Word just in from the National School Boards Association: the Senate's action on the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 includes a six-month moratorium that would prevent federal administrators from cutting the funding to public schools.

ASBSD has contracted Senators Johnson and Thune on the issue, and we thank our Senators for their support of this legislation. Without it, South Dakota schools would have been shorted millions.

From NSBA's Office of Advocacy:

Form the Argus:

Rounds recommended a smaller-than-normal increase in school aid during his budget address. With uncertain annual funding, schools would be irresponsible to pay for recurring expenses from reserves. School districts can't raise teacher salaries based on one-time showers of cash from the Legislature.

Districts would then have to be prepared to cut teacher pay when the Legislature doesn't come through for them.

Rounds' criticism also seems to cherry-pick the numbers that best suit his case. As Harrisburg School District Superintendent Jim Holbeck pointed out, go back just a few more years, and the reserve funds don't seem to be growing at all. If a baseball batter has a hit in three of his last four at bats, is that more indicative of a trend than his last 20 at bats - or even his last 200?

Not only does the editorial board understand the issue from the school district perspective (read ASBSD's take here), but they've added a little gusto to their stance by suggesting that Gov. Rounds' criticisms are unfair, given the size of state reserves.

It is a do-as-we-say-and-not-as-we-do situation, of course. State government runs up enormous reserves and is deeply reluctant to spend them on education.

Open Forum is smiling today, grateful that the entire truth about reserves is not lost on everyone. Let's hope legislators favor reason over rhetoric as well, and couch their criticisms of reserves until school boards have a few years to plan for year-after-year of one-time funding.

According to the Washtington Post, federal funding for abstinence-only sex education programs could be in jeopardy because a handful of states have decided to offer more comprehensive sex education curriculum.

To date, 14 states have rejected funding because mounting evidence suggests the programs are ineffective. The news comes as Congress is considering increasing abstinence-only sex ed grants from $50 million to $204 million.

Open Forum has read the recent research that labeled abstinence programs as ineffective. We also took note as the supporters of abstinence programs picked the research apart, offering evidence to suggest the programs work.

Rather than debate the merits of any type of sex education program, Open Forum holds the position that sex education programs should be the responsibility of local communities - with the school board, administration and parents working together to determine the content of curriculum.

Federal or state policy shouldn't dictate sex education curriculum. Neither government entity should fund it, either. The money would be better spent increasing the federal commitment to special education funding as part of an effort to fulfill a promise made by the federal government more than 40 years ago.

The Mitchell Daily Republic has commentary from three members of Senate Education, including committee chair Ed Olson, R-Mitchell.

According to the Daily Republic:

Olson feels that South Dakota continues to underfund education; doing so, he said, could lead to some dire consequences.

He pointed to a recent National Education Association report that showed that South Dakota again ranks last in annual teacher pay with an average of $34,709, almost $10,000 less than the national average.

A member of several state and national education committees, Olson said there's a nationwide call to restore fair funding for education.

"We have these huge issues that, as I look at it, only money solves," he said. "We need to make teaching a very soughtafter career."

It appears as though the senate is poised to provide additional funding this year. Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, told the Argus Leader last week that his top priority is to offer a 4.25 percent increase in state aid.

Meanwhile, ASBSD staff was on hand in Aberdeen for a education-focused legislative cracker barrel. ASBSD Director of Communications Brian Aust led a discussion about the realities of school funding in South Dakota.

From the Aberdeen American News:

And for the nine states including South Dakota with fewer than five students per square mile, the eight other state governments provide an average of almost $1,900 more per student than does South Dakota: $4,700 compared to $2,800.

That's according to data presented by Brian Aust, communications director for the Associated School Boards of South Dakota. The other eight are North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada and Alaska.

Aust said state government needs to allocate more for K-12 schools in South Dakota. The teacher supply is short nationwide while demand is high, Aust said, and that means the supply as a whole will go to where it finds the best pay.

A couple of admin changes to Open Forum.

