Link to jump to start of content The Seattle Times Company Jobs Autos Homes Rentals NWsource Classifieds seattletimes.com
The Seattle Times Editorials
Traffic | Weather | Your account Movies | Restaurants | Today's events

Tuesday, November 28, 2006 - Page updated at 12:30 PM

E-mail article     Print view

Guest columnist

Seattle schools crisis highlights need to boost state funding

Special to The Times

The budding campaign to change the elected Seattle School Board to one that is appointed by the mayor is misguided and ignores the real challenges facing Seattle Public Schools.

Regardless of whether the board is elected or appointed, the most pressing problem facing our city's schools is the lack of adequate funding. State support for public schools is woefully insufficient.

Anyone who works in Seattle schools knows the issue is money, including the uneven distribution of state dollars among local districts. For years, Seattle teachers have subsidized our school system by $6,000 or $7,000 per year in reduced compensation (when compared with surrounding districts).

That subsidy, in effect a payroll tax on teachers, paid for small, underenrolled schools. It also has resulted in high turnover among teachers, many who leave for higher-paying jobs in the suburbs.

The imminent school consolidations and closures will lessen the burden on Seattle educators, but the contentious public debate around the issue highlights the need for increased state funding for public education.

Seattle gets about $10,000 per pupil from all sources (state, federal and local). Boston spends about $15,000 per pupil, and the elite private schools of the country invest $25,000 or more per pupil.

Compared with other states, Washington's funding for public schools is simply uncompetitive. Overall, Washington's public schools rank 42nd in the nation on per-pupil spending. Our class sizes are the 46th-largest in the country, and our state spent $548 less per pupil in 2003-04 than we did in 1992-93.

A favorite mantra of public-school critics is that you can't solve the problem by throwing money at it. That's not true. Wealthy parents spend $20,000 or $25,000 to send their children to Lakeside School because they know more money does indeed provide a quality education. With funding like that, Lakeside can keep class sizes down to 10 or 12 students per class, compared with Garfield or Ballard high schools' class sizes of 34. And unlike Lakeside, Seattle Public Schools have the responsibility to educate all of the children who walk through the door.

If we had $5,000 more per pupil, school closures and busing costs would not be on the table, regardless of how much sense that makes. If we had $5,000 more per pupil, we could provide the best learning environments, smaller class sizes and more course offerings. We could extend the length of the school day and school year. We could provide the counseling and social workers needed to help the most-at-risk students. We could offer all-day kindergarten and provide music, art and drama to all children. We could compensate school employees fairly and be competitive with the suburbs.

In this context, the misguided focus on changing the structure of the Seattle School Board is a red herring, a false solution, a sleight of hand to take our eyes off the real issues facing the children and the schools.

Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels argued that state funding for Seattle schools was inadequate when he campaigned against a local funding solution that was on the ballot this fall.

"... [W]e must demand that the state fulfill its constitutionally 'paramount duty' to adequately and fairly fund public education. Inside the classroom, state education funding is supposed to provide a level playing field for all of Washington's kids," Nickels said in June.

If insufficient state funding is the culprit, then why are Nickels and his political friends proposing a takeover of the Seattle School Board? Will changing who has the responsibility for administering a starving system generate more resources for our students? It is unlikely.

When all is said and done, our Seattle School Board is democratically elected. If Seattle voters are dissatisfied with the performance of some of the board members, they can vote them out of office in the next election. Or they can find candidates to run against the incumbent board members.

Or even better, they can join us in the effort to significantly increase school funding so that all Seattle students receive the quality public education they deserve.

Steve Pulkkinen is executive director of the 5,000-member Seattle Education Association, which represents teachers and other school employees.

Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company

Marketplace