The Williamson Heraldreports that Williamson County Director of Schools Mike Looney is the top finalist for the same position in Fulton County (Atlanta) Georgia:
Atlanta’s Fulton County Schools on Wednesday announced Williamson County Director of Schools Mike Looney as the top finalist to fulfill its open superintendent position.
As the district’s top finalist, Looney could soon exit the position he’s held in WCS for just over 10 years if he chooses to officially accept the position May 2 at the competing district’s school board meeting.
The Williamson County School Board issued the following statement from Board Chair Gary Anderson in response to the announcement:
On behalf of the Williamson County Board of Education, I want to thank Dr. Looney for his service to Williamson County Schools and wish him the best in his next endeavor. Should Dr. Looney sign a contract with Fulton County Schools on May 2, the WCS Board, at its regular May meeting, plans to name an interim superintendent and establish the effective date of that leadership transition.
We have a strong leadership team in place at the Central Office and in our schools, and our teachers and staff are focused on success for all students. Our students come prepared to learn and achieve, and our parental involvement is second to none.
For more than 25 years, Williamson County Schools has been recognized as a top performing school district in the state, and I believe that will continue for years to come. The Williamson County community should expect a seamless transition as we move on to our next Superintendent of Schools.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support — $2 or $10 — helps make reporting education news possible.
Despite being represented by top voucher advocate Jack Johnson, the Franklin Special School District is speaking out against vouchers. Johnson, best known for his poor math skills and penchant for hypocrisy, is taking the lead in pushing forward Governor Bill Lee’s “Education Savings Account” proposals. Education Savings Accounts, or ESAs, are simply a nicer way to explain the process of taking money from public schools and funneling it to unaccountable private schools.
The Franklin Special School District Board of Education approved unanimously, by consent agenda, a resolution opposing the governor’s Education Savings Account (ESA) proposal, or voucher program, that would use public education dollars to fund private school education.
During his first State of the State address earlier this month, Gov. Bill Lee-R, proposed state funding of an Education Savings Account (ESA), or voucher, program that would allow qualifying parents to use public school funds to enroll their children in a private school, or non-public entity.
In recent days, both Eric Welch and Brad Fiscus of the Williamson County School Board have made their opposition to vouchers known.
While no one should be shocked that Bill Lee supports efforts to dismantle our public schools by way of both vouchers and rapid expansion of charter schools, what’s suprising to me is the number of school board members I talk with who supported Lee. It’s difficult to square support of Lee with support of public education in our state. Lee made clear both during the campaign and by his past involvement in voucher efforts that he is a proponent of using public money to fund private schools.
I suppose some of these same school board members are voting in favor of resolutions opposing vouchers. Perhaps if voucher legislation passes, they’ll explain to their constituents why a local property tax increase is necessary not to support any improvements in what’s offered, but to make up for lost revenue due to an ever-expanding voucher school district.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Williamson County School Board member Brad Fiscus offers thoughts on vouchers.
During Tennessee’s State of the State address, Governor Bill Lee made it clear that privatizing public education would be a significant initiative of his legislative agenda. While he professed his support for public schools, he also laid out his plan to strip away funding from public schools.
The
Governor’s plan proposes vouchers that would eliminate public accountability by
channeling tax dollars into private schools or home school programs that do not
face state-approved academic standards. Private schools do not publicly report
on student achievement and do not meet the public accountability requirements
outlined in major federal laws– including laws which protect students with
special needs. Vouchers are an easy, yet ineffective “out” for our
legislators– relieving our state leaders of their responsibility to provide
oversight and accountability for public schools as demanded by our state
constitution.
Governor Lee
has promised to restrict his “Education Savings Accounts” (ESA) to use by
students from low-income families from the lowest performing schools. These
Education Savings Accounts or education scholarship accounts or individual
education savings accounts or education scholarship tax credits are euphemisms
for vouchers.
In Indiana
in 2011, while now-Vice-President Mike Pence was Governor, vouchers were
approved. Similar to Governor Lee’s proposal, Indiana’s program initially
limited ESAs to 7500 students from low-income families in low performing
districts. As of 2018, over 35,000 students now utilize taxpayer money intended
for public education to pay private school fees. Indiana has spent a combined
$685 million on this publicly-funded private-school experiment. However, a
significant number of participating students were already attending private
schools or participating in homeschool programs. What’s more, studies reveal
these students are not improving academically. Voucher programs don’t work. Imagine
the benefit if Indiana had invested an additional $685 million in its public
schools, instead of subsidizing private schools.
