New Opening for School Vouchers
November 13, 2009Will Democrats and the state’s most powerful teachers union inadvertently bring school vouchers to Michigan? Could these historic protectors of Michigan public education ultimately drag it under?
How ironic and tragic if the Michigan Education Association (MEA), Democratic lawmakers, Governor Granholm, a dozen or so Republicans backed by the MEA, and a busload of complacent school superintendents and school boards ultimately helped bring vouchers to Michigan’s public schools.
How could that happen?
The answer is simple. Taxpayers are fed up.
Michigan residents, who are experiencing the pain of disruptive and transformational change, expect high quality education and sensible action by our governor and legislators to put teaching, learning and children ahead of power, control and politics. They are also quite aware how change is impacting them and how the system is protecting the status quo.
When I served as state superintendent of schools, I sounded the alarm in 2004 that our current system of funding schools was unsustainable in the face of the sharply rising costs of health care, pensions and the large number of small school districts. Shortly thereafter, I was forced out of the position by Gov. Granholm, assisted by a major shove from the MEA.
If action had been taken when I recommended change, Michigan schools could have saved an estimated $4.5 billion to be invested in 21st century education initiatives by now (see the report: Structural Issues Surrounding Michigan School Funding in the 21st Century).
Fast forward to 2009 and House Speaker Andy Dillon’s ambitious proposal to bundle all public employee health care plans into one, with the potential to save up to $1 billion per year. His bold plan prompted MEA officials to immediately “declare war” on his efforts and him.
Even if Speaker Dillon’s savings estimates are off by 50 percent, we are still talking about significant money that could and should be redirected to the classroom.
There is a desperate need for sensible reforms in government at all levels and specifically in our schools.
The foundation on which our public infrastructure was built, the auto industry, has been eroding for two decades and has imploded in the last year. What we once had is now gone. We have a new reality of less revenue to support what we have had in the past. Changes need to be made, and have been denied for too long, to adjust to this new reality.
Our public schools cannot be, and are not, immune to these new realities. We must control rising health care benefits and pensions, and share services and consolidate local districts.
The actions by the MEA, standing in the way of sensible reforms and browbeating and cajoling legislators, local school boards and superintendents in light of Michigan’s new economic realities, will ultimately be self defeating. The MEA may win the battle — but it is at great risk of losing the war.
Vouchers
Michigan’s constitution prohibits using government tax support for private or religious schools.In 2000 a voucher initiative was put on the statewide ballot. Opponents, led by the MEA and local school boards and using the public school establishment as foot soldiers, defeated this assault by a margin of 69-31 percent. It was a sharp setback to pro-voucher forces, and many thought it was the final nail in its coffin. Not necessarily so. That was then, this is now.
In November 2010, Michigan voters will be asked if they wish to hold a constitutional convention and rewrite the existing state constitution. Polls show there is massive dissatisfaction, frustration and anger that the voters feel toward Lansing, and they just might take the opportunity presented by a con-con question to force change.
The Detroit News recently quoted Lt. Gov. John Cherry as saying, “People are not happy with the capacity of state government to solve problems right now. … I don’t think the votes are there” to enact reforms.
Sadly, the lieutenant governor is right and the taxpayers may take matters into their own hands — and that ought to concern all the special interests in the halls of the Capitol. When the “I’m mad as hell and not going to take it anymore” crowd gets rolling, major change may be in store for Lansing.
The public understands that education matters and is willing to invest in results. However, when they see data from the national ACT college admission test that show Michigan ranks 42nd among the 50 states on the composite score (49th on English, 44th on math, 49th on reading, 41st on science), they question whether the current system is taking us where we need to go to be competitive in the global economy (see the scores).
This, coupled with the resistance to sensible change, is a prescription for a revised voucher initiative or some other massive assault on public education. The status quo is quickly disappearing as a sensible option.
Michigan is in stiff competition to receive an estimated $600 million from President Obama’s “Race to the Top” federal education funding initiative. It is one of the new president’s most innovative tools to spur states to overhaul the change-resistant school culture and prepare our kids for a hyper-competitive economy.
Without serious structural changes that push more of Michigan’s existing resources to the classroom, our state will be hard pressed to demonstrate that it is committed to change and deserving of these new, targeted stimulus investments.
Michigan has until the end of this year to submit its application to the feds. How do we stand out among the states when we are content to muddle along? When other states are raising their innovative sails high, it appears, once again, that Michigan is content to drop anchor in the past.
Our students will confront a rapidly changing, disruptive, information and technologically driven global economy that requires innovation, creativity and talent. Are we investing our limited state resources in ways that will ensure they are prepared for this future? The answer, under the current power structure in Michigan, is a resounding NO!
The rest of the world is not sitting idly by waiting for us to get our act together. At a time when ideas and work can, and do, effortlessly move around the globe, the states and nations that get their system of education right will prosper in the 21st century. We are on the wrong track in Michigan.
