Port Arthur I. S. D. has proposed total expenditures will be $172,649,667. The expenditures will be taken from Local M & O collections of $45,115,917. Of that total, $43,380,689 is M & O Collections @ Compressed Rate (compressed rate x 100 x yield per penny) and $1,735,228 is M & O Collections for Level 1 (Level 1 rate x 100 x yield per penny). The district also has I & S tax collections of $19,495,622. Because the district has 9% of its population that is designated as special education, it receives a special education allotment of $4,212,523. It also receives $413,277 for its bilingual students and $8,344,712 in compensatory funds.
For 2011-12, the district has total general fund revenue of $69,665,575. 61.71% or $47,650,002 is from local sources, 37.53% or $21,504,435 is from state sources and 0.75% or $596,238.
The budgeted calculations indicate that $38,227,070 will be used for instruction and $1,924,599 is allocated to instructional leadership. $11,614,028 is proposed to be used for plant M & O. This results in per pupil expenditures of $4,166.
I found this assignment quite enlightening. I have a better understanding of how the funds that are used to operate a district are generated and expended each year.
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Local Property Values
2010 Local District Property Value (DPV)
District 1 $ 145,968,635
District 2 $2,916,187,709
I & S (Interest & Sinking Fund) Tax Collection
District 1 $94,871 District 1 $8,836,256
Chapter 46 (EDA) Totals
District 1 $572,716
District 2 $0
Funds Available to Make Payments
District 1 $667,587
District 2 $8,836,256
By examining the figures above, it is apparent that District 2 is a much wealthier district than District 1. District 1only has a local district property value approximately 145 million dollars and District 2 has a local district property value of approximately 2 billion dollars. I would ascertain that the buildings and the infrastructure in District 2 are probably newer and better maintained than those of District 1. With property values as low as they low as they are in District 1 would probably indicate that the buildings in District 1 are somewhat dilapidated and the infrastructure antiquated. I would also envision District 2 to have more intervention and remedial programs than District 1 although they are needed much more in District 1. Even if District 1 had newer buildings, it doesn’t have enough funds available to make payments on them according to calculations above. Since District 2 has the funds available to implement new programs for its struggling students, it is probably rated by the state as a Recognized or Exemplary district. District 1, on the other hand, appears to be experiencing financial hard times and is probably rated by the state as an Acceptable or Unacceptable district.
District 1 $ 145,968,635
District 2 $2,916,187,709
I & S (Interest & Sinking Fund) Tax Collection
District 1 $94,871 District 1 $8,836,256
Chapter 46 (EDA) Totals
District 1 $572,716
District 2 $0
Funds Available to Make Payments
District 1 $667,587
District 2 $8,836,256
By examining the figures above, it is apparent that District 2 is a much wealthier district than District 1. District 1only has a local district property value approximately 145 million dollars and District 2 has a local district property value of approximately 2 billion dollars. I would ascertain that the buildings and the infrastructure in District 2 are probably newer and better maintained than those of District 1. With property values as low as they low as they are in District 1 would probably indicate that the buildings in District 1 are somewhat dilapidated and the infrastructure antiquated. I would also envision District 2 to have more intervention and remedial programs than District 1 although they are needed much more in District 1. Even if District 1 had newer buildings, it doesn’t have enough funds available to make payments on them according to calculations above. Since District 2 has the funds available to implement new programs for its struggling students, it is probably rated by the state as a Recognized or Exemplary district. District 1, on the other hand, appears to be experiencing financial hard times and is probably rated by the state as an Acceptable or Unacceptable district.
Analyzing District Snapshots
Economically Disadvantaged
District 1 93.3%
District 2 20.7%
Total Refined ADA Adjusted for Decline
District 1 $3,893.754
District 2 $4 032.037
Weighted ADA (WADA)
District 1 $5,555.815
District 2 $4,794.076
Although District 1 has a smaller ADA than District 2, it has a larger Weighted Average Daily Attendance Rate. One reason for this is because District 1 has a higher percentage of economically disadvantaged students (93.3%) than District 2 (20.7%). District one also has a large percentage of its student population represented in Special Education, Bilingual/ESL Education, and Career & Technical Education. While District 2 has no LEP (Limited English Proficient) students, District 1 has 48% of its students represented in this sub-group. Since the districts receive additional funds according to the number of students in special populations, District 1 has a higher WADA than District 2.