Contrary to what proponents purport, voucher
programs do not support parent and student choice. Instead of voucher programs
providing options for parents and students, private schools have the chance to
choose which students will be accepted, while public education districts are
expected to provide a local system of free public education for all children.
Governor
Lee’s misguided plan will undermine the very schools the State of Tennessee
should be supporting. Until we address the socio-economic conditions that are
predominant in neighborhoods where underperforming schools operate, we will not
solve the issue of suboptimal school performance. We must invest in systems of
support and training, such as mentorship and literacy programs, that have been
proven effective with underserved children and youth, instead of taking
financial resources away.
In
Williamson County, a district with some of the highest performing schools in
the state despite some of the lowest per-student funding, we’re being told by
Senator Jack Johnson and House Speaker Glen Casada that “vouchers won’t affect
us because we have strong schools.” We have been told we “shouldn’t be
worried.” Why would the state’s top-ranked county want to ensure they are not
affected if vouchers are good for public education?
If Indiana’s
experience with vouchers is any indication, we can be sure this plan will
affect Williamson County schools. Even if it doesn’t, shouldn’t we care enough
about public education in other parts of Tennessee to prevent this program from
happening there?
Tell your legislators and our Governor that vouchers are not welcome in our state.
Brad Fiscus is a veteran teacher, a leader in the Tennessee Conference of The United Methodist Church, and a member of the Williamson County Board of Education, the following Op-Ed is his personal views and does not represent the thoughts or opinions of Williamson County Schools or the Board of Education.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support makes reporting education news possible.
In an absolutely epic Twitter thread, Williamson County School Board member Eric Welch makes a case for vouchers. Actually, he makes a case for voucher-level funding for public schools. Welch uses math to make his case. Here are some examples:
Per the @Tennessean, @GovBillLee will provide $7,300 per student in the form of a state-funded voucher for use at for-profit private schools able to discriminate on the basis of special needs, academic achievement, religion, disciplinary concerns, religious views, etc (3)
In fact, let’s do the math. $7,300-$3,410=$3,890 per student funding difference. 40,811 enrolled students X $3,890 = $158,754,790 in additional funding if @GovBillLee’s budget funded @WCSedu as equitably as it proposes to fund for-profit schools (5)
So maybe a voucher for public schools is what students like mine need. Because frankly, what our state currently provides (45th nationally in education funding) isn’t cutting it and it’s not sustainable. (16)
Welch notes the significant funding gap between vouchers and the dollar amount per student Williamson County receives from the state based on the BEP formula. This is an important distinction. The BEP formula generates a per student dollar amount (currently $7300) and then devises an amount owed to local districts based on each district’s ability to pay. So, in some districts, the state sends a lot of money and in others, like Williamson, not so much.
Factors involved in generating the total number are based on a school system’s average daily attendance. That number then generates a number of teachers, administrators, and other positions. The state funds each system’s BEP teacher number at 70% — that is, the state sends 70% of the average weighted salary (around $45,000 currently) to the district for each teaching position generated by the BEP.
Let’s be clear: The BEP is inadequate. Every single district hires more teachers (and other positions) than generated by the BEP. Local districts fund 100% of those costs.
Before the state was taken to court over inadequate funding, the BEP Review Committee used to list a series of recommendations on ways to improve the funding formula to adequately meet the needs of our state’s public schools.
While routinely ignored by policymakers, this list provided a guide to where Tennessee should be investing money to improve the overall public education offered in our state.
Here are some examples from the most recent version of this list:
Fund ELL Teachers 1:20 — COST: $28,709,000
Fund ELL Translators 1:200 COST: $2,866,000
Instructional Component at funded at 75% by State COST: $153,448,000
Insurance at 50% COST: $26,110,000
BEP 2.0 Fully Implemented COST: $133,910,000
Some notes here –
First, BEP 2.0 was frozen by Governor Haslam as he “re-worked” funding distribution and supposedly focused on teacher pay.
Next, the state currently provides districts 45% of employee health insurance for ONLY the BEP -generated positions. Districts must fund 100% of the benefit cost for teachers hired about the BEP number.
Finally, beefing up the instructional component by 5% as recommended here would mean significant new dollars available for either hiring teachers or boosting teacher pay or both.