Death Spiral
Michigan is caught up in a perfect storm of losing people, businesses and the taxes they pay. Michigan gets less populated, less educated, and poorer because of people and business fleeing our state.Since 2001, out-migration has cost Michigan 465,000 people, the equivalent of half the population of Detroit. The rate of exodus, one of the worst in the nation, is accelerating. Nearly 109,000 more people left Michigan last year than moved in. It is reported that our state loses a family every 12 minutes, and the families who are leaving are the people the state desperately needs to kick-start our economic rebound — young, well-educated, high-income earners.
It is change or die time for Michigan schools. Many school boards and administrators have been conspirators with the MEA to avoid change. As long as money could be extracted from taxpayers via local millage votes prior to Proposal A in 1994, and from the governor and state legislature ever since, everyone has been content to maintain a virtual state of homeostasis.
Few organizations relish change, and they will go to great lengths to avoid facing the consequences. Clearly, this has been the case with public education in Michigan.
Our state continues to lose jobs in roaring tsunamis and replace them in teardrops. Even if our economy improves dramatically, we simply cannot afford the cost structure under our current system of public education.
Covering the rising cost of pensions and health care for our schools would require up to a half-billion-dollar investment per year ($300 per student x 1.7 million students) for the foreseeable future. This leaves no money for schools to invest in programs and services that will prepare our students for the future. Schools have not seen an increase of this magnitude for years; hence, local superintendents and school boards have become “Pac Man,” gobbling up or cutting other school functions to pay for escalating health care and pension costs. This is unsustainable. The governor and legislature should either have the political courage to adequately fund the status quo or make the necessary changes.
There have been countless studies and recommendations from distinguished organizations to address the structural funding crisis facing our schools, including: The Center For Michigan (http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/), Business Leaders for Michigan (formerly Detroit Renaissance) (www.businessleadersformichigan.com), Citizens Research Council (www.crcmich.org), Mackinac Center (www.mackinac.org) and others. In addition, Granholm appointed a bipartisan Emergency Financial Advisory Panel, co-chaired by former governors William Milliken and James Blanchard and stacked with knowledgeable Lansing insiders, that offered recommendations on how best to avoid ongoing budget crises like Michigan is experiencing now. Granholm never acted on her panel’s recommendations.
Each of these groups spells out ways for Michigan to make sensible changes while fairly supporting its teachers and public schools that are vital to our economic rebound and prosperity. The time for studies, delays, debates and talking is over. We need the governor and legislators to act.
The MEA has considerable clout in Lansing. It underwrites Democrats and Republicans alike and is calling in its chits to prevent change.
As an example, newly elected state senator and former state representative Mike Nofs has been a long-time supporter of the MEA and was endorsed by the MEA in his recent successful special election Senate bid. Do you think he’s likely to vote against the MEA’s and his interests in the future?
At a time when Michigan and the schools the taxpayers support demand adaptability, creativity, flexibility, innovation, problem solving and versatility, what we have from the MEA and the politicians they have supported is rigidity, conformity, protectionism and standing pat for the status quo.
Those who profess to support public education should take notice: “if you give people a choice … they may take it.”
New 3 Rs
Historically, we spoke about the 3 Rs of education: Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic. We need the new 3 Rs in Michigan education: Reform, Restructure and Reinvent.There should be no agreement on the fourth new R — Revenue/taxes — until these structural changes are well underway.
Suggesting such ideas has brought the wrath of the MEA down on my head, Speaker Dillon’s and others who dare to speak truth to power.
Many public schools across the state are financially wobbly today due to the strain of inadequate state funding that has not, and cannot, keep pace with rising health care and pension costs, especially when combined with limited or declining enrollment coupled with the inaction to consolidate school districts.
To make matters worse, the state continues to take in less sales tax revenue than projected, so dollars for the school aid fund will be hundreds of millions short as the new year begins.
To add insult to injury, the current Democratic plan to slap a Band-Aid on the current school-funding crisis by tapping the federal stimulus money set aside for next fiscal year is simply postponing the day of reckoning.
Further, the governor’s plan to tax loose tobacco, bottled water and close tax loopholes is anemic, at best, and will not raise enough revenue to stop the bleeding. It is the equivalent of plugging the hole in the Titanic with a wine cork. Even if these “revenue enhancements” are enacted, school funding will remain in crisis.
While some may doubt our system of public education could topple, it is increasingly unstable, unbalanced and ultimately unsustainable unless bold structural changes are made to alter its present course.
This will require the type of real change and leadership from the governor, legislature and state school board that has been lacking to date.
The MEA is intent on not altering course and will attack change advocates as anti-Democrat, anti-teacher and anti-labor. I am none of the above. In fact, I was a youth advocate long before becoming a Democrat. I support these changes because doing nothing will bankrupt our schools and state and drag our children under in the process.