Effects of Local Property Values
Effects of Local Property Values
2010 Local District Property Value (DPV)
District 1 $ 145,968,635
District 2 $2,916,187,709
I & S (Interest & Sinking Fund) Tax Collection
District 1 $94,871 District 1 $8,836,256
Chapter 46 (EDA) Totals
District 1 $572,716
District 2 $0
Funds Available to Make Payments
District 1 $667,587
District 2 $8,836,256
By examining the figures above, it is apparent that District 2 is a much wealthier district than District 1. District 1only has a local district property value approximately 145 million dollars and District 2 has a local district property value of approximately 2 billion dollars. I would ascertain that the buildings and the infrastructure in District 2 are probably newer and better maintained than those of District 1. With property values as low as they low as they are in District 1 would probably indicate that the buildings in District 1 are somewhat dilapidated and the infrastructure antiquated. I would also envision District 2 to have more intervention and remedial programs than District 1 although they are needed much more in District 1. Even if District 1 had newer buildings, it doesn’t have enough funds available to make payments on them according to calculations above. Since District 2 has the funds available to implement new programs for its struggling students, it is probably rated by the state as a Recognized or Exemplary district. District 1, on the other hand, appears to be experiencing financial hard times and is probably rated by the state as an Acceptable or Unacceptable district.
2010 Local District Property Value (DPV)
District 1 $ 145,968,635
District 2 $2,916,187,709
I & S (Interest & Sinking Fund) Tax Collection
District 1 $94,871 District 1 $8,836,256
Chapter 46 (EDA) Totals
District 1 $572,716
District 2 $0
Funds Available to Make Payments
District 1 $667,587
District 2 $8,836,256
By examining the figures above, it is apparent that District 2 is a much wealthier district than District 1. District 1only has a local district property value approximately 145 million dollars and District 2 has a local district property value of approximately 2 billion dollars. I would ascertain that the buildings and the infrastructure in District 2 are probably newer and better maintained than those of District 1. With property values as low as they low as they are in District 1 would probably indicate that the buildings in District 1 are somewhat dilapidated and the infrastructure antiquated. I would also envision District 2 to have more intervention and remedial programs than District 1 although they are needed much more in District 1. Even if District 1 had newer buildings, it doesn’t have enough funds available to make payments on them according to calculations above. Since District 2 has the funds available to implement new programs for its struggling students, it is probably rated by the state as a Recognized or Exemplary district. District 1, on the other hand, appears to be experiencing financial hard times and is probably rated by the state as an Acceptable or Unacceptable district.
Compensatory Education Allotment Funds
Compensatory Education Allotment
District 1 - $3,835,000
District 2 - $633,369
Although District 1 and District 2 have similarities in the number of teachers, the student/teacher ratio and the approximate number of students they serve, they differ in the types of students they serve. District 1 has large number of economically disadvantaged students (93.3%) and District 2 only has 20.7% of economically disadvantaged students. Compensatory education funds are provided to districts so that they are able to provide programs and services to the at-risk population. These funds are intended to make up for experiences lacked by those students who are economically disadvantaged. Compensatory education may also be defined as a program of supplementary instruction designed to meet the individual needs of students that may be performing significantly below their expected achievement level in language arts, math and or reading. If used as intended and implemented to address specific student needs, District 1 could see tremendous growth in student achievement. District 2 on the other hand with its low percentage of economically disadvantaged students, does not require the same amount of remediation and/or intensive instruction. That results in District 2 receiving a smaller amount of compensatory education allotment funds.