First, we added an RSS feed so you can have blog updates come to you. The feed is listed on the bottom of the right navigation column.

And we've removed required registration for comments in favor of an open system with full moderation.

Read. Enjoy. Comment away.

For those not-so-familiar with NCLB-speak, growth models add a measure of flexibility to the way schools are held accountable under the state's accountability system.

As it stands right now, every student is expected to meet performance targets. Under a growth model, schools can be measured on the progress an individual student makes, not just whether all students meet a single standard.

To help bring it home, consider this example.

Little Johnny and Little Suzy are both set to enter the 4th grade. Little Suzy reads at grade level - she knows exactly what a student entering the 4th grade is supposed to know. Little Johnny, though, has had a difficult time reading, and still only reads at a 2nd grade level.

Schools know that Little Johnny needs extra help in reading, so they assign Little Johnny to a reading recovery program that gives him some added reading instruction. And, to the credit of the teaching staff, Little Johnny goes from reading at a 2nd grade level, to reading well above a 3rd grade level - just not quite a 4th grade level.

Under the current system, Little Johnny and Little Suzy both have to read at a 4th grade level by the end of the year. That means, in order for the school to make the grade on the state report card, Little Suzy has to progress one grade level in one year, and little Johnny has to jump two grade levels in one year.

When assessment time comes, Little Suzy tests at grade level. Little Johnny, though, despite having moved up nearly two grade levels in one year, hasn't quite reached the 4th grade level yet.

According to our state's current assessment system, the school has left little Johnny behind. Under a growth model system, the school may receive credit for Little Johnny's progress that year.

Keep in mind: The use of growth models doesn't change the ultimate goal that every student is proficient in reading and math by 2014. Growth models simply recognize incremental achievements toward the broader goal.

The U.S. Department of Education put together a growth model pilot program that several states participated in last year. Apparently the success of the pilot has opened the door for all states to participate.

South Dakota made an application to be part of the pilot, so Open Forum thinks it's a sure bet that we'll try to take advantage of the newly granted flexibility. And that's good news.

When news recently came down that South Dakota, once again, ranks last in the nation in average teacher salary, reporter Kayla Gahagan contacted area schools to talk about the impact low salaries has on a school district's ability to recruit teachers.

From the Rapid City Journal:

The reality of low schoolteacher salaries in South Dakota hit home for Steven Hengen of Rapid City School District Office of Human Resources when he sat down with a qualified applicant and started talking money.

"We offered a special-education teacher position to a woman from North Dakota, and she was all excited to come," said Hengen, who serves as assistant superintendent for the HR department. "When I sat down with her and we talked about salary, she just about had tears in her eyes. She couldn't afford to come for that amount of money."

Open Forum knows that the most effective way for a district to improve achievement for all students is to invest in high-quality teachers. We also know that South Dakota teachers aren't compensated in line with what they are worth to our state.

The debate on teacher pay in South Dakota is, to say the least, interesting.

Those against salary increases use a host of arguments that play well politically, but don't hold up to scrutiny. Check out the Madville Times and South Dakota Politics (here and here) for arguments that dispel some of the myths surrounding South Dakota's last-in-the-nation ranking.

Open Forum will have much more on school funding in South Dakota in the coming weeks, when ASBSD releases the updated version of School Funding Realities.

In the interim, though, consider one other item that gives cause for concern. The number of teachers applying for jobs in South Dakota is on the decline - a fact that impacts schools across South Dakota, even the state's second largest district.

From the Journal:

Hengen said that five years ago, the Rapid City district never went to a single job fair to recruit teachers. Now, representatives attend between five and six a year.

"That's something we didn't have to do before," he said.

He said Rapid City has seen a decrease in applicants for all teacher positions, but even more so in high-need areas such as math, science, special education, music and foreign language.

The Rapid City district is fortunate that some people want to come to the area because of the city and its location, Hengen said. Professional development is also a key attraction to teaching jobs in the area, and teachers find it a positive that the community stands behind educators.