Here are some “wish list” items on teacher pay, which reflect that our state has long known we’re not paying our teachers well:
BEP Salary at $45,447 COST: $266,165,000
BEP Salary at $50,447 COST: $532,324,000
BEP Salary at Southeastern average $50,359 COST: $527,646,000
BEP Salary at State average (FY14) $50,116 COST: $514,703,000
These are FY14 numbers — so, that’s been a few years. Still, funding teacher pay at the actual average spent by districts (just over $50,000 a year) would mean significant new funding for schools that could be invested in teacher salaries. We don’t fund teacher pay at the actual average, though, we fund it at a “weighted” average that is thousands less than this actual number. Then, districts receive only 70% of that weighted number per BEP position.
Making the large scale jump necessary to truly help direct state BEP dollars into teacher paychecks and provide a much-needed boost to salaries would cost close to $500 million. Bill Lee’s budget this year provides a paltry $71 million, continuing the tradition of talking a good game while letting teacher pay in our state continue to stagnate.
Here are some other recommendations — ideas that Welch suggests districts could pursue if only they were funded at the same level Bill Lee is proposing for private schools:
Change funding ratio for psychologists from 1:2,500 to 1:500 $57,518,000
Change funding ratio for elementary counselors from 1:500 to 1:250 $39,409,000
Change funding ratio for secondary counselors from 1:350 to 1:250 $18,079,000
Change funding ratio for all counselors to 1:250 $57,497,000
Change Assistant Principal ratio to SACS standard $11,739,000
Change 7-12 funding ratios, including CTE, by 3 students $87,928,000
New BEP Component for Mentors (1:12 new professional positions) $17,670,000
Professional Development (1% of instructional salaries) $25,576,000
Change funding ratios for nurses from 1:3,000 to 1:1,500 $12,194,000
Change funding ratios for Technology Coordinators from 1:6,400 to 1:3,200 $4,150,000
Increase Funding for teacher materials and supplies by $100 $6,336,000
Instructional Technology Coordinator (1 per LEA) $5,268,000
If you look at these numbers, you see that a state committee of professional educators (the BEP Review Committee) has been telling state policymakers that Tennessee needs to do more.
They’ve been saying it for years.
Now, we have a Governor who is suggesting that instead of spending state dollars to meet these needs, we’re going to spend them to prop up private schools with little to no accountability.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
Your support makes publishing education news possible.
Following last week’s release of TNReady results, Williamson County Director of Schools Mike Looney offered words of caution in interpreting the results.
Looney said he was proud of how well WCS students, parents, teachers and staff responded to the testing in light of its documented flaws, and he was pleased with the fact that the district remained in the top five in every test and grade level.
“However,” he said in a statement released by WCS, “it would be disingenuous to fully celebrate without acknowledging the problems experienced by students, parents and teachers during last year’s testing process.”
While clearly frustrated with continued TNReady problems, Looney offered hope for a reliable assessment in the future:
“While I am so sorry that our students and teachers had to endure last year’s State testing experience, moving forward, we are optimistic that our students will be able to show what they know with a reliable and functional assessment. As a district, we will continue to be laser focused on success for all students.”
Tennessee State University Professor and Williamson County resident Ken Chilton offers his thoughts on the changing demographic landscape of Williamson County and the implications for politics and public education there.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city of Franklin was the eighth fastest growing small town in the United States between July 1, 2016 and July 1, 2017. That’s both exciting and scary. How will we pay for the schools? What about the congestion? How will we finance and manage all this growth? This is nothing new. Think of Levittown or the suburb you grew up in. Things change. Cities grow. Infrastructure gets built.
The growth of Franklin is dwarfed in number by the growth of Williamson County. The population of Williamson County grew by about 31,383 residents between 2010 and 2016. In 2016 alone, roughly 9,500 new residents moved to Williamson County from out-of-state or abroad.
Who are these new residents? Overall, 85.6 percent of Williamson County residents are classified as non-Hispanic white. In fact, between 2010 and 2016 the non-Hispanic white population grew by 24,000. Many of them have relocated to the Nashville region for employment and they chose Williamson County because of the public schools.
During that same time, the number classified as Asian grew from 4,432 to 7,752—a 75 percent increase in just 6 years. Likewise, the Hispanic population grew from 7,338 to 9,513. The African American population increased from 7,416 to 8,698, but its share of the population dropped from 4.3% in 2010 to 4.2% in 2016.
I believe Williamson County leaders and residents will figure out the growth puzzle. The bigger challenge is the ongoing demographic shifts and the future battles associated with rapid cultural change.