As the health care, pension and school district consolidation (and other) reform issues are debated in the coming months, lawmakers need to ask themselves — and be asked by taxpayers — who’s side are you on? Will they stand up for the teachers union and the status quo or take a stand for our children and the collective future of our state?
It would be sad as well as ironic if those professing to support our public schools and children ended up destroying both.
Inaction has consequences, too. If backed into a corner, voters will choose change.
Tom Watkins is an education and business consultant in the U.S. and China and served as Michigan’s state superintendent of schools from 2001-2005. His “Bridge to China” cover story appeared in Dome in September.
35 responses so far ↓
1 Jack Finn // Nov 13, 2009 at 7:24 am
Tom, IF the Mackinac Center is a responsible entity for educational studies, I think your brain/body were taken over by aliens, like the TV sequel series, “V”! Tom, your Blanchard roots have been totally excised from you!
2 Dave Lambert // Nov 13, 2009 at 8:29 am
Excellent column. It illustrates what is known as “rent-seeking.”
3 Beverly Williams // Nov 13, 2009 at 8:32 am
I didn’t support school vouchers then. I might consider it now. You’re right about at least one thing: throwing money at schools is NOT the answer. The poor showing of Michigan students on standardized testing is pathetic. I’d say no more school funds for any Michigan school until ALL Michigan students can read well, comprehend what they read, write/spell, and perform basic math well enough to ace these testing measures. If they can’t, then maybe our teachers AREN’T worth their salaries.
4 Mark Bertler // Nov 13, 2009 at 9:23 am
Perhaps we need to operationalize the meaning of public servant and use Michigan’s public servant corps as the core of health and pension reform.
Our large group of employed, relatively healthy and educated public servants need to take a big step back and come to understand that they have the opportunity to drive reform or be run over by it.
5 Mike Reno // Nov 13, 2009 at 9:59 am
Outstanding points, Tom.
Michigan’s public education system needs to hit the RESET button.
I serve on a school board. The lack of depth is appalling. There is no accountability.
Quite frankly, there is little desire to explore the the challenges we face, and no effort to craft solutions.
Vouchers might just be the wakeup call that local school boards need.
6 Leroy Stephens // Nov 13, 2009 at 10:05 am
We must do what is necessary to secure quality education for our children. It is a shame that politics has affected that simple request. Tom you hit it right on the head. Sometimes we must do unpopular things in order to stay above water and if stepping on toes is what it takes then so be it.
7 david doyle // Nov 13, 2009 at 10:06 am
Tom Waskins has been a voice of reason , speaking out on this very issue for years. I recall the report he wrote in 2005 — at personal sacrifice as he lost his job for telling the truth – that state funding for schools was a mirage – like the emperor with no clothes.
It’s time for the educational community to realize things have changed. They need to get up with the times.
While many in Lansing continue to cling to the past, Watkins again offers creative solutions.. IS ANYONE LISTENING!
8 Frances // Nov 13, 2009 at 10:11 am
Nice column. I’m mad as hell at the numbers representing our Michigan students ACT college admission test. Modification Modification Modification is all I have to say!
9 William L. Coale, Ph.D. // Nov 13, 2009 at 11:17 am
Tom Watkins makes a number of valid points. The sad truth is that the Michigan leadership repeatedly fails to move in a timely and strategic manner. This has been evidenced by the ridiculously slow budget adoptions that have plagued the state in recent years. Band-aid fixes have become the norm, and the vision for the state appears to be heavily blurred by political cataracts. People are quick to blame Proposal A (which provided a significant leveling of the funding field for schools across the state), rather than take a look at hard truths. Lacking courage, legislators and school board members have made poor economic decisions, resulting in structural funding issues that will never be solved without significant reform. I would propose a Michigan educational summit of change agents from education/policy/finance/legislature, inviting the MEA and AFT to the table, in a role clearly defined for all participants as, “work with us in the interest of students and fiscal responsibility, or leave the room.” In all likelihood, the same conversations/excuses will be heard a year from now, when the problem will undoubtedly be much worse, absent decisive action now. It is sad that reform in Michigan often occurs only during time of crisis, so I hold hope that the current disastrous situation might actually bring about true reform…but only if the right people are at the table, and the goal is made crystal clear: Michigan must clean up its educational act, with a laser-beam focus on providing ALL students with an education that will provide them with the ability to achieve success in our global economy.
10 Mike Reno // Nov 13, 2009 at 11:55 am
The idea of a summit is intriguing, but I’m trying to picture the invite list.
Superintendents? Most of them are part of the problem.
School Boards? Maybe 5% of them could be considered “agents of change”.
Legislators? They were accurately described recently as a “Beehive of inactivity”
The State Board of Ed? Does Michigan have one? Really?