District 1 - $3,835,000
District 2 - $633,369
Although District 1 and District 2 have similarities in the number of teachers, the student/teacher ratio and the approximate number of students they serve, they differ in the types of students they serve. District 1 has large number of economically disadvantaged students (93.3%) and District 2 only has 20.7% of economically disadvantaged students. Compensatory education funds are provided to districts so that they are able to provide programs and services to the at-risk population. These funds are intended to make up for experiences lacked by those students who are economically disadvantaged. Compensatory education may also be defined as a program of supplementary instruction designed to meet the individual needs of students that may be performing significantly below their expected achievement level in language arts, math and or reading. If used as intended and implemented to address specific student needs, District 1 could see tremendous growth in student achievement. District 2 on the other hand with its low percentage of economically disadvantaged students, does not require the same amount of remediation and/or intensive instruction. That results in District 2 receiving a smaller amount of compensatory education allotment funds.
Analyzing Contrasts
Although the intent of WADA (Weighted Average Daily Attendance) is to provide more money and professionals working directly with students in District 1 than in District 2 due to the percentage of economically disadvantaged students, this was not the case. District 1 has 93.3% of its student population that is economically disadvantaged while District 2 only has 20.7%. District 1 should have received more money because not only does it have a significantly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students, it also has higher percentages of LEP, Bilingual/ESL Education students. These special populations require intensive instruction and would benefit from a lower teacher to student ratio.
District 1 has a WADA of $5,555.815 and District 2 has a WADA of $4,794.076. It would appear that District 1 would have more money to hire more professionals to work with students and have a lower teacher to student ration; however, this is not indicated in the actual reported figures. As indicated in Part 2, District 1 had a budget that was $6,522,508.80 smaller than District 2. While they had the same number of teachers, District 2 actually had more funds to provide better instruction, and remediation if necessary, than District 1. The way that the state allocates funds to the districts does not provide the assistance to the poorer districts as it should. Even though the state provides a larger WADA for the special populations, in the end the funding comes up extremely short.
District 1 has a WADA of $5,555.815 and District 2 has a WADA of $4,794.076. It would appear that District 1 would have more money to hire more professionals to work with students and have a lower teacher to student ration; however, this is not indicated in the actual reported figures. As indicated in Part 2, District 1 had a budget that was $6,522,508.80 smaller than District 2. While they had the same number of teachers, District 2 actually had more funds to provide better instruction, and remediation if necessary, than District 1. The way that the state allocates funds to the districts does not provide the assistance to the poorer districts as it should. Even though the state provides a larger WADA for the special populations, in the end the funding comes up extremely short.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Additional Stakeholder Input
Although my superintendent was not available for an interview, I responded according to my previous experiences in working on the budget with the Superintendent.
What types of input could you receive for budget development from each of the following individuals or groups:
* Central Office Administrators and Staff - they offer information on fulfilling the goals generated by the Board of trustees, federal budgets (i.e. special education, Title I, Bilingual/Migrant, etc.), staffing requirements for each department, curricuum and instruction needs, technology requirements, finance information, information on personnel budgets (FTE’s, salary increases, additions or deletions for positions, etc.), benefit requirements;
* Principals - staffing needs, curriculum and instruction needs based on student achievement and demographics;
* Site Based Decision Making Committees – curriculum and instruction needs based on student performance on state developed assessments, needs based on goals established by the committee, funding sources, responsible parties;
* District Improvement Committees - strategies to fulfill the district goals, funding sources to obtain goals, activities to achieve district goals, persons responsible;
* Teacher Organizations - teachers’ curriculum and instruction needs, teachers’ concerns and needs;
* Key Stakeholders - Community concerns, parent concerns;
* Board of Trustees - District goals and objectives, district priorities.
What types of input could you receive for budget development from each of the following individuals or groups:
* Central Office Administrators and Staff - they offer information on fulfilling the goals generated by the Board of trustees, federal budgets (i.e. special education, Title I, Bilingual/Migrant, etc.), staffing requirements for each department, curricuum and instruction needs, technology requirements, finance information, information on personnel budgets (FTE’s, salary increases, additions or deletions for positions, etc.), benefit requirements;
* Principals - staffing needs, curriculum and instruction needs based on student achievement and demographics;
* Site Based Decision Making Committees – curriculum and instruction needs based on student performance on state developed assessments, needs based on goals established by the committee, funding sources, responsible parties;
* District Improvement Committees - strategies to fulfill the district goals, funding sources to obtain goals, activities to achieve district goals, persons responsible;
* Teacher Organizations - teachers’ curriculum and instruction needs, teachers’ concerns and needs;
* Key Stakeholders - Community concerns, parent concerns;
* Board of Trustees - District goals and objectives, district priorities.