The Politics of Cultural Change
During the May primaries, some candidates appealed to traditional Williamson County values to garner votes. Such calls to nostalgia are often nothing more than dog whistles to a more racially homogeneous time. Regardless, there seems to be a growing resentment of newcomers. The new residents are accused of ruining the small town vibe, and presumably, bringing their non-Williamson County values.
Perhaps the opposition is not appealing to our basest instincts. Maybe it’s simply a matter of scale—we’ve reached a tipping point where the marginal costs of additional growth outweigh the marginal benefits of continued growth.
Invoking the “costs of growth” to rail against changes occurring in Williamson County is politically acceptable. However, do those who vocally oppose growth support policies typically associated with controlling growth?
Smarter growth means support for affordable housing. It means support for denser developments. It means support for impact fees. And, it means limiting the property rights of landowners who want to sell their properties to developers.
Most of the anti-government types in Williamson County resist all or most smart growth measures as big government interference in the private market.
Given this disconnect, I fear that some of the opposition to newcomers is rooted in “otherness.”
The changes are visibly evident. Go to Crockett Park on a Saturday morning and you will see plenty of racial diversity in YMCA sports leagues. My son’s YMCA tennis classes are racially diverse. A casual ride through Cool Springs reveals an increase in the number of Indian and other ethnic restaurants.
Many of the new residents are, first and foremost, parents seeking to maximize their children’s success. They might be Republicans, Democrats, or Independents in political affiliation, but their primary concern is maintaining and improving the quality of public schools. Some have moved here from high tax districts and they are fully supportive of efforts to increase public school revenues.
A quick glance at the age composition of Williamson County by racial group is instructive. Roughly 42.5% of the white population is aged 45 and older compared to 39.3% for African Americans, 21.1% for Hispanics, and 26.5% for Asians. The graying of Williamson County is most pronounced in the white community. In most cases, those over the age of 45 have less of a vested interest in the school system. Many no longer have children in the school system. Consequently, increasing property taxes to increase school revenues is a harder sell.
Age
White
Black
Hispanic
Asian
<18
26.9
27.4
38.9
31.6
18-44
30.6
33.2
39.9
41.8
45-64
30
28.2
19.1
21.5
65+
12.5
11.1
2.0
5.1
Sharing Power & Resources
Williamson County must reconcile the concerns of an aging, mostly white, political elite that has called the shots in Williamson County for the past 30 years with the different preferences of new Williamson County residents. The May primary results are an example of how new voices are shaping local politics.
If opposition to growth is justified on the grounds that urban values are supplanting rural values, that’s xenophobia. No group has a monopoly on place. Neighborhoods transform. New residents bring fresh ideas to the public sphere. My property did not come with a deed restriction requiring me to support the political status quo.
Growth will continue to happen. You can either manage it or drown in it. You can either resent the newcomers or tear down walls and welcome them. The future is unwritten.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
The tax increase — from 2.25 percent to 2.75 percent — is projected to raise about $60 million over three years to help pay for school construction.
“Voters overwhelming support public education and have agreed to use sales tax to fund schools,” said Williamson County Director of Schools Mike Looney. “I am surprised at the margin. I thought it would be a tight race but it’s a 2-for-1 margin. This is a huge victory tonight for the commission’s plan for the school district.”
Public education advocate Kim Henke writes about the tax game going on in Williamson County as the state’s wealthiest county “struggles” to fund schools.
Here’s some of what she has to say:
I’m embarrassed that last summer, WCS had to cut $6 million from the operational budget because the County Commission wouldn’t do the right thing and raise property taxes ahead of an election year. There is no reason that the 7th wealthiest county in the nation with the lowest property tax rate in Middle TN and the lowest in the state among communities with >100,000 residents should have to cut new teacher positions, counselors, and special ed staff. We shouldn’t have so many portables. We shouldn’t have kids in overcrowded schools eating lunch at 9:45 in the morning. We shouldn’t have roving teachers with carts teaching class in hallways and closets. We shouldn’t have principals mopping floors because the roof leaks. We shouldn’t have underpaid teachers and support staff who often work two jobs and can’t afford to live in Williamson County.
I’m embarrassed that WCS is in the bottom 10 of Tennessee’s 141 school districts in per pupil expenditures in a state that’s in the bottom 10 of PPE nationwide.
Members of the Williamson County Commission’s Education Committee voted unanimously Monday night in favor of a resolution supporting changes in the state’s BEP formula that would direct additional state resources to the wealthiest county in the state. Williamson County is also the 7th wealthiest county in the United States.