The MEA? Don’t they already run the show anyway? Why would they want to share control?
I’d be more in favor of putting Flannigan and Robert Bobb in a room together and letting them hammer it out. Seriously.
Cynical, I know, but after operating on the inside for 5 1/2 years, it’s hard to picture this institution reforming itself. That is, unless it faces a near-death experience. Then, like an alchololic (or General Motors), they might finally awaken to the depth of their troubles.
11 William L. Coale, Ph.D. // Nov 13, 2009 at 12:05 pm
It would be difficult to fix from the inside, to be sure. Involvement of “outsiders” who are critical thinkers would be vital to the process!
12 Jim Brazier // Nov 13, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Watkins does not proprose any radical new way of paying for schools or improving school performance. Support for Dillon’s proposal cannot really count as school reform. It would deprive teachers the right to collectively bargain over insurance plans in favor a standrad state-mandated plan. Sacrificing employee compensation in order to fund schools would penurize teachers as public sector employees. How would this make teaching more attractive as a profession? Finding recession-proof revenue sources is just not possible; a sliding tax scale for different economic circumstances is one possible solution. The \Race to the Top\ educational improvement grant seeks experimentation to find the right formula for manufacturing workers of the future to meet the perceived need of far greater global competition. Regional variations in economic activity will cause migration from areas of decline to areas of higher activity. While improvement in our educational system is certainly sought, the beneficiaries of such improvement will be among those most likely to migrate. Certainly this should function as a reason to select Michigan as a grant recipient since benefits will go more to the nation instead of the state. A national recession should require national solutions for the eductation funding crisis. It will, however, not happen since states and localities have claimed propietary rights over educational policy. States will have to surrender more control over educational policy to reach national aims. There should be a national educational tax, such as a national sales tax, for assisting the nation in reaching national educational goals.
13 dschroeter // Nov 13, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I couldn’t agree more Tom! Rome is burning the emperors are fiddiling away. Our system is not working and it is unfixable in it’s current structure. Somebody needs to show some leadership. Local based bonds and millages are not the solution and will continue to be voted down as the economy struggles.
14 Dr. John Telford // Nov 14, 2009 at 5:06 am
Tom’s article is right on. If the powers-that-be had spent more time listening to him (and to me), and had they been more inclined to retain our services, they might not be in the fix they’re in now–both locally (Detroit schools) and statewide. I explore these problems in-depth in my memoir on the decline of the Detroit schools, A Life on the RUN (www.alifeontherun.com).
15 Greg Olszta // Nov 14, 2009 at 6:31 am
General dissatisfaction with our public schools could certainly lead to a successful initiative to rewrite the constitution to permit vouchers. This could be defused, in part, by expansion of charter public schools, which would also assist Michigan’s eligibility for federal “Race to the Top” funds and provide parents with some of the additional education options they are demanding. Can the Michigan Legislature, mired in its ongoing political battles at the expense of children, act in time to do this? Highly questionable. And that doesn’t even begin to address the structural financing problems Tom Watkins articulates so well above. Given the status quo and projected continued declining revenues for the state aid fund, there will soon be nothing left over for the classroom and instruction anyway, after the (few remaining) teachers are paid, pension payments made and administrators compensated.
16 Ken Beedle // Nov 14, 2009 at 6:48 am
The voice crying in the wilderness. I admire your reasoning but it falls on deaf ears and self-interest
17 William Myles Arnold // Nov 14, 2009 at 10:28 am
Another erudite and informed article by one of Michigan’s most informed.
18 Ben Starling III // Nov 14, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Excellent article, but I suspect the policy makers will reject as it does not strengthen union leaders.
All of the United States, school districts are quickly realizing that unions have tied their hands and are leaving them with little room to take control of failing schools and aid children most at risk.
It is time everyone takes one step back and reflects on what is best for the students, not the union, not the tenured teachers, and certainly not a faltering Education Department.
19 B. Nadir // Nov 14, 2009 at 4:15 pm
The author is right on. The realities of Michigan’s ranking on the ACT college admission test, that Detroit Public Schools have close to the worst test scores in the nation and the fact that we allow this to go on without any semblance of a strategic plan in place that would indicate any intention of changing the status quo is nothing short of horrific. The governor’s press secretary states in MIRS that the governor’s position on the Race to the Top federal funding is to “go for it.” What a frightening disconnect from present reality and the governor’s steadfast resistance to moving forward in our desperate need for educational reform. In case anyone in Lansing hasn’t been listening, the average Michigan taxpayor is furious and we look forward to having a choice. I say bring on the con-con – it seems to be our best hope.
20 sherry Xu // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:33 am
Not everyone likes to change, but changing means surviving and realigning.It can be stressful and painful. That is happening all the time. Our schools have to rethink the education system, like how many years that Federal and state can really support and provide to students, it maybe EC-12, or EC-8, etc.
