A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

PART III EDUCATION REFORM 1990-1994

Reform at the State Level

During this period, the education reform movement made headway in all states, though in some more than others. One of the issues that required the attention of State authorities was the problem of unequal funding among school districts. In the United States, the states contribute the largest share of the education budget, but local school districts finish a close second. In most states local revenues for education come from property taxes. In school districts where property values are high, the revenues are greater than those where property values are low. In part this discrepancy is mitigated by the fact that living expenses are lower in poorer districts (if only because house payments are less). However, it has become increasingly clear over the past few years that in some states the low-income school districts are suffering disproportionate as the result of diminished revenues. The result has been unequal opportunity of education among the various school districts. In several States -- e.g., Texas and Kentucky -- State courts have intervened and ordered the legislatures to take some action that will ensure a greater equity in funding.

The Texas legislature voted to take State revenues away from the more affluent districts and redirect them to the poorest districts. However, this solution proved unsatisfactory to the smaller counties; and the court ordered the State to make an additional effort to provide equity. The legislature passed a law ordering more affluent school districts in the State to share revenues from local property taxes with the poorest districts. This solution provoked a legal challenge from the affluent districts, and the State court likewise ruled that such a solution was unconstitutional. In 1994, Texas was still wrestling with the problem.

The Kentucky Experiment

In 1989 the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled that the State's system of public school financing provided unequal education and was therefore a violation of the State's constitution. The court ordered the legislature to devise a new way of funding the State's school systems. As a consequence of this ruling, Kentucky was forced to reexamine its entire education system, and the result was a series of reforms at both the local and State levels.

The next year, in response to the Kentucky Supreme Court's mandate for financial equity, the legislature passed the 1990 Kentucky School Reform Act, which authorized an extra $1 billion for education -- to be appropriated over a two-year period. This appropriation constituted a 35 percent increase in funding between 1990 and 1992, which raised the per pupil spending by nearly $1,000 to $4,600.

But the legislature did not stop there. In addition to this huge increase to correct inequities, the School Reform Act also called for sweeping changes in the way the State operated its educational system. These reforms eventually included:

• the institution of instruction on Saturdays, before and after school, and during the summer vacation for students in need of extra help;

• the maintenance of "family resource centers" designed to provide social and medical services to needy schools;

• the abandonment of multiple-choice tests in favor of tougher measures that demand essays and analysis of data, as well as an emphasis on collections of student work rather than a single examination;

• the establishment of cash awards for teachers whose schools show improvement over a two-year period;

• the assembly of a statewide technology network designed to put a computer-ready telephone line in every classroom, providing linkups with libraries, research databases, governmental agencies, and even other schools and classrooms;

• the elimination of separate grades in elementary school, allowing students of different age groups to work side by side;

• the introduction of new courses that help students prepare to cope with such practical problems as child rearing and personal finance; and

• the adoption of a looser classroom structure, including untimed classes and the blending of subjects such as mathematics and English.

This experiment in educational reform is perhaps the greatest ever undertaken by a state -- at least since the Massachusetts "common school" movement in the 1830's -- and after only three years the final results have yet to be posted. However, changes have taken place.

In 1990, the first phase of the reform program was implemented:

• A new school-financing formula began to correct inequalities in funding.

• An Education Professional Standards Board, made up mostly of teachers, was named to set and enforce teaching standards.

• With some exceptions, schools were required to open preschool classes for disadvantaged 4-year-olds. Such classes had to be in place the 1991-92 school year as well as preschool programs for handicapped 3- and 4-year-olds.

The year 1991 brought further implementation:

• An appointed education commissioner replaced the elected superintendent of public instruction as the head of the state school system with a mandate to reorganize the Department of Education.

• At least one school in each district was mandated to begin governing itself through a school council. The idea was to ensure that most decisions relevant to instruction be made at schools by teachers, principals, and parents.

• In order to provide help for students in need of extra attention, schools began offering instruction before and after school, on weekends or in the summer.

