach, 18% say they will "continue teaching unless something better comes along." An additional 5% say they "plan to leave teaching as soon as I [they] can." Interestingly, the attitude about staying in teaching is unrelated to the age of the respondents. Seventy-six percent of educational support staff say that the revenue caps have had a negative effect on the morale. In addition, 89% say that support professionals are "very" or "somewhat" concerned about the impact of the revenue caps on pay and benefits.

When asked how the revenue caps might affect their district's future capacity to hire and retain quality teachers, 88% of superintendents say the effects will be "negative" or "very negative." This is a sobering figure given that about one-third of Wisconsin's teachers are expected to retire during the next decade.

The Long Term Effects of Complying with the Revenue Caps

Beginning with the 1993-94 school year, districts have been required to make cuts in programs or services in order to comply with the revenue caps. Superintendents were given a list of programs and services and asked to indicate if they had made cuts in any of them during the 2000-2001 school year. If a cut was made, they then were asked to evaluate the effect of the cut, using a five-point scale ranging from "Very Negative" to "Very Positive." With this format, it is possible to distinguish between cuts in programs or services that are relatively minor, versus cuts that have a significant positive or negative effect.

Table 5 shows the percent of districts making cuts in each of 27 areas during 2000-2001. The list is in rank-order (column one), based on the percent of districts reporting action. The next six columns show the percent of superintendents saying the actions were "Very Negative," "Negative" "Neutral," "Positive," "Very Positive," or "DK" (Don't Know).

Table 5
Effects of the revenue caps on 27 district programs and services
2000-01 school year
	Of those taking action, the % who say it was
	% taking action	very neg	neg	no diff	posit	very posit	DK
Spent less for improvements of buildings andgrounds	77	18	61	18	01	02	--
Spent less for maintenance of buildings and grounds	75	18	57	22	02	02	--
Delayed/reduced purchase of computers, other technology	73	19	50	25	04	02	01
Offered fewer staff development opportunities for teachers	72	18	48	29	04	01	01
Delayed/reduced purchase of curricular materials	70	19	50	26	05	01	--
Delayed building maintenance or improvement projects	69	19	60	19	02	01	--
Reduced purchase of consumable supplies, such as paper	66	12	39	42	06	01	01
Increased administrator workload	66	24	53	21	02	01	01
Delayed hiring of new staff	64	17	47	32	03	01	--
Did not replace departing staff	61	14	48	31	04	01	02
Offered fewer field trips for students	60	10	48	38	02	01	01
Increased student fees	59	14	39	45	01	01	01
Used fund balance to support budget	57	31	30	34	02	02	01
Increased teacher workload	56	15	46	36	01	01	01
Increased class sizes	56	20	46	28	05	01	01
Laid off teacher aides or other support staff	54	28	35	32	03	01	--
Reduced programs for gifted and talented students	53	21	31	47	01	01	--
Laid off teachers	50	29	26	42	02	01	01
Offered fewer courses	49	12	34	53	01	01	--
Reduced programs for students who are at risk	48	17	27	51	04	02	--
Reduced transportation services for students	48	15	23	57	04	02	--
Reduced extracurricular programs	46	12	24	60	03	01	01
Reduced counseling or similar services	45	19	22	55	03	01	01
Reduced summer school programs	43	12	22	58	06	01	02
Laid off administrators/supervisors	42	22	13	58	04	01	02
Reduced number of academic courses offered to students	41	04	27	66	01	02	--
Reduced courses in art, music, theater, band, etc.	38	04	20	73	01	01	01

Forty-one percent of educational support staff say that there were "many" or "some" significant building or maintenance needs in their district that were not being met. Furthermore, 33% say that the revenue caps have "hindered the capacity of support staff to do their jobs well."