The public students do not pay for their textbooks and that may also need change, when they feel they are paying for education and books and knowlege that they must master, they pay more attention and more seriously.
American’s students lost the interest in a lot foundation knowledge, not just math, sicence, language arts; there is no motivation for them to study hard since they used to think they were number 1 in the world. But, now maybe in debt number 1 in the world also. That is really count on the education and its system can prepare these students for college. Not just HS graduates.
God bless American.
But, still we need put our actions and make things better in the end.
21 Sandra Cummnings // Nov 16, 2009 at 9:38 am
Interesting (and self-serving) comments from our former Superintendent of Public Schools. The implication of the article seems to be that more parental choice in education (through vouchers or even tax credits) would be bad. Mr Watkins, for all of his appearance of being “cutting edge” when it comes to public policy, simply falls back into the tired old presumption that all of the ills of the world can be solved by more funding for public education. Parental choice in education in Michigan is long overdue, notwithstanding the current economic crisis. Other states have seen the light and support faith-based and private education as way to lift up those trapped in struggling school districts. Michigan needs to amend its archaic Constitution barring indirect aid to non-public schools.
22 Mike Reno // Nov 16, 2009 at 2:00 pm
The first paragraph — the hook — suggests that the MEA might inadvertantly be the catalyst to bring vouchers to Michigan. It is something THEY dislike… I didn’t see anything from Tom that suggests they are bad (or good, for that matter).
I also don’t see anything in the article that advocates for tax increases.
Sandra… I’m not sure why you are critical of Tom in your post… can you be more specific?
23 williamsnewjournal | New Opening For School Vouchers | Domemagazine.Com // Nov 18, 2009 at 4:25 am
[...] However, when they see data from the national ACT college admission test that show Michigan ranks 42nd among the 50 states on the composite score (49th on English, 44th on math, 49th on reading, 41st on science), they question whether the …. Tom Watkins makes a number of valid points. The sad truth is that the Michigan leadership repeatedly fails to move in a timely and strategic manner. This has been evidenced by the ridiculously slow budget adoptions that have plagued …Continue [...]
24 John Scott // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:48 am
A fine piece, as far as it goes. But as long as calls for “reform” remain abstract, there will always be the suspicion that something nefarious, like vouchers themselves, is afoot. You can complain all you want about the futility of “throwing money at the schools,” but it remains true that the most pressing problem facing the schools, and preventing an effective response to low student performance, is lack of money. Why do you think class sizes are so scandalously high and rising? That’s uniformly the principal “structural” problem in public education today, especially in problem districts like Detroit, Flint, Lansing, etc.
25 maryann cristof // Nov 22, 2009 at 6:20 am
Whether it be hind-sight or insight, Mr. Watkins presents his case with factsfactsfacts. His cause is true belief in making the most of our children’s education. Bravo!
26 Susan Collet // Nov 23, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Tom’s article in AnnArbor.com, 11/22/2009 titled “We need to change education in Michigan” was on target. The points under the heading “Let’s get radical” were very reasonable:
Eliminate the Sr year of high school, Allow a 3 instead of 4 year bachelors college degree, maximize technology and allow e-learning in K-12, consolidate school districts, cut college tuition for high-job-demand degrees while increasing tuition for low-job-demand degrees.
How do reforms like this happen?
(Certainly not by throwing more money at an inefficient system… )
27 John Austin // Nov 30, 2009 at 5:43 pm
We read with concern Tom Watkins’ recounting of how he lost his job as Michigan’s Superintendent of Public Instruction in the recent edition of Dome Magazine. His assessment does not match the facts. In early 2005, a bi-partisan majority of State Board of Education members – and the Governor – had grown impatient with his inability to enact consensus-driven state and federal education reforms. The Board decided that Michigan needed new and stronger leadership in this critical position, and moved forward to find it.
The job of the State Superintendent is complex: skillful administrator, succinct communicator, thoughtful gubernatorial advisor and executor of State Board of Education decisions. None of us who worked with Tom wish him ill. Whether we agree with his positions or not, we appreciate his ongoing efforts to improve K-16 education. However, rewriting this history serves no reasonable purpose at a time of high risk for Michigan’s educational future.