The Williamson Herald reports:
Members of the Williamson County Commission’s education committee voted unanimously Monday night to approve a resolution of support for state legislation that would modify the Basic Education Program (BEP) to provide Williamson County and others a more reasonable allotment of state funding for education.
I suppose “reasonable allotment” is in the eye of the beholder.
The state’s funding formula for schools, the BEP, is designed to provide all districts a base level of funding to support public education. The formula came about in response to a successful lawsuit by small, rural districts who sued suggesting the way the state was funding schools was unequal. In 1992, the General Assembly enacted the Education Improvement Act which included the Basic Education Plan (BEP) as a new school funding formula. One of the primary goals of this formula was (and still is) equity.
What the legislation sponsored by Jack Johnson would do is direct additional state resources to the five school districts in the state with the greatest ability to pay.
While the BEP certainly has shortcomings, I would suggest finding ways to direct more state funds to a county quite capable (but unwilling) to dedicate local resources to schools is not a very responsible use of state taxpayer dollars. To be clear, improving the BEP by making formula adjustments (adding a component for RTI, for example), would necessarily mean additional funds going to Williamson County.
Here are some fun facts about the county now begging the state for more cash:
Williamson County has the lowest property tax rate of any county in Middle Tennessee.
Williamson County has the lowest property tax rate of any county in Tennessee with a population over 100,000.
Williamson County is the wealthiest county in the state of Tennessee and 7th wealthiest in the United States.
Williamson County Commissioners have been reluctant to raise property taxes in order to continue to provide resources to schools.
An analysis of household income compared to property tax rates in similar affluent communities reveals that Williamson County’s tax burden is incredibly low. The chart below comes from public policy professor Ken Chilton, who teaches at Tennessee State:
That red bar on the chart is Williamson County, with a property tax burden on a $500,000 home of just over $3000. That’s just over 3% of the average household income, far lower than similar communities in Tennessee and across the country. Plus, as Chilton notes, Tennesseans pay no personal income tax.
Despite these facts, Williamson County Commissioners are headed to the state with their hands out, begging for more help.
Tennessee is a state making long overdue improvements in public education. As more state dollars become available, those dollars should absolutely be invested in continuing to improve our public schools. By closing the teacher pay gap, for example.
Giving money to those districts that have the ability to generate funds on their own but won’t is not a pressing need in our state. In fact, doing so would only serve to exacerbate the inequity the BEP was intended to address. Of course, these Williamson County Commissioners aren’t concerned about inequity. They are clearly concerned about ensuring one of America’s wealthiest communities continues to pay bargain basement prices for its public schools.
Policymakers should reject this rich get richer scheme and focus on education needs that will benefit every district and lift up those least able to generate funds for schools.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
As the state continues to experience challenges with TNReady implementation, districts are speaking out. In October, the Williamson County school board adopted resolutions asking for changes to how the state will assign letter grades to schools and asking that TNReady scores not be included in report cards for students in grades 3-5.
This week, Knox County adopted three resolutions relevant to the current testing troubles.
All three were sponsored by Board Member Amber Rountree.
The Knox County Board of Education hereby urges the Senate to amend legislation SB 535 in the upcoming session by assigning a school level designation that aligns with the district designation, rather than assigning a letter grade to each school; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The Knox County Board of Education hereby urges Governor Haslam, the State Board of Education, and the Tennessee General Assembly to consider a moratorium in using any school or district designation based on data obtained via the TNReady assessment which was administered in School Year 2016-17.
The Knox County Board of Education opposes the use of TCAP data for any percentage of teacher evaluations and student grades for School Year 2017-2018 and urges the General Assembly and the State Board of Education to provide a one-year waiver, as was previously provided for School Year 2015-2016.
And then there’s one similar to Williamson’s request to exclude TNReady data from report cards for students in grades 3-5:
WHEREAS, the Knox County Board of Education submits student scores on the Tennessee comprehensive assessment program’s grades 3-5 achievement test scores should not comprise a percentage of the student’s final grade for the spring semester in the areas of mathematics, reading/language arts, science and social studies.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE KNOX COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION AS FOLLOWS: The Knox County Board of Education hereby urges the Tennessee General Assembly amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-1-617 to remove the requirement of using any portion of the Tennessee comprehensive assessment program scores as a percentage of the students in grades 3-5 spring semester grade
No word yet on a response to these two districts speaking out on the proper use of TNReady data.
For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport
