1 (c) 2008 the mcgraw ‑ hill companies using educational resources more effectively school...

(c) 2008 The McGraw‑Hill Companies 1

Using Educational Resources More Effectively

School Finance: A Policy Perspective, 4e

Chapter 7


Using Educational Resources More Effectively

1. Introduction2. More efficient use of resources for core

instruction3. Reallocating categorical and specialist subject

resources4. More effective ways to structure the “overhead”

functions of schools5. Reallocating resources to the evidence-based

adequacy model


Why Reallocate Resources?

• As we saw in Chapter 6, the influx of dollars into schools over the past few decades has led to many extra professional positions outside the regular classroom

• Even with these extra positions, schools are not achieving at desired levels and thus need to rethink their use of resources


Category 1: Core Resources

• Principal

• Classroom teachers– Grade-level or multiage for elementary schools– Math, Science, History, Language Arts (and in

some cases World Language)

• Professional Development


Examples of Reallocating Core Resources

• Madison, WI: Low reading scores, particularly for minority students, was the impetus for the following changes:

• Implementation of a research-based reading curriculum in all elementary schools

• Class Sizes of 15 in grades K-3• Intensive, ongoing professional development for

teachers related to the new reading program• Teacher tutors for struggling students



• Mid-sized urban district, WI: Low test scores, particularly for minority students, was the impetus for these changes also:– Class sizes of 15 in K-3– Changing from half-day to full-day

kindergarten



• How did the district finance these changes?– Using their knowledge of marginal vs. average

costs, administrators figured out that by switching from half- to full-day kindergarten, they would get twice the resources (since their student count goes up), but it wouldn’t cost twice as much, and the surplus could be used to reduce class sizes in K-3

– Enrollment growth also brought in more funds



• Using multiage classrooms in small schools can save teacher resources– For example, if K-5 school has 60 students, 10

in each grade, they would need 6 teachers if organized by grade level, but could combine classrooms and have three teachers with class sizes of 20: K-1, 2-3 and 4-5

– Other configurations also possible – research shows that students in multiage classes do well



• At the high school level, resources can also be saved by offering classes less frequently:– In a high school with 100 students, class sizes

would be approximately 8 in the sciences if they offered all of them – physics, chemistry, biology, general science, advanced science – every year

– Could also choose to offer these courses every other year and combine ages of students



• At the district level, one of the most important reallocations to make is resources for professional development– Studies show that districts spend more than

think on professional development but in incoherent, fragmented ways

– Reallocating these resources to more in-depth professional development around the core curriculum can help boost student achievement


Examples of Reallocating Core Resources• In the early 1990s, Karen Miles and Linda

Darling-Hammond studied 3 elementary and 2 high schools– These schools adopted or created a new school

vision and reallocated their resources to the needs of their new vision

– All schools were in urban districts serving large numbers of low-income and disabled students

– 3 of the schools were “new starts”– 2 schools restructured themselves from their

previous to their new design



• To varying degrees, the schools made these 5 changes to their use of resources: – 1) increased the number of regular-classroom teachers,

thereby devoting more of their budget to the core education service: teaching a classroom of students

– 2) provided varied class sizes for different subjects – 3) grouped students differently from the age-grade

strategy of most schools – 4) expanded common planning time for teacher teams– 5) increased teacher professional development



– Each of these strategies:• involved using resources differently • were designed to help strengthen the schools’ core

instructional program• And each school produced higher levels of student

performance, including special education students, as a result

– None of the schools studied were given extra resources above those provided through normal district budgeting


Category 2: Resources for Specialists and Student Support

• Art, music, physical education, drama, technology and other special subject teachers

• ELL teachers• Special Education teachers • Reading and Math specialists or tutors• Pupil Support (Guidance, Psychologists etc.)• Instructional Aides


Examples of Reallocating Specialist and Student Support Resources

• Odden and Archibald (2000, 2001) studied schools who reallocated resources to fund comprehensive school designs and class size reduction

• A major source of funding for these changes was reallocation of category two resources


Examples of Reallocating Specialist and Student Support

Resources• Specifically, the schools in Odden &

Archibald (2000, 2001):– Kept nearly all regular-education specialists as

well as the bulk of special-education and pupil support staff

– Reallocated their categorical program specialists, including ELL, Title I, and Special Ed for mild disabilities, for regular classroom teachers


Category 3: Overhead

• Central Administration– Superintendent– Support for School Board

• Business, Fiscal and Personnel Services• Operations (Heating, Cooling, Electricity,

Janitors)• Maintenance (Plumbers, Electricians, Carpenters)• Food• Transportation• Short-term debt


Examples of Reallocating Overhead

• Transporting Pupils: The Foshay Bus– Using knowledge of fixed and variable costs, a

principal decided to hire a bus driver to stay at the school every day to be available for field trips, rather than pay for the back and forth and have the driver available less often

– Financed this through a combination of reallocating student activities resources, fundraising and grant money



• Linking the Community through Food Services: Combining school lunch with neighborhood meal programs– Because food service is cheaper per meal the

more meals are served, combining these programs saves money

– This can mean combining with meals on wheels (sending food out) or inviting community members to come to the school



• Improving Energy Management: In Warwick, RI, they did this by:– Purchasing heating oil futures to mitigate increases in

the cost of heating oil over the year– Entering into cooperative agreements to purchase

natural gas and electricity– Retrofitting school buildings with energy-efficient

lighting– Implementing solar energy– Shifting to biodiesel fuel for space heating


Allocating Resources Using the Evidence-Based Adequacy Model

• The chapter also identifies a school redesign simulation available online at http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/cpre that can be used to determine whether it can afford to implement the Evidence-Based Adequacy Model

• Use data from your school or another student’s school to try this process yourself


Allocating Resources Using the Evidence-Based Adequacy Model

• The next slide provides the current resources for a 600-student middle school with 50% poverty and 25% ELL

• Can use this school’s data to input into the school finance redesign report, as shown on slide 24, titled “Evidence-Based Model Resources”


Current ResourcesTitle Positions

(FTE) Revenue per Position

Total Revenues

Principal 1 $100,000 $100,000 Assistant Principals 2 $85,000 $170,000 Instructional Support Staff 0 $65,000 $0 Classroom Teachers 23 $65,000 $1,495,000 Specialist Teachers 11 $65,000 $715,000 Categorical Program Teachers for mild special education, compensatory education, ESL, gifted and talented, etc.

10.5 $65,000 $682,500

Counselors 0.4 $65,000 $26,000 Other Pupil Support Staff 3.2 $65,000 $208,000 Instructional Aides 13.5 $20,000 $270,000 Supervisory Aides 0 $17,500 $0 Librarians 1.3 $65,000 $84,500 Secretary/Clerk 2.7 $30,000 $81,000

Discretionary Funds Professional Development $10,000 Equipment and Technology $50,000 Instructional Materials $84,000 Gifted and Talented Education $15,000 Total of Other Discretionary $0

Total Actual School Revenues $3,991,000


Evidence-Based Model ResourcesElements of Model Number of Positions Cost of Positions*

Principal 1.3 $133,333 Instructional Facilitators 3 $195,000 Classroom Teachers 24 $1,560,000 Specialist Teachers 4.8 $312,000 Teacher Tutors 3 $195,000 ELL/LEP Teachers 1.5 $97,500 Extended Day Teachers 2.5 $162,500 Summer School Teachers 2.5 $162,500 Special Education Teachers (non-severe) 4 $260,000 Counselors 2.4 $156,000 Other Pupil Support 3 $195,000 Supervisory Aides 2.7 $53,333 Librarians 1.3 $86,667 Secretary/Clerk 2.7 $80,000

Discretionary Funds Professional Development $60,000 Equipment and Technology $150,000 Instructional Materials $84,000 Gifted and Talented Education $15,000

Total Design Costs $3,954,000

1 (c) 2008 the mcgraw ‑ hill companies using educational resources more effectively school...

Documents