"It's a wonderful place to live, but we need to pay teachers more," he said. "To compete with surrounding states is becoming more and more difficult."

Lots happening in the Yankton area leading up to legislative session.

District 19 legislators, including Representatives Gary Jerke, R-Tripp, and Jim Putnam, R-Armour, are joining Senator Frank Kloucek, D-Scotland, to sit down with school officials and discuss legislative issues.

The forum hit on several topics, including school district reserve funds. From the Yankton Press and Dakotan (subscription required):

Following last month's Tripp forum, Jerke asked a certified public accountant to review the budgets of selected school districts in District 19, which covers Douglas, Hutchinson, Bon Homme and northwest Turner counties.

"Of all the schools, you (Bon Homme) are the one in the biggest hurt," he said. "Every school is different. Some schools have higher reserves, some don't use all the money available, and some have a windfall of money."

When reserves came up, Avon Superintendent Tom Oster countered.

Avon Superintendent Tom Oster responded passionately to the perception that schools are stockpiling reserves. When talking about school reserves, the governor and other state officials cite the districts' reserves at their highest point in the year, Oster said.

In contrast, school districts on average are maintaining a consistent percentage of their budgets in reserves, Oster said.

In fact, Oster said, school districts as a group have already met a law passed last year in the Legislature. The law requires that school districts must limit their reserves to 25 percent by 2012, or the state will take action.

"Among South Dakota schools, the entire state has a 23 percent fund balance," Oster said, noting counties in contrast are allowed 40 percent reserves.

By regulating school reserves, the Legislature is sending a message that local districts cannot manage their own fiscal affairs, Oster said. He noted that districts can't use reserves for ongoing expenses.

"Don't be snowed under ... by the twisting of facts," Oster told the Tyndall audience Monday night.

When funding for K-12 education came up, Rep. Jerke had this to say:

Jerke said he sees an imbalance between K-12 and higher education funding. He pointed to figures showing the state's K-12 funding has gone up 31 percent in five years, compared to 49 percent for corrections and 62 percent for higher education.

"The current governor, right or wrong, focuses on higher education. We are spending $173 million for 31,000 college students and $378 million for 121,000 students in K-12," Jerke said. "There is a disconnect, focusing more on higher ed than K-12, that needs to be brought back in line. I believe K-12 is the poor stepsister to higher education."

At what appears to be the same forum, the Tyndall Tribune and Register recounted commentary from Rep. Putnam, Chair of Joint Appropriations:

With a state statute that limits the inflation rate that can be applied for education funding each year to three percent or the increase in the cost of living index, whichever is less, shortfalls continue. This statute, as written, does not keep up with inflation. It was also his opinion that in pitting one school district against another, no one wins.

The Tyndall Tribune and Register also reported Rep. Jerke saying this about the amount of funding made available to K-12 education:

He does not support any increases in property taxes to help the situation. If necessary, he would support an increase in sales tax.

The past two years, ASBSD and the South Dakota Alliance for Education have supported legislation that would infuse $100 million into K-12 education without raising taxes. The plan would limit state government spending to the rate of inflation or 3 percent, whichever is less - the same growth restriction currently placed on school districts.

The legislation failed both years, and the most recent discussion drew fire from Jason Dilges, director of the Bureau of Finance and Management. His commentary, as Open Forum paraphrases it: the state's budget, growing at a rate higher than 3 percent, couldn't survive under the 3 percent cap.

The Yankton Press and Dakotan has the scoop on a discussion of the benefits of early childhood education held in Yankton this week.

A panel discussion revealed a host of positive impacts of high-quality pre-kindergarten programming. From the P&D (subscription required):

Webster Elementary School principal Melanie Ryken also noted the importance of early education relating to a child's neural development.

"By the age of 3, a child has two times the number of connections and three times the activity as an adult. Once the brain is wired, it begins to prune excess connections. Without proper education, these connections are lost," she said.

Early intervention is paramount to a student's future success, according to Ryken.