John Austin
Vice-President, Michigan State Board of Education
Eileen Weiser
Former member, Michigan State Board of Education
28 Ken Beedle // Dec 1, 2009 at 4:46 am
Here are the facts:+ in the weeks leading up to the state board pushing Watkins out — they gave him an “outstanding” performance evaluation. John Austin praised Tom Watkins during his evaluation as a “leader.” + the Governor commended Watkins for his leadership skills and advocacy on behalf of quality public school and the great teachers that teach in them. She thanked him for his leadershipon a number of issues. Then Watkins released a report critical of Michigans funding of public education— showing that all the new money “invested in schools” was absorbed by two items– pensions and health care.He pointed out that the current funding system was unsustainable.The people that support the status quo did not appreciate Watkins honesty and pushed him out the door. Funny, Watkins went from being an A- state Superintendent to a failing superintendent overnight— per Mr. Austin. The truth is obvious! The sad tale is Watkins told the truth about the school funding fraud and lost his job. Look around at what is happening to our schools today and it reinforces– that Watkins told the truth and led— and Mr. Austin continues to play politics with our schools and our children. Austin is a small man that continues to put union politics above the needs of our children and state. Tom Watkins spoke the truth then and continues to do so today. Until Michigan puts the needs of our kids above politics and adults we will continue to become irrelevant in the global economy. I appreciate the truth Watkins spoke to power.
29 Tamara Bashore-Berg // Dec 2, 2009 at 11:28 pm
I read with concern both Tom’s report and the negative comments that have been posted. The truth is, none of this is about individuals – it’s about saving our state and our children’s futures.
It sickens me that a good man was forced out of a job he got rave reviews for doing – and Tom was (and continues to be) an outstanding leader, as even the State Board of Education stated at his performance review just a few short weeks before he published the report on insustainable school funding. However, all Tom Watkins was doing was stating the difficult truth…and the last 5 years have born that out.
Our state’s current leaders at ALL governmental levels have failed miserably at putting aside politics for the good of our state and our future, and are becoming more and more like GM leaders and Union Reps who ensured the auto industry’s demise in Michigan.
Is that what we want for public education? Enough. We are better than this.
30 George H. Williston // Dec 23, 2009 at 6:39 pm
I worked for the State of Michigan and I know that those who rock the boat are pushed out. Our State is so top heavy withthose who protect each other we need an independent evaluation to trim off much dead wood. As for our education system it also needs major re-evaluation. We must remember that public education is the public’s hope of developing it’s young people into what is needed to make a better future. Our educational system has developed out of the one room school house that taught the three R’s to the children of mostly farmers. To meet the requirements of a successful future I agree with Tom’s assessment that they are going to meet a “technologically driven global economy that requires innovation, creativity, and talent.” How does our current system foster young people to think outside the box to find solutions to large problems? They are being taught not to ask questions but to regurgitate information to pass standardized tests. We must remember that public education can be whatever we imagine it to be. It does not have to be only measured by scores on ACT tests. It can be measured by outcomes. How do the children function in the world they move into. Many children are not going to go to four year colleges to be the middle managers and teachers. They are going to be skilled trades of labor of other kinds and they need individually to discover their talents and work with mentors to develop those talents. Our world needs many innovations and imagination and creativity should be supported for the good of all.
31 Mort (Westland) // Jan 6, 2010 at 9:47 pm
Charter schools and competition aren’t the answer to our public education woes. Kick the MEA and AFT all you want, but businessmen trying to impose “private enterprise” in education will only worsen the problem.
There hasn’t been one study, using objective criteria, showing an advantage to vouchers or charter schools. There have, however, been many studies showing that reduced class size and empowering teachers to teach dramatically improves the quality of education.
32 joy // May 7, 2010 at 8:15 pm
Watkins is a visonary.
Note what is being debated in Lansing today?
Dealing with the issue of pension, healthcare costs and consolidation of school districts— just like he predicted in his report in 2004!
Some are attempting to rewrite history and suggest he was against teachers– nothing could be futher from the truth. He was a strong advocate for teachers and told the truth– that we are realizing today— unless and until the Gov and Leg truly fund education–yes, that means our pensions and health care—than local schools have little choice but to cut. Our money comes or should I say– DOES NOT COME from Lansing. They say they are for education– but, do not fund the basics.
The self serving school board members, Gov and so called “leg leaders” are a joke. They refused to deal with these issues when the then state superintendent raised the issue and are still ducking the tough issues today.
Funny thing is the Speaker, Andy Dillion suggested following up on whatWatkins suggests, 4 years later and NOW is a candatate for Governor! Amazing.
Watkins was ahead of his time– and paid the price for raising the issue about fair and adequate funding for our schools.
Just think, if he was listened too we would be a lot futher ahead of solving the mess our schools are in today!
33 Janet // May 12, 2010 at 3:13 pm
This reporter seems to capture this issue quite well—
here we are 5 years later– and not a thing has been done to address the school funding mess– nothing.
2004 report by deposed state education leader forecasted Michigan school funding problems
By The Grand Rapids Press
June 04, 2009, 11:13AM
Tom Watkins isn’t one to say “I told you so.”
But at look at a December 2004 report from the then-state schools superintendent showed he tried to warn people that school funding was in trouble, and offered some suggestions for changes.
Watkins warned that money for schools would dry up in an economic downturn since so much of the funding is linked to the sales tax after Proposal A.
He called for drastic changes to make districts more efficient, saying an influx of cash is unlikely, and schools still needed to improve academic achievement.
