Although Rhode Island ranks 10th nationally in per-pupil spending, Education Week finds students in poor communities are not getting what they need.

01:00 AM EST on Thursday, January 5, 2006

BY JENNIFER D. JORDAN
Journal Staff Writer

Rhode Island is failing to fairly finance its public schools, according to a national education publication, which gave the state one of the worst scores in the nation in its annual state report cards.

Education Week found that Rhode Island's "wealthier districts tend to have higher per-pupil funding levels than do poorer districts." Rhode Island received a D in resource equity, one of four areas graded, and only four states did worse.

The state's failing grade is merited, said Peter McWalters, commissioner of education.

Although the state ranks among the highest in per-pupil spending -- at $10,349 per student in 2003, 10th nationally in data used for the Education Week report -- it has no statewide financing formula for education, and therefore receives low marks. "We are a high-spending state, that's not the issue," McWalters said. "The issue is, are there some kids out there in a high-need place not getting as much spent on them?" English as a Second Language and special-education programs cost more. High-poverty districts with higher numbers of students needing such services have less ability to cover such costs, McWalters said.

Education Week's yearly report, Quality Counts, graded states in four categories, using state and federal data.

The state ranked among the highest in school climate, as it has in past years. School climate includes school safety, parent involvement, class size and school facilities. Rhode Island received a B, the highest grade given this year. But it earned a low grade in its efforts to improve teacher quality: C-minus. While the state requires teachers to major in the subject they teach for teacher certification, it does not require subject-knowledge tests, as do 42 other states.

Rhode Island did not fare as well as expected in content standards, tests that are aligned to the standards and school accountability, earning a C. However, state education officials dispute that grade, saying it should be higher, and authors of the report agreed in a conference call yesterday. Education Week said that the grade was erroneous because it had used outdated information provided by the American Federation of Teachers.

Rhode Island uses the same standards and assessments as Vermont and New Hampshire. The three states designed new tests in math and English for elementary and middle school students that rolled out last fall. Yet Vermont earned a B-minus and New Hampshire a C.

"How can you give these states different rankings when they all have the same standards," said Elliot Krieger, spokesman for the Education Department. "It's very frustrating."

Education Week's editors said they had been made aware of the discrepancy. "The AFT said they went off the standards on state Web sites, and it does look like they had out-of-date information," said Lynn Olson, executive project editor for Quality Counts 2006.

Rhode Island also lost points for not having grade-level standards in science and social studies, although the state is planning on having science standards and a test in 2007, Krieger said.

ONLY FOUR STATES received grades lower than Rhode Island for resource equity in the Quality Counts report: Montana, North Dakota, Vermont and Idaho. New Hampshire, like Rhode Island, received a D.

Rhode Island has a higher proportion of students in urban and urban ring districts than do many other states, McWalters said.

Urban districts, with high concentrations of poverty and ESL students, have more students who are more expensive to teach, McWalters said. When other factors, such as money to improve old buildings and bus costs are factored in, urban districts can spend a lot on paper, but still fall behind their suburban counterparts.

Last year, the state spent an average $12,036 per student, according to the Rhode Island Department of Education. Seventeen districts, including Providence, Newport and Central Falls, spent more than the average, while 19 fell below, including some of the state's highest-performing districts, such as Barrington.

The numbers only tell part of the story, McWalters said. Poor urban areas have less capacity to raise money through property taxes. The state pays virtually all of Central Falls' school costs, and covers 56 percent of Providence's school system. In contrast, Barrington, one of the state's wealthiest towns, receives just 8 percent of its budget from the state.

"If you add to that discussion the issue of tax burden and student need, then you look at a place like Providence that spends above the state average," McWalters said. "But what you also have to realize is that the city is kicking in an increasing share each year through raising property taxes and the kids are needier every year."

THE REPORT HIGHLIGHTS Rhode Island's struggle to fairly finance its schools, said Gary Sasse, executive director of the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council, a business-backed public policy group.

"The whole problem of funding education in Rhode Island is a problem whether you live in East Greenwich or Providence, and it comes from a very simple cause: the over-reliance on property tax, which has built-in inequalities," Sasse said. "The inequalities stem from the relative wealth of communities and the needs of the students they are serving."

Sasse said Rhode Island has to first decide how much it costs to "adequately" educate a student, then figure out how each community can reach that amount, without putting more burden on property owners. Rhode Island ranks near the bottom in the proportion of money that comes from the state versus property taxes -- in Rhode Island 37 percent of education financing comes from the state; the national average is 48 percent.

"You can't just fix the education issue without looking at the tax structure," Sasse said. "We're talking about fundamental tax reform."

State lawmakers are also grappling with this issue. A joint commission to study the issue of a statewide financing formula began meeting last year, and is preparing to send out bids to hire a consultant to analyze how much an adequate education would cost, said state Rep. Edith H. Ajello, D-Providence, co-chairwoman of the commission.

"Taxpayers are worried about how high their property taxes are, and now we also have No Child Left Behind, which requires that our schools meet targets for improving student performance," Ajello said. "Perhaps the adequacy study will give us some indication of why students aren't doing better."

Sasse said he hopes the commission goes beyond the adequacy issue, and studies how efficiently education dollars are being spent.

"The issue is, how do you break the over-reliance on property taxes to fund schools, and how do you control the rate of growth, to control spending?" Sasse said. "We predict that between 2005 and 2010, Rhode Island will see a slight decline in student enrollment of about 1 percent. But our expenditures will increase by 27 percent, and we're among the top spenders in per-pupil expenditures. It's not a sustainable situation."

jjordan@projo.com / (401) 277-7254