Wesley Null, vice provost for undergraduate education at Baylor University, and I wrote this piece for the Dallas Morning News.
Texas legislators are revising the state’s school finance laws. We wanted to put before the public the importance of paying teachers well.
Some legislators are enthusiastic about what they call “outcomes-based funding,” which would send more money to affluent districts and less money to needy districts. This would be a huge mistake for obvious reasons. It’s reverse Robin Hood.
Long ago, Texas had visionaries in the legislature who understood that the future of the state relied on having a strong public education system. Current legislators think they can use charters as a substitute for adequate funding.
In 1948, those visionaries proposed a dramatic increase in state funding and equalization. Gilmer and Aiken persuaded their colleagues to raise the state share of funding to 75-80% of costs. This year, the state share will fall to 39%, shifting the burden of financing schools to localities, which favors the richest districts.
We wrote:
The heart of any school is the teacher. The only way to ensure that every Texas child receives a quality education is to place a well-educated, well-prepared teacher in every classroom. That truth will never change.
The attractiveness of teaching, however, continues to decline. The results are tragic. Labor Department statistics reveal that public educators are leaving the profession at the highest rate in 20 years. Low pay and disrespect are key factors in this alarming decline.
The Texas Legislature this session will have the job of remedying the state’s public school finance system. As historians of education, we think some background is helpful.
The last time Texas overhauled public school finance was immediately following World War II. The need for change was great. Many young Texans had been denied the opportunity to serve during the war because of their poor level of education. Such news was embarrassing to Texas leadership.
Compulsory attendance laws existed, but they had many loopholes. Only 65 percent of school-aged children attended school. Only 40 percent of adults had a high school education. Many school buildings were dilapidated and dangerous.
School finance was based on a census count of how many school-aged kids lived in a county regardless of whether those students attended school. Consequently, funds were commonly distributed but no education took place. Pay for teachers was embarrassingly low, leading to difficulties with recruitment and retention.
Fortunately, Texas had leaders who were driven by foresight and determination. Named in honor of legislators Claud Gilmer and A.M. Aikin, the Gilmer-Aikin Laws modernized Texas education. They revolutionized school finance, substantially increased pay for teachers, rebuilt dilapidated buildings, and redesigned teacher education and certification.
Please read it all!
Diane Ravitch's blog 
On this point, I’ve found that most — that is a majority, most likely a large or overwhelming majority — of charter schools run on a model with these three pillars or principles:
1) pay teachers horribly
2) treat teachers horribly
3) if teachers raise even the slightest
objection to 1) and/or 2), fire them
and replace them with others who
*won’t object.”
The charters that don’t operate this way — and there are a scant few here in Los Angeles — are the exception.
I’ve spoken with hundreds of current and former charter schools in Los Angeles, and have read hundreds of articles on-line about this subject, and that’s what the evidence shows.
“I’ve spoken with hundreds of current and former charter schools. . . ”
Hmmm. Should we question your sanity, Jack? 🙂
Yes, I know you meant “personnel” or “teachers”. Just funnin ya!
I hope this country finds its SOUL and SENSE again. But then I look at who’s potus and I cringe.
Borrowing the posted sentiment, “the heart of the U.S. is its democracy, treat it with love and respect”.
Thank God for AOC, who has the character and visibility to bring condemnation to the lobbyists who pay for line standers so that corporate interests can butt ahead of working people at Congressional hearings. (Vox 2-13-2019)
Why isn’t every Democratic politician in D.C. voting to stop the travesty?
Imagine if one of the villaintropists had spent his money to save American democracy instead of lining his pockets.
“Imagine if one . . . ”
I’d have to be imagining something that never has been and never will be. Definition of insanity? Or just a bold thinker?
Unlike Bill Gates, John Arnold and Z-berg, there have been some whose philanthropy gifted or created something of value for the common good.
And, unlike the lying Gates and Buffett, the owner of Duty Free shops actually gave away his fortune to charity in his lifetime.
love it! Posted it at https://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/The-Heart-of-a-School-is-I-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Diane-Ravitch_Education_School-Reform_Statistics-190214-795.html
Thank you, Diane!
Texas like so many other states have been negatively influenced libertarian ideology. This belief leads to a disinvestment in public education with low salaries and promotion of privatization. It is the wrong path for a state that heavily depends on educated workforce as Texas does. Too many teachers are working second and third jobs to make ends meet, and some are leaving teaching to seek higher paying jobs. Teachers like students do their best work when they are supported and valued.
“It is the wrong path for a state that heavily depends on educated workforce…” You expose the deepest insanity of pushing for a non-creative, poorly educated citizenry through policies which allow more and more ed. money profiteering — an ed. money profiteering which depends upon a non-creative poorly educated citizenry to find enough votes and thus aggressively continues to push policies which will produce a dumbed down populace even as business looks around and says, “where are our educated workers?”
There is a simple explanation for the indifference and neglect of legislatures in regards to their public schools. In states where the student body is increasingly comprised of black and brown children, and the legislature is dominated by white men, neglect is the norm.
While I tend to agree with your thought, there is another explanation:
GUBMINT BAD!
And actually one more reason:
Xtianists would love to see an xtian fundie regressive reactionary theocratic caliphate as our form of governance. Can’t be funding those socialistic public schools now can we?
Regardless of how a person stands on school choice/vouchers, all reasonable persons believe that school teachers should be paid a living and honorable wage. No person should have to take a vow of poverty to be a teacher.
Bad news for Pennsylvania, continuing into 2019- “Gates Foundation official named new Chancellor of Pennsylvania’s state higher ed system” (May 21, 2018)
Presumably, the universities will be collaborating on delivery and curriculum with the Bwana Gates, just as prescribed by Gates’ Frontier Set.
“Current legislators, accepting the postulate that the private sector is superior to any government intervention a priori, think they can use charters as a substitute for adequate funding.”
Sorry to change your prose. I felt the parenthetical necessary.
There are enough legislators who accept the idea that government is incompetent as a rule (on both sides of the asile) to effectively assure that it is indeed incompetent.
Insofar as teachers are concerned, I think the important thing is that teachers and students be pointed in the same rough direction. The relationship between students and teachers is what makes a good school. It is a delicate balance that is achieved by a functioning school between teacher as authority and motivator, between one who understands and one who demands. Anyone who believes this can be attained by paying teachers low wages is either stupid or dishonest.
The autonomy of teaching coupled with the satisfaction of seeing children grow and succeed as a result of your efforts is what made teaching worthwhile. Many schools have taken away the autonomy by mandating canned curriculum and irrelevant standardized tests. THEN they turn around and demonize teachers, blaming them for things over which they have no control, which has resulted in dissatisfaction and the mass exit of people from the profession.
Higher pay is a good way to attract young teachers, but in the end I feel like teachers have put up with low pay for so long the change needs to be more than that. In order to retain teachers, we need to give them the training and education to get started. Provide mentoring and support so they make it through those first most difficult years when most teachers seem to leave. We also must give them back their freedom to teach the curriculum in a way that meets the needs of their individual students.
Great article with interesting background. Especially that detail about prospective WWII soldiers rejected for insufficient general education. It surprises me that just 75 yrs ago, TX public ed reached a mere 60% of school-aged kids. But I expect there were a number of other states lagging as well. My Dad’s 8th-gr ed was enough for a job in the steel mills, & to get into the navy. But he was not unusual for a small-town Indiana farm kid; there must have been others who got less schooling.
Just musing: there must be a fair number of our eldest voters who grew up in such rural areas. Many of them may be chary of public-school spending, since in their day folks managed with far less.