Watkins noted that Michigan school funding always has been based more on the dollars available in the budget rather than what it actually costs to educate a child.
And, of course, there are considerable inequities among districts left over from the pre-Proposal A days.
He pointed out that two-thirds of each new dollar provided to schools is consumed by health care and pension costs. The teachers’ pension plan even then was suffering because of a falling stock market, plus a growing number of retirees who were living longer.
“A holistic approach is needed that recognizes the limitations of Proposal A to fund schools appropriately during economic downturns,” he wrote.
“A new approach will require everyone to let go of deeply entrenched constraints and the ‘We’ve always done it this way’ mentality. We are challenged to take a fresh look at how business is conducted. Inability or unwillingness to act is detrimental to Michigan, its communities, families, and most importantly, its children.”
Watson called for two big steps:
1) That Gov. Jennifer Granholm create a bipartisan committee to review district boundaries, sizes and costs to identify administrative inefficiencies.
2) That the Legislature determine what exactly it costs to educate a child. The last study was in 1968 and prompted a revamping of school funding in the 1970s.
“Widely recognized is the fact that an overhaul of the school finance system is meaningless if it is not accompanied by comprehensive efforts to improve efficiency, effectiveness and equity.”
Watkins argued that any plan to seek additional money for schools will fall apart without such changes.
Michigan at the time spent $12 billion on education.
“Let’s clean the slate and approach this challenge as if a new territory has been discovered with 1.7 million children desiring a quality education. How would $12 billion be invested to assure that children obtain the education necessary to thrive in a 21st century knowledge economy?”
So flash forward five years and let’s see what happened as a result of his report, which most definitely stirred things up when it was released.
Watkins was pushed out of his job by Granholm after a tussle with the state Board of Education over who gets to hire and fire a state superintendent.
He’s now CEO of TDW & Associates, a consulting firm that works on creating educational links between Michigan and China.
There certainly has been no state study on what it costs to educate a child in Michigan, though 34 other states have taken that step.
I know of no effort to look at district boundaries, though there is occasional talk out of Lansing encouraging districts to take such steps with their neighbors.
We’ve seen some baby steps. Jon Felske now serves as superintendent of both Wyoming and Godwin Heights, the first time we’ve seen such an arrangement.
There are some consortiums for special education transportation, and there are some districts sharing some services. Caledonia and Byron Center will share a special education administrative position in a cost-cutting move for both districts.
We’ve also watched districts privatize some services like transportation and substitute teaching to pull employees out of the state’s pension pool, since they’d have to pay an amount equal to 16.94 percent of each salary to the fund.
We have the state relying on federal stimulus money to keep the school aid fund level for this year and next, with fears of a funding “cliff” in the following year.
And, during that time, we learned that the number of West Michigan school employees making $100,000 climbed from 58 to 176.
I think that Sunday story is what prompted Watkins to remind me of his 2004 report. He wasn’t upset with the salaries, but with the number of people making that money, showing that there are a lot of administrative jobs that could perhaps be merged among districts.
“I am leaving for China tomorrow for two weeks,” Watkins e-mailed this week. “Let me assure you, they are not sitting idly by waiting for us to get it right.”
E-mail Dave Murray: dmurray@grpress.com
34 jesse // May 13, 2010 at 7:20 am
Seems to me— this MI Dept of Ed Press release about the leadership of State Superintendent says it all—
State Board Gives Watkins A- on Annual Rating
Contact: Martin Ackley, Public Information Officer (517) 241-4395
Agency: Education
July 7, 2004
LANSING – The State Board of Education gave its overwhelming endorsement today of the performance of state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Watkins. In its annual evaluation, State Board members gave Watkins an overall grade of A-.
“In spite of numerous challenges, Tom Watkins has performed as an effective and efficient leader and manager,” said State Board President Kathleen N. Straus. “He is a dedicated and committed visionary who works tirelessly on behalf of Michigan’s students.”
Board members rated Watkins on his performance in the areas of Implementation of State Board Policies; Day-to-Day Management, Supervision, and Leadership of the Michigan Department of Education; Facilitation of Alliances and Partnerships and Cooperative Working Relationships with Others; Assistance in Strategic Planning; and Spokesperson and Advocate. This was the selection criteria used when the Board appointed Watkins in 2001.
In her letter of support for Watkins, Governor Jennifer Granholm commended him for the smooth transition of the Michigan Education Assessment Program (MEAP) from the state Department of Treasury to the Department of Education, as well as his “commitment to the women and men who teach our children and those who support them in so many ways.
“I enjoy a warm and productive relationship with Superintendent Watkins, anchored in his sincere commitment to the children of our state,” Granholm wrote. “They are truly fortunate to have a strong and effective advocate in Tom Watkins.”
