Big Idea: Less is More

Gov. Rendell’s budget was mostly ho-hum—a little more here, a little less there. The exception was a very bold proposal to eliminate 80% of Pennsylvania’s school districts (500 to 100). That proposal (summary here) got lots of reaction (list here). The insider view is that forced merger proposals are dead on their arrival at the state legislature. The last round of district consolidations (in the 1970s) cost many legislators their jobs.

But is consolidation a good idea? The Pittsburgh Schooler only observes that consolidation is not about improving quality. There’s nothing wrong with getting more efficient, and there’s no doubt that consolidation will create some opportunities for financial efficiencies. But at what cost? Would turmoil surrounding consolidation drown out desperately needed discourse on quality?

Surprises

It surprises Pittsburgh Schooler that that there is still so much that surprises him. A run of the mill attack on Head Start in this Sunday's NYT (op-ed here) included this shocker:

to keep a child in Head Start full-time, year-round, costs about $22,600.

Turns out fact checking is a little difficult because this is the author's own calculation (details here).

But the cost per child number got me wondering what our local school districts' spend per child.

And here is your real surprise for reading this blog (straight from a PA Department of Education publication), Pittsburgh Public Schools was spending $19,294 per student in 2006-2007. The good news is that other districts are spending significantly less; the median among the 43 districts in Allegheny County was $13,049.

Woodland Hills Response to Charters: Imitation

Woodland Hills is moving ahead with plans for a new Academy (most recent article here) that borrows heavily from Propel Schools (longer day, longer year, uniforms, etc). The superintendent there of course denies this, but with so many families choosing Propel (350 at the school and more than 500 on a waiting list) it seems like a reasonable and obvious response.

What's most interesting is the somewhat tepid response from parents. Part of this may be deep seated doubt that a school district like Woodland Hills can pull it off. But another part is a misread of how parents choose schools. Parents don't choose schools because of longer days and years; they warm to how classrooms feel and how adults at a school treat parents and children. Replicating that kind of culture is a lot harder than lengthening the school day or adopting a new science curriculum.

Does Time Matter?

Thanks to my neighbor for his response to the Super Bowl delay: "Wouldn't it be great if missing two hours of school really did matter?"

Amen to that.

Time in school is kind of like money for school. Until the public feels that every minute (dollar) already available is being used wisely, there won't be any enthusiasm for more time (or money).