"Studies show that early education of students leads to better achievement, higher test scores, higher reading competency and fewer referrals in the future," she said.

... and ...

[South Dakota Voices for Children senior policy analyst Greg] Boris noted that children, especially children from low-income homes, who receive early education are less likely to need special education, commit juvenile and adult crime, become teenage parents and depend on public assistance.

"Actually, they are more likely to graduate from high school, enroll in a four-year college degree program, be employed as an adult and have higher earnings," he said.

Boris noted that children who "have access to quality preschool education have more school success, more young adulthood success and by age 24, the return on investment is $7 for every $1 spent."

Academic benefits, with a high return on investment to boot.

But, legislation to create standards for pre-k programs in South Dakota failed during last legislative session. Rep. Gary Jerke, R-Tripp, was present for the panel discussion, and offered a good summary of why the legislation stalled last year.

In response to the presentations, Dist. 19 Rep. Gary Jerke said he was opposed to publicly-funded early education.

"I have a real difficulty with using the state pocketbook to provide funds for programs without legislative authorization and that compete with private business," he said. "I also have problems with referring to children as economic units. Children are not economic units, they are special spiritual entities and until we can empower families to do the things required to raise children I don't believe any amount of funding is going to help.

"In my opinion," he added, "families have abandoned their children to the three 'Ts' -- teachers, television and technology. I really think we need to get back to the lifestyle of a family unit we were accustomed to in the 1940s, '50s and '60s."

Rep. Gary Moore, D-Yankton, added this:

"I think parents today have an economic choice," he said. "Both parents are working to have eight TVs, a motor home, motor boats and a brand-new house. Parents today don't sacrifice. When my kids were young, my wife didn't work; we sacrificed and struggled. I really think society has to change."

Establishment of pre-k standards (not the use state funds for pre-k, mind you, just the development of standards) is a component of Gov. Rounds 2010 Education initiative, and is expected to resurface this session.

School board members took a position on the issue during ASBSD's Delegate Assembly last November. Coming into session, ASBSD will work with Gov. Rounds and the Department of Education to make voluntary pre-k standards a reality.

The standards will be voluntary - meaning private providers will have the option to follow them. And Open Forum believes parents may want to know if the preschool their child attends meets certain quality standards, and that those standards align with the K-12 system and what their child will learn throughout their elementary and secondary schooling.

Of course, the Legislature could wait for society to change. They could wait until the general public realizes the benefits of returning to 1940s ways of thinking and acting. But Open Forum hopes they think more about what students will need to succeed in the 21st Century.

From ASBSD's media release regarding Gov. Rounds' FY09 recommended budget:

As required by state law, Gov. Rounds offered a 2.5 percent increase in per-pupil funding for K-12 education.

South Dakota's "3 percent or less" law does not meet the needs of K-12 districts, and has, over time, tied school districts hands, forced program cuts and led to school district opt-outs. Gov. Rounds' budget will not move South Dakota out of last place in state per-student funding or last place in average teacher salary.

We're hopeful that the Legislature will respond to the challenges our school districts are facing and provide additional funding for K-12 education.

We understand that putting together a state budget is about balancing priorities. There's an old adage: "Don't tell me your priorities, show me your budget." We haven't had a chance to review the full budget yet, so we can't comment at this time on how K-12 fared compared to the rest of state government.

On School Reserves

Gov. Rounds showed during his budget address, through an example of capital outlay budget reserves, that board members will responsibly manage district funds when given predictable and ongoing funding.

Unfortunately, school district general funds have not seen the same consistency as school district capital funds. One-time money and fluctuations in other revenues has created uncertainty, and school boards are appropriately cautious. School board members realize it is not appropriate to use one-time money to fund ongoing expenses.

Two important considerations were absent in Gov. Rounds explanation of school district reserves.

First, school reserves are approximately $25 million less today than they were in 1998. In fact, general fund reserves were decreasing until school districts started receiving one-time funding.