Superintendent's Interview
Since we were dismissed from school this week, my Superintendent was unavailable to interview. I have learned that by law, the superintendent is responsible for preparing the budget. My superintendent has worked in the same capacity in districts of varying sizes. With this said, the size, demographics, and the student needs, vary from district to district.
After the Board of Trustees develop the district’s goals, the superintendent is then responsible for preparation of the budget. If the Superintendent has the full support of the Board for each goal, it is easier to prioritize. First and foremost on the list of priorities is addressing students’ needs.
Although the Board does not prepare the budget the Superintendent must work collaboratively with them to develop the budget. Because the Board represents the community as well, they must have full buy-in to every aspect of the budget. In the end, they are responsible for approving and adopting the final budget.
The Superintendent not only focuses on revenues and expenditures, he/she must also pay attention to the fund balance. Every superintendent works extremely hard so that he/she won’t have to use any of the district’s rainy day fund.
The Superintendent has to also make sure that the district uses the public funds conservatively. The Superintendent is certain to make enemies when public funds are expended on what the public views as unnecessary items. This is also important when the district wants the public to consider the passage of a bond. Even when items of importance are included, if the public feels that the district has been wasteful in the past, they are more than likely not to approve a bond. The Superintendent has to remember that he/she and the Board are custodians of the taxpayers’ tax dollars. Finally, the district’s spending should be tailored to the attainment of district’s goals.
Reflection:
I had never taken the time to examine all of the factors that a Superintendent must consider in developing a goal driven budget. Although he is responsible for preparing the budget, he must give the opinions and views of others strong consideration. He/she must listen to all key community constituents. I was aware of all the timelines and dates, but I didn’t realize their importance. Some of the dates are legal timelines that must be adhered to. Just because the Board is not responsible for preparing the budget, their establishment of the district’s goals is the main source for the development of a comprehensive goal driven budget. The goals set the foundation for which the budget must be built.
After the Board of Trustees develop the district’s goals, the superintendent is then responsible for preparation of the budget. If the Superintendent has the full support of the Board for each goal, it is easier to prioritize. First and foremost on the list of priorities is addressing students’ needs.
Although the Board does not prepare the budget the Superintendent must work collaboratively with them to develop the budget. Because the Board represents the community as well, they must have full buy-in to every aspect of the budget. In the end, they are responsible for approving and adopting the final budget.
The Superintendent not only focuses on revenues and expenditures, he/she must also pay attention to the fund balance. Every superintendent works extremely hard so that he/she won’t have to use any of the district’s rainy day fund.
The Superintendent has to also make sure that the district uses the public funds conservatively. The Superintendent is certain to make enemies when public funds are expended on what the public views as unnecessary items. This is also important when the district wants the public to consider the passage of a bond. Even when items of importance are included, if the public feels that the district has been wasteful in the past, they are more than likely not to approve a bond. The Superintendent has to remember that he/she and the Board are custodians of the taxpayers’ tax dollars. Finally, the district’s spending should be tailored to the attainment of district’s goals.
Reflection:
I had never taken the time to examine all of the factors that a Superintendent must consider in developing a goal driven budget. Although he is responsible for preparing the budget, he must give the opinions and views of others strong consideration. He/she must listen to all key community constituents. I was aware of all the timelines and dates, but I didn’t realize their importance. Some of the dates are legal timelines that must be adhered to. Just because the Board is not responsible for preparing the budget, their establishment of the district’s goals is the main source for the development of a comprehensive goal driven budget. The goals set the foundation for which the budget must be built.
TEA Budgeting Guidelines, January 2010
This document is not only important to a superintendent, but it could also be useful to any school district administrator. This whole section on the budget made me realize that the fundamental nature of any budget should be derived from the goals established. The goals are defined to insure that the districts allocate money to fulfill student needs. The budget is not only a page with numbers representative of different categories. It is a document that is prepared carefully and meticulously taking into consideration the goals set forth by the Board of Trustees. There are also several legal components that have to be considered. The district has to guarantee that it adheres to all federal guidelines, or it stands to lose funding. One example of this would be federal funding for special education. If a district does not continuously meet the previous year’s Maintenance of Effort (MOE) for special education, it may have to refund some of the federal dollars it received.