State Board member Marianne Yared McGuire said that Watkins has been an outstanding and enthusiastic spokesperson for the children of Michigan and the State Board of Education.
Board member John C. Austin noted that through Watkins’ leadership Michigan schools have continued to make headway during times that have been financially difficult.
“Tom has done an excellent job in his tenure,” said Board member Reginald Turner. “I am particularly pleased with the sharpened focus he has brought to the needs of High Priority Schools. He has us moving in the right direction.”
Watkins also received broad-based support letters from educational leaders across Michigan, including former state Senate Majority Leader Dan DeGrow, now superintendent of the St. Clair Intermediate School District; Detroit Regional Chamber Senior Director Gregory Handel; the Michigan Business Leaders for Education Excellence; the Tri-County Alliance for Public Education; and current State Representative Doug Hart (R-Rockford).
“Tom has done an excellent job,” DeGrow said in his support letter. “During a time when public education is often unfairly under attack, Tom consistently points out the many positive things happening in public education here in Michigan.”
Dan Quisenberry, president of the Michigan Association of Public School Academies, told the State Board that he “appreciates the accessibility and approachability of Tom.”
Support letters for Watkins also were received from school superintendents at Pinckney Community Schools; Calumet-Laurium-Keweenaw schools; Marquette-Alger RESA; Capac Community Schools; Algonac Community Schools; Coopersville Public Schools; Marysville Public Schools; Port Huron Public Schools; Yale Public Schools; Memphis Community Schools; East China Schools; and Armada Area Schools; as well as former Michigan Teacher of the Year Bill Cecil.
Watkins thanked the State Board for its support and belief in him and shared credit with the employees of the Michigan Department of Education.
“My goal is to do right by our children each and every day,” Watkins said. “We still have work to do.
“My accreditation standard is if each school would be good enough for my kids, or your kids, to go to,” he added. “There are schools that aren’t there yet. Until such time when I can say that each school is good enough for our kids, our work is not done.”
The State Board unanimously gave the President Straus and Board Secretary Carolyn L. Curtin authorization to begin negotiating a new contract with Watkins.
this was just a few months before he was “shown the door” for pointing out what is still a crisis today– not dealing with the needed structural reforms of consolidating school districts, funding or addressing through reforms changes in health care and pensions.
Vision and leadership is what education needs– not a stick your head in the sand mentalilty.
This saying by Niccolo Machiavelli, in The Prince seem to fit what has happened to Watkins:
“There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.”
35 luvtheclassroom // May 30, 2010 at 3:31 pm
Seems from this source below —Watkins foreshadowed the mess our schools would be in unless the policy makers took action …. they did not and what Watkins predicted has come true.
The Gov and Leg have been asleep at the switch.
What is laughable is the State Board of Education and Department of Education took months to develop a plan nearly 6 years after Watkins’ 2004 report– that comes to the same conclusions— a bit late– don’t ya think!
This story is by Dave Murray: dmurray@grpress.com at the Grand Rapids
Press—
See entire story at:http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2010/05/would_23_billion_plan_to_halt.html
I was reminded of the work( http://www.michigan.gov/documents/michiganschoolfunding_110803_7.pdf ) by former state Superintendent Tom Watkins, who back in 2004 predicted dire times for Michigan schools unless drastic reforms are carried out.
Watkins looks more like a visionary every day, and it’s widely thought that the report likely got him pushed out of his job.
He pointed out that two-thirds of each new dollar provided to schools is consumed by health care and pension costs. The teachers’ pension plan even then was suffering because of a falling stock market, plus a growing number of retirees who were living longer.
Watkins at the time called for two big steps:
1) That Gov. Jennifer Granholm create a bipartisan committee to review district boundaries, sizes and costs to identify administrative inefficiencies.
2) That the Legislature determine what exactly it costs to educate a child. The last study was in 1968 and prompted a revamping of school funding in the 1970s.
“Widely recognized is the fact that an overhaul of the school finance system is meaningless if it is not accompanied by comprehensive efforts to improve efficiency, effectiveness and equity,” he wrote.
The report came out in December 2004, and only now are we seeing changes to the pension system and talk about pushing for districts to consolidate or share more services.
Those moves, of course, stem from the state’s economic crisis.
Wishing that lawmakers took Watkins’ warnings more seriously five years ago doesn’t help. It also seems that lawmakers don’t make changes unless faced with a crisis.
Watkins today is CEO of TDW & Associates, a consulting firm that works on creating educational links between Michigan and China.
Knowing how we are viewed from afar, Watkins told me he wonders if Michigan accepting part of the $23 billion would put some of the financial problems on hold, but would that push reforms to the back burner until, once again, the cash runs out.
The Chinese, he said, are not slowing down.
Dave Murray: dmurray@grpress.com and follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/ReporterDMurray
Leave a Comment:
Be sure to put in the security words and hit SUBMIT