Second, it's also important to remember that last year the Legislature made a policy decision on school district reserves. They recognized that schools may need to hold up to 25 percent in general fund reserve to meet local needs. Statewide, school district reserves are well below the 25 percent threshold.

Legislators have a good understanding of the fund balance issue. They talk with their local districts and understand the impact one-time funding has on school district reserves. School boards are being good stewards of tax dollars, and we think most legislators will see it that way as well.

Gov. Rounds is asking for $24 million in one-time funds from the budget reserve for various special appropriations.

Included in the breakdown, $948,750 to defend the state against the school funding lawsuit.

Also included, $2.2 million to in other legal defense funds to represent the state in other legal matters, including, according to Gov. Rounds, voter rights and abortion issues.

Gov. Rounds is also asking for $10 million in emergency appropriations to create energy efficiencies throughout the state.

Five million would be available for local governments, including K-12 schools, to upgrade facilities to be more energy efficient. It's a loan program, so schools would have to pay the funds back at 4 percent interest.

The other five million would be available for state facilities, including the state universities.

Gov. Rounds, once again, is taking issue with school district general fund reserves. School reserves have increased by more than $16 million last year.

As a comparative look, he complimented board members on the prudent use of capital outlay reserves. In general fund, though, he questioned increasing reserve, labeling it as a trend that shows school boards are not spending funds on students and on increasing salary policy.

Of course, Open Forum knows the story behind fund balances. We know that school boards are being responsible by not building one-time funding into ongoing expenses.

Look for a statement coming from ASBSD very shortly.

Gov. Rounds has recommended, as required by law, a 2.5 percent increase in the per-student allocation. That amounts to $4,642.02 per-student.

He's going into his K-12 speech, and he's hitting on reserves - BIG TIME.

According to a release sent out by Gov. Rounds' office last night, the FY09 state budget request amounts to $1,207,600,000, up 6.1 percent from the $1,137,714,874 in general funds appropriated as part of HB1281 (the FY08 general appropriations bill).

Gov. Rounds opened up his address by saying his recommendations represent a "limited growth" budget.

Gov. Rounds will take center stage in about 15 minutes to outline his budget request for FY09.

Media reports point to a tight budget. We'll see how the reported lower-than-expected revenue collections impact state government growth.

Check it out on SDPB.org, and stay tuned to Open Forum for details. We'll be live-blogging details as they become available.

With Gov. Rounds about to outline his priorities for the coming legislative session, Open Forum would be remiss if we didn't mention the news from ASBSD's corner of the world.

Last week, ASBSD's press release surrounding the recent Delegate Assembly made it's way into newspapers across the state. Open Forum hasn't seen every news story resulting from the release yet, but we'll point to the Rapid City Journal's coverage and the commentary offered by some board members in the immediate area.

One of the new elements of Delegate Assembly this year was the establishment of legislative priorities. ASBSD views every resolution as important, but the ASBSD Board and staff felt a more narrow focus would allow additional news coverage and provide some after-session accountability to our members (see the full release here).

Click here and here to visit our full Government Relations platform.

Gov. Rounds will deliver his state-of-the-state address tomorrow, complete with his recommended budget for FY09.

News outlets are already buzzing about the state's budget demands. The Argus Leader, for example, contends that Gov. Rounds is facing his tightest budget since he became Governor.

From the Argus:

Consequentially, as Gov. Mike Rounds prepares to make his budget address Tuesday, he faces an economic climate almost as delicate as in 2003, his first year in office, when the state faced a $54 million revenue shortfall.

Demands on the treasury will be huge, and a recent report shows revenue somewhat above last year but well below what lawmakers projected when they finalized the current budget last March.

The Argus goes on to list a host of competing priorities, which includes items like transportation funds and upgrading facilities at the state's universities. What the list doesn't include, unfortunately, is K-12 education.

Stay tuned to Open Forum for ASBSD's reaction to Gov. Rounds' budget address. We'll have live coverage during the request, along with comment after the presentation.