THIS YEAR, the Rhode Island General Assembly sent a very clear message to school districts and to unions.

In level-funding state education aid, after passing a Senate bill last year that checks property-tax increases, legislators sent the message that school committees and unions should not expect to get more money if they cannot appropriately account for what they are spending. The legislature is (finally) noticing that, under the current approach, simply sending more money to the districts increases salaries and benefits — but does not necessarily benefit the children in our public schools, particularly in our urban school districts.

Local school committees, to their credit, have begun to take the determined stance that school-district employees must contribute to their health- and dental-benefit plans. Certainly, it would be in the students’ interest if the contending parties signed contracts by the start of each school year (see “Teachers lacking contracts in 8 districts,” news, Aug. 21). Nevertheless, it is encouraging that some school committees are resisting union pressure to simply give more and more to teachers in salaries and benefits while programs that directly benefit students — sports, arts, etc. — are being under funded or cut out altogether.

In several recent contract negotiations, unfortunately, school committees agreed to a quid pro quo for unions’ paying part of their health and dental benefits. In a number of new contracts, any savings were completely offset by a shorter school year, special stipends and increased “buy-backs” — money given to teachers for declining to take health insurance. Instead of helping students, the money continues to go for excessive adult entitlements.

As The Journal article stated, “The lack of money means some districts are contemplating increasing class size, closing programs and laying off teachers.” Students are suffering because of over-generous contract obligations. The legislature has begun to understand that fact — and this year, did not see fit to send more money to schools to simply increase salaries and benefits. (See Rep. Paul Crowley’s June 11 Journal Commentary piece, “A ‘clunker’ school- spending plan.”)

The Education Partnership honors good teachers. We want good teachers to have good salaries, health and dental care and a retirement benefit. But what our school committees are currently negotiating into teacher contracts in Rhode Island is not sustainable, and vastly outstrips the resources that we have for our children, and should be devoting to them.

When are we going to start to talk about real reform to help support our students? For almost a year, The Education Partnership worked closely with the legislature, the Rhode Island Department of Education, and various advocacy groups (including teachers unions!) to help increase public understanding of why Rhode Island needs a permanent school-funding formula, and to help design the formula. (Only one other state, Pennsylvania, does not have a permanent funding formula.)

At the end of the legislative session, though, after it became clear the formula was being distorted to support bloated and unrealistic spending, The Education Partnership felt compelled to withdraw its support for the formula that was ultimately proposed. Thankfully, the legislature refrained from passing a school-funding formula and it level-funded school districts, sending a clear message that it’s time for a change.

This state needs to think about real financial reform and ways that truly bring resources into school districts for students. For starters, when are we going to work on changing the pension system for teachers (and all municipal and state employees)? We should not be distracted by talk about consolidating school systems and redesigning the funding formula — which could cost enormous political capital while doing little to help students directly.

Let’s talk about a real reform agenda and pass legislation that redirects education spending more toward students.

Require that every school district (as well as municipal and state) employee who is more than three years away from retirement to be part of a defined-contribution plan — and take that issue off of the negotiation table. Our legislators could step up to the plate in a big way if they would take on this issue — and pass legislation that changes our system from an unsustainable defined benefit to a sustainable defined-contribution plan.

Additionally, we need one statewide health-care plan for all school district employees — taking that issue off the local negotiation table. Let’s end sick-day abuse that is costing taxpayers so much. The state law should set a cap of 10 sick days for all school-district employees (how about adding municipal and state workers?) with assignment beyond that to Temporary Disability Insurance (TDI). There should be no more insurance buy-backs of any kind. The state should mandate teacher and principal evaluations in every district, every year, to measure outcomes and bring accountability to our school systems.

For all the frustrating news about teacher-contract negotiations in Rhode Island, there are some encouraging signs coming from Smith Hill. This year’s decisions indicate that our legislators now understand something: Rhode Island does not have adequate public-education performance, and increases in funding have been going to excessive adult entitlements, rather than toward improving student achievement.

The citizens of Rhode Island need to work now to send a message to the unions and the legislature. We need a strong new pension-reform plan that seriously gets to the heart of the problem, a statewide health-care plan, no more insurance buy-backs, 10 sick days and TDI, and a research-based evaluation system in every district.

What we are doing is not working for our children and is not sustainable. Unfortunately for our students and the taxpayers of Rhode Island, that is eminently clear.

Valerie Forti is president of The Education Partnership.