This document also made me realize that making budget projections is no game. A district cannot spend more revenue than it receives. It is important to accurately make predictions of student projections and taxable values. If these components are inaccurate, the entire district’s budget is at risk. It is also important for a district to periodically monitor the budget to substantiate whether the dollars are being spent effectively.
It is essential that the superintendent and the leadership team be knowledgeable of the TEA Budgeting Guidelines, published January, 2010. Without this knowledge, vast errors are eminent, and the superintendent could be at risk of losing his/her job. I know more now than I have ever know about a budget. This information will definitely be used in my current job as Director of Special Education.
This document also made me realize that making budget projections is no game. A district cannot spend more revenue than it receives. It is important to accurately make predictions of student projections and taxable values. If these components are inaccurate, the entire district’s budget is at risk. It is also important for a district to periodically monitor the budget to substantiate whether the dollars are being spent effectively.
It is essential that the superintendent and the leadership team be knowledgeable of the TEA Budgeting Guidelines, published January, 2010. Without this knowledge, vast errors are eminent, and the superintendent could be at risk of losing his/her job. I know more now than I have ever know about a budget. This information will definitely be used in my current job as Director of Special Education.
Top Five Events and Important Dates in the Development of a District Budget
Although I have been assigned to Group 1, my input has not been considered; therefore, I will list my top five events and important dates in the development of a district budget. They are listed according to district’s fiscal calendar.
1. October thru November - These dates are important because the Board of Trustees adopts the campus staffing formula and the non-campus staffing guidelines. During this time, a collection and an analysis of student projections is also made.
2. Late October thru December – Student projections are refined the district applies for student/teacher ratio formulas.This is one of the major funding sources.The districts receive a large amount of funding that is based on the district’s WADA (Weighted Average Daily Attendance).
3. February thru March – Campus and central office budgets are received.Other than employee costs and benefits, the second most important costs are the campus costs.Campuses make projections based on goals developed by the Campus Improvement Committee.Student learning and performance is directly related to the campus budget.
4. May thru June – The districts receive a preliminary estimate of taxable values from the Appraisal District.This gives the district an estimate of the revenue they will receive from the Certified Taxable Values that will be received in July.This timeframe is important because it allows districts to develop a preliminary budget that will be reviewed by the Board of Trustees near the beginning of June.At this time, the district will also publish the proposed budget summary on the web.They also publish the adoption of the district’s budget in the newspaper.
5. August – It is legally required that the district adopts a tax rate, approves and adopts the final budget.
1. October thru November - These dates are important because the Board of Trustees adopts the campus staffing formula and the non-campus staffing guidelines. During this time, a collection and an analysis of student projections is also made.
2. Late October thru December – Student projections are refined the district applies for student/teacher ratio formulas.This is one of the major funding sources.The districts receive a large amount of funding that is based on the district’s WADA (Weighted Average Daily Attendance).
3. February thru March – Campus and central office budgets are received.Other than employee costs and benefits, the second most important costs are the campus costs.Campuses make projections based on goals developed by the Campus Improvement Committee.Student learning and performance is directly related to the campus budget.
4. May thru June – The districts receive a preliminary estimate of taxable values from the Appraisal District.This gives the district an estimate of the revenue they will receive from the Certified Taxable Values that will be received in July.This timeframe is important because it allows districts to develop a preliminary budget that will be reviewed by the Board of Trustees near the beginning of June.At this time, the district will also publish the proposed budget summary on the web.They also publish the adoption of the district’s budget in the newspaper.
5. August – It is legally required that the district adopts a tax rate, approves and adopts the final budget.
A Goal Driven Budget
It is imperative that every school district and every school develop a goal driven budget. A goal driven budget is a budget that that is completely aligned and funded are to the goals that are developed by the organization for which it is prepared. In other words, a goal driven budget is crucial to a district and a school because it is designed and funds are allocated to attain the goals set forth by the district and/or campus.
