You
In education news, it was a year that saw Wisconsin voters approve a record number of
referenda to boost spending in local school districts to the tune of $4.4 billion.
At the same time, the state superintendent of public instruction wants to increase state
K-12 funding by a total of new proposed spending of more than $4 billion.
Meanwhile, in Washington, moves to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education.
Lots of foot.
We check in with Christopher Saldana, professor of K-12 Educational Leadership and Policy
Analysis.
Thanks for being here.
Thanks for having me.
So, in terms of DPI's $4 billion budget request, it calls for funding 90 percent of
special education costs.
What's your reaction to that?
I think it's a great proposal.
I think schools are federally mandated to provide education for students with disabilities.
And for the last, at least since, for the last 20 years, school districts have had to
fund the majority of that.
So I think currently the state reimburses about 30 percent of spending on public education.
And school districts have to supply 70 percent of those costs.
And that those funds come from their general funds.
So those are supposed to be dollars that are supposed to support all students in general
education classrooms.
But is this request on the part of the Department of Public Instruction kind of more aspirational
than real, at least politically?
I think that's a question for the legislature.
I think that's a question for what our values are in the state of Wisconsin.
I think special education is something that we want to ensure that's provided to every
single student, regardless of their disability or need.
And I think currently because of the different financial capacity that school districts have,
there's a huge amount of variation in what school districts can afford.
So having the state step up and play a bigger role in funding special education creates greater
equality of opportunity for students who have disabilities, whether they're in a small
rural district or in a large urban district like Milwaukee.
Why have we allowed it to be so underfunded for so long in the state of Wisconsin?
That's a great question too.
I think one of the things that folks are very familiar with, in particular because of the
recent referendum that have been requested on the parts of districts, is that funding
for any public service, any public good, requires tax dollars.
And I think from the state's perspective, there is this question about raising revenue
for providing adequate public education for students.
And for far too long, the answer to that question has been to just not fund public education
because it's easier.
You don't raise taxes on people, you don't face the repercussions of that kind of political
action.
So the Wisconsin Policy Forum reports that this past year was a record year for the passage
of these referendas.
We said $4.4 billion, but they have also noted a decline in the passage of these over the
years.
Do you think there is kind of a referenda fatigue?
I think when you come to someone who is doing their best in their life to try to pay their
bills and you say, we have this need for public schools, I think generally folks across the
state of Wisconsin, folks across the country support public education, but when you're
asking them to pay $100, $200, $300, $400 more in property taxes per year, that starts
to hit people's wallet.
And I think it becomes a question of can I afford this?
I think this is very closely tied to Dr. Underley's budget proposal at DPI because I think what
she's proposing is to say let's provide additional state revenues that are going to alleviate
some of these referenda questions and are going to provide some relief for local taxpayers
by providing state funding.
And yet school districts over the years have really not had a choice but to go to the local
voters, right?
As years go by, costs rise.
You have to pay teachers more, health care costs rise, you have to repair your buildings.
All of those things cost more and more money.
I think people are now very intimately familiar with inflation.
Those things exist within school buildings too and within school districts.
And so if the state provides the same amount of funding over time with no inflationary
adjustments, then districts have no other option but to ask their communities to foot
the bill.
Meanwhile in Washington, there is a move to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education.
What are the implications of that?
I don't think it's entirely clear yet.
I think there's this argument that we should eliminate aspects of government.
One of the proposals eliminating the Department of Education, I think there's an argument
that then the control over education should go back to states.
I think there's a smith that states and local communities don't already control their education.
States constitutionally do decide what happens in schools.
They determine curriculums, they determine standards, local school districts do, folks
elect their school boards.
A lot of that decision making power is local control.
But what would happen, I think, is unclear because of the programs that the Department
of Education has.
They administer funding for students in poverty.
They administer funding for students with disabilities.
They ensure that those students aren't discriminated against.
And then they provide a ton of research for education, which is really the innovation
wing of our country's educational system.
But it's very unclear what abolishing the Department of Education means.
Does it mean no more funding for students in poverty?
No more oversight of discrimination?
Or is it really a reallocation of those responsibilities in the administration of those funds to different
agencies?
I guess we will find out.
That's right.
All right.
Professor Christopher Saldana, thanks very much.
Thank you.
If you don't eliminate the funding, you know...
Well, that's the big question.
Although it costs a lot probably to administer all this stuff.
Yeah.
Well, that's the question.
I think the efficiency argument is that we don't need the specific agency just to send
out grants.
But I think there's not a clear enough understanding of what else the Department of Education
does.
And I think the Civil Rights Office is particularly important, and this is in higher ed, too.
And then there's the Institute of Education Sciences, which does a lot of research on
special education on students who are economically disadvantaged, trying to find programs that
are effectively able to support them.
And so that would just go away.
That's a big one too.
That would be a big one, yeah.
Have you heard anything about who's on tap, possibly, to become the Secretary?
Well, so I've heard one name.
There's the State Superintendent of the State of Oklahoma, who has been overseeing really
a monumental shift in education in Oklahoma.
This is requiring prayer in schools, purchasing Bibles, implementing curricula created by
PragerU, very right-wing conservative organization.
And there's some speculation that that might be someone, but I haven't seen who it might
be.
But given who President-elect is nominated, it wouldn't surprise me.
Wow.
We'll watch her back.
Yeah.
Very much.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
Thank you for having me.
Nice to have you.
Watch your step as you walk off.