Misrepresentations, Distortions and Lies

By Jose Escarce

Misrepresentations, distortions, and lies. Those are the three legs holding up the shameful and cynical campaign against the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District’s school funding measure, called Measure S, that is being waged by a handful of residents who are willing to sacrifice our children and our schools in order to further their own political agenda.

One of the biggest lies promulgated by the opponents of Measure S is that our school district is mismanaged and wasteful. In fact, all the evidence points, compellingly and convincingly, to the opposite conclusion.

To evaluate the evidence, it’s essential to understand that California public schools have been severely underfunded for years. According to the journal Education Week’s most recent report card on the 50 states, in 2002 California schools spent $7,236 per student, nearly $300 below the national average of $7,524 and ranking 31st in the nation.

However, this figure does not account for regional differences in the cost of living -- a dollar goes much farther in Idaho, Nebraska, or Mississippi than in our home state. Adjusting for regional cost differences reduces California’s spending to $6,161 per student, nearly $1,400 below the national average, and our ranking plummets to 46th among the states.

Chronic underfunding has forced public schools in California to reduce or eliminate numerous valuable programs and services over the past two decades. For most districts, any fat in their operations disappeared years ago; recent cuts have whittled away plenty of meat and have begun to dig into bone. According to EdSource, a nonprofit, independent organization that conducts research on public education, in 2001 California public schools had:

• 20.6 students per teacher, 28 percent higher than the national average of 16.1 and ranking 48th among the states
  
• 994 students per guidance counselor, 2 times higher than the national average of 490 and ranking last among the states
  
• 4,379 students per librarian, 5 times higher than the national average of 873 and ranking last among the states
  
• 482 students per school principal or assistant principal, 37 percent higher than the national average of 352 and ranking 48th among the states
  
• 2,468 students per district administrator, 3 times higher than the national average of 828 and ranking 48th among the states

An important message in these data is that California public school officials have done everything they could to spare teachers from cuts relative to other types of personnel. Nonetheless, the consequences of our state’s dismal funding for the public schools include very large classes, inadequate numbers of counselors and librarians, and skeleton administrative staffs in both schools and district offices, not to mention serious shortages of nurses, classroom aides, clerical staff, maintenance and repair staff, custodians, gardeners, and transportation and food workers.

Our own district has been more fortunate than many in California: Thanks to the wisdom, foresight, and generosity of the citizens of our communities, we have been able to spend over $400 more per student than the California average, though it is important to realize that this is still far below the national average when regional differences in cost of living are taken into account.

The additional funds have been carefully targeted to improve the education our children receive. For example, to improve instruction in the classroom, we have hired more and better teachers; to improve the advice and guidance our high school students receive, we have hired more counselors; to improve literacy and students’ access to books and other information sources, we have hired more librarians; to raise the achievement of low-achieving students, we have developed innovative intervention programs; to provide our students with a well-rounded education that includes the arts, we have maintained an award-winning music program.

As a result of these targeted efforts, our district has just under 20 students per teacher, 635 students per counselor, and 2,540 students per librarian, all better than the California figures, though still far worse than the national averages.

Recently, opponents of Measure S have alleged mismanagement and waste based on the fact that our district’s per student spending on teachers is 19 percent higher than the average in Los Angeles County. This is perhaps the most astonishing, ignorant, and odious distortion of all.

Yes, we do spend more on teachers than most other districts in the county, but this is not due to higher salary levels; rather, it is due to our district’s emphasis on hiring and retaining the most qualified teachers available. Our district’s spending on teachers should evoke pride and gratitude, not concern, for the result, in a state with a severe teacher shortage, is an experienced, talented, and highly qualified teaching staff.

According to DataQuest, a repository of public school data maintained by the California Department of Education, our teachers average 14 years of experience compared with a county average of 12 years; only 11 percent of our teachers hold emergency credentials compared with 18 percent in the county; most remarkable, 53 percent of our teachers have masters degrees or doctorates compared with 31 percent in the county.

The talent, qualifications, and dedication of our teachers, combined with our district’s focus on high academic standards and its intervention programs, help to explain the high levels of academic achievement among our students.

We have a remarkably diverse school district: 42 percent of our students are minorities, 12 percent are English-language learners, and 20 percent are eligible for free or reduced-price meals. Despite the challenges posed by this diversity, 9 of our 13 schools exceeded the state’s benchmark score of 800 for high achievement on the Academic Performance Index (API) in 2002; the other 4 schools scored in the 700’s and will likely surpass the benchmark in the next year or two.

Most gratifying, our most challenged schools, which had the lowest API scores in the district in 1999, have made the most rapid gains. At the high school level, 52 percent of our graduates met the criteria for admission to the University of California/California State University systems, compared with 31 percent in the rest of the state. Santa Monica High School offers 22 Advanced Placement courses, while Malibu High School offers 14.

Student participation in and performance on these courses, which represent the most rigorous coursework available to high school students in the U.S., places both schools among the top 5 percent of public high schools in the nation. Three schools in our district have been California Distinguished Schools, and one recently won a National Blue Ribbon Award.

Clearly, the picture painted by the evidence is not that of a mismanaged, wasteful public school district. Quite the contrary, the picture that emerges from an objective and dispassionate assessment of the data is that of a district that has focused its limited funds where they will do the most good; of a district that has strived to provide our students with a rigorous, well-rounded education; of a district that has attained high levels of academic achievement despite enormous challenges; of a district that contributes to the quality of life in our communities and deserves to be a source of pride and joy.

Tragically, California’s budgetary fiasco and the resulting devastating impact on public school funding threatens our district’s successes and accomplishments. Our district simply cannot absorb a shortfall of $13 million -- more than $1,000 per student -- without severely damaging the quality of the education our students receive. The damage will be felt by our students for the rest of their lives, and just as surely and unavoidably, it will be felt by our communities for many years to come.

Our district’s school funding measure, Measure S, is a crucial component of our communities’ effort to keep our schools as nearly whole as possible. If Measure S does not pass, the negative consequences will be immediate, severe, widespread, and enduring.

Our public school district is not mismanaged and it is not wasteful. Please don’t believe the distortions and lies told by the opponents of Measure S. Please support a high-quality education for our students and a high quality of life for our communities.

Measure S needs two-thirds of the vote to win. Please vote YES on Measure S.