Last year the typical district made cuts in approximately 15 areas. However, there were five areas in which 70% or more of superintendents say they had taken action. For these five, an average of 71% of superintendents report that the effects were "very negative" or "negative." The top five areas are listed below:

• spent less for improvements of building and grounds (77% of districts)
  
• spent less for maintenance of buildings and grounds (75%)
  
• delayed/reduced purchase of computers and other technology (73%)
  
• offered fewer staff development opportunities for teachers (72%)
  
• delayed, reduced purchase of curricular materials (70%)

Teachers were asked to indicate whether or not there had been improvement in the recent years in 13 features of the school environment, educational program, or condition of teaching. Teachers report improvements in two areas: number of computers and access to private telephones. In six of thirteen areas, more than one-fourth say that conditions have worsened: · enough quality staff development opportunities (27%) · enough quality textbooks and other materials (28%) · reasonable number of students to evaluate (grade) (28%) · adequate resources/programs for special needs students (32%) · adequate resources/programs for regular education students (37%) · adequate resources/programs for gifted and talented students (39%)

Although cuts in the remaining 22 programs or services are not as large as those listed above, many relate directly to the heart of the educational program.(4) These include:

• increased class sizes (56% of districts)
  
• reductions in programs for gifted and talented students (53%)
  
• fewer courses offered (49%)
  
• reduced programs for at-risk youth (48%)
  
• reduced extracurricular programs (46%)
  
• reduced counseling or similar services (45%)
  
• reduced number of academic courses (41%)
  
• reduced courses in art, music, theater, and band (38%)
  

Referendum Option is not Endorsed

The law allows districts to exceed the revenue caps by passing a referendum. Although 48% of superintendents report that they may try to pass a referendum in the next two or three years in order to pay for operating expenses, opinions of superintendents about this option are not very positive. Their responses fall into four distinct categories, ranging from critical to positive; most comments are critical.

There are 151 comments that describe the referendum option as unworkable or difficult to achieve. Many superintendents make reference to the difficulty of passing a referendum, often stating that it is an unreasonable or ineffective way to meet necessary operating expenses. Others speak of the time and effort required for a referendum, the difficulty of getting taxpayers to understand school fiscal problems, and the difficulty of getting adults without children to vote in favor of school taxes, when this is the only tax for which people have the opportunity to vote.(5) There are an additional 30 comments expressing the opinion that school boards should have more flexibility and control over school finances.

During the 2000-2001 school year, teachers report spending an average of $357 of their own money for school supplies and other school materials. In response to the same question, educational support staff say they spent an average of $70.

There are 53 statements that are somewhat more positive. Of this number, 26 express an opinion along the following lines: "The referendum option provides the possibility of relief, so in this sense it's better than nothing." However, the superintendents who express these words also say that a referendum is not a good way for schools to fund programs and services. Finally, there are 23 comments that offer direct support for the referendum option, or state that the policy has personally benefited their district.

-------------

(2) The mean value is the arithmetic average, whereas the median is the half-way point in a distribution (half above and below the value).

(3) Superintendents were given the following question: "Assume that the overall educational quality in your district is the number '8' on a ten point scale (with 10 being the highest). Given the current and projected trends in revenues, enrollment, and student demographics, what number do you think will describe the quality of education in 2006?"

(4) In their written comments asking them to list specific classes, programs, or services that have been eliminated or reduced, superintendents offered the following:

• 47 superintendents say there were reductions in miscellaneous classes including literature, business, technology, drivers' education, field trips, and summer school.
  
• 43 superintendents reported reductions in administrative or support staff, including aides, guidance, reading specialists, social workers, audio visual coordinators, and librarians.
  
• 22 reported reductions in advanced placement and gifted and talented programs or classes.
  
• 19 respondents say that there were cuts in extracurricular activities, sports, theatre, and elementary music and art.
  
• 11 persons reported reductions in alternative education or at-risk programs.
  
• 8 superintendents wrote about reductions in science, math, physics and biology classes.
  
• 8 superintendents say that they had eliminated or reduced classes in the areas of family and consumer education.
  
• 7 superintendents say there had been reductions in foreign languages.

(5) Eighty-seven percent of superintendents disagreed with the statement, "The average citizen in my community has a good understanding of the way the revenue caps are affecting the local schools."