• Centers to coordinate school and health services for students and their families began to open in or near schools where at least one-fifth of the students lived in poverty. More than 1,000 schools were required to provide such centers by the 1994-95 school year.

In 1992, more reforms followed:

• The State began to assess learning in grades four, eight, and twelve. This assessment involved not only grading written tests, but also evaluating portfolios of student work. Students were asked to perform complex tasks that required them to draw on several types of knowledge. Successful schools were rewarded. Struggling schools received extra help. (Current policy would permit the State to take over the worst schools.)

• The Council on School Performance Standards issued detailed goals for Kentucky schools. Schools are to be judged by how they meet the learning goals and whether or not the school reduces impediments to poor learning, such as poor health and poor attendance.

By 1993, the Kentucky Department of Education reported the following progress:

• An "improvement goal" and an "accountability index" had been set for each of 1,400 schools. Approximately 600 of the schools already had councils in place, with a full budget allocation.

• At least 222 Family Resource/Youth Services Centers were already in operation--127 Family Resource Centers, 55 Youth Services Centers, 40 combined -- and 103 school districts have one or more. These centers served 51,205 individuals representing 32,916 families.

• Summer school programs operated in all school districts and served 20,750 students. About 33 percent of those students improved by at least one letter grade.

• Eight Regional Service Centers, dedicated to the professional development of teachers and administrators, were established. The funding for this program increased from $1 per student to $16 per student.

As reported by the Washington Post in April of 1993, teachers were teaching their subjects in a new way and students were learning differently:

• In rural schools, which were once without the basic tools of scientific learning, children were studying biology and chemistry in high-tech laboratories.

• A team of academics was deciding which literary works were most important in order to establish a syllabus with which all students must be familiar in order to graduate.

• Desks now came with lap-top computers, and eventually students would be able to check them out for home use like library books.

• A class in Calloway County Middle School was using its computer to call a national weather database. Recently these students tracked the progress of an ongoing tornado in Louisiana, hundreds of miles away.

Of course, some educators were cautious about abandoning all the ideas and practices of the past. As one teacher put it: "I have to keep enough of the old way to know it will work, and the add to it and build in the new way. In my own mind I can't throw away what I learned in 19 years."

Many students weigh the new against the old and see advantages in change. "The work is a little bit harder," said one 14-year-old, "but it sticks with you longer."

Some administrators have also found improvement in the midst of challenge and readjustment. "People feel so pressured, there is so much change," said a rural principal. "But this is absolutely the opportunity of a lifetime." Her county superintendent affirmed the radical nature of the change. "Basically we were able to erase the board clean and do away with everything as it was," he said. "It's probably the cleanest sweep [the country] has had in education."

These are signs of significant progress in Kentucky schools. However, it would be unwise to suggest that all states could profit equally from these reforms. In many ways, Kentucky's educational system is atypical. For one thing, its per pupil expenditures and its teacher's salaries have always been among the lowest in the Nation. Some of what is happening in Kentucky's schools is merely compensation for past inadequacies, a sudden and valiant effort to catch up with the rest of the states. For this reason, a dramatic rise in funding may be more likely to yield dramatic results here than in a state where expenditures have been perennially high and where modern technology has long been available.

On the other hand, some of the classroom innovations instituted in Kentucky (e.g., diverse age grouping in elementary school) may generate improvement in traditionally affluent states as well as in poorer ones. For this reason, the Nation is watching Kentucky with great interest.

The Kentucky experiment is probably the boldest of any educational reforms at the State level, but there is reason to believe that other states are beginning to consider some of the ideas instituted in Kentucky. For one thing, by the beginning of the 1990's, other States had begun to face the issue of inequity in financing, and the question was a topic for debate at every level of the U.S. education system. It seemed clear that with rising taxes more and more an issue in local, State, and federal elections, educators would have to devise innovative solutions to justify the expectations of the general public. Already a number of researchers were exploring various means of delivering a quality education at a reduced cost.

-###-

[Part III - Federal Level]

[Part III - Reform at Local Level]