The initial goals are developed by the district’s Board of Trustees. These goals basically determine how the district will spend its funds for the school year. These goals are based on the defined goals and priorities that are defined by the District Improvement Committee. This is a collaborative effort that involves representatives from the district’s stakeholders. Communication between the groups is extremely important.
After the district’s goals are developed, they are then distributed to each campus. Each campus has the responsibility for developing a Campus Improvement Committee. These committee members are comprised of members of the school’s stakeholders. The Campus improvement Committee then develops a Campus Improvement Plan. The goals of the campus plan mirror the goals established for the district. Since I have previously served as an elementary school principal, I know that each goal has objectives, persons responsible, resources required (funding and personnel), timelines (formative and summative), and evaluations. I agree with Dr. Arterbury that the district plan should be “version of the vision.” I interpret this as “although each campus plan will be somewhat different because of the student demographics, there should be some alignment to the district’s plan.”
Ultimately, district and campus spending should be tailored to insure the attainment of goals that have been established. When the budget shows commitment to achieving the developed goals, we have a goal driven budget.
The initial goals are developed by the district’s Board of Trustees. These goals basically determine how the district will spend its funds for the school year. These goals are based on the defined goals and priorities that are defined by the District Improvement Committee. This is a collaborative effort that involves representatives from the district’s stakeholders. Communication between the groups is extremely important.
After the district’s goals are developed, they are then distributed to each campus. Each campus has the responsibility for developing a Campus Improvement Committee. These committee members are comprised of members of the school’s stakeholders. The Campus improvement Committee then develops a Campus Improvement Plan. The goals of the campus plan mirror the goals established for the district. Since I have previously served as an elementary school principal, I know that each goal has objectives, persons responsible, resources required (funding and personnel), timelines (formative and summative), and evaluations. I agree with Dr. Arterbury that the district plan should be “version of the vision.” I interpret this as “although each campus plan will be somewhat different because of the student demographics, there should be some alignment to the district’s plan.”
Ultimately, district and campus spending should be tailored to insure the attainment of goals that have been established. When the budget shows commitment to achieving the developed goals, we have a goal driven budget.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Equity, Equality and Adequacy
For any school administrator to be successful, he/she must have a clear understanding of equity, equality and adequacy from an educational stand point. Equity is insuring that all children have an equal access to a high quality education regardless of where they live or who they are. An example would be Title I funding that provides additional money for schools that have a large population of students that receive free and reduced lunches, or economically disadvantaged. A second example would be federal funding received by a district to provide supplementary services to special education students. Both of these funding sources provide money to insure that the learning field is somewhat leveled or equitable for all students.
Equality in education is defined as every student having the same access to the same type of basic educational programs. Permanent school funding is an example of fairness in funding. Another good example would lie in a district's ability to hire a high quality teacher just as a neighboring district. Due to demographics and salaries in many districts, it is very difficult to hire and retain quality teachers.
Adequacy is defined as a minimum level of funding needed for every school to teach its students or a district receiving financial support sufficient to meet state accreditation standards. Providing school improvement funding to a school that is rated unacceptable would be one example of adequate funding. All of the sub-groups identified in PBMAS and the funding provided in the District Improvement Plan is another example.
Equality in education is defined as every student having the same access to the same type of basic educational programs. Permanent school funding is an example of fairness in funding. Another good example would lie in a district's ability to hire a high quality teacher just as a neighboring district. Due to demographics and salaries in many districts, it is very difficult to hire and retain quality teachers.
Adequacy is defined as a minimum level of funding needed for every school to teach its students or a district receiving financial support sufficient to meet state accreditation standards. Providing school improvement funding to a school that is rated unacceptable would be one example of adequate funding. All of the sub-groups identified in PBMAS and the funding provided in the District Improvement Plan is another example.
State Formula Funding
State formula funding is too complex and has too many variables to be 100% successful for each school district in the state of Texas. Dr. Nick's did assist me in acquiring more knowledge than I initially started with. Although there are several issues impacting the state formula, I have addressed four. State funding is affected by WADA (weighted average daily attendance, ADA (average daily attendance), property taxes, allotments for special instructional programs, etc. If all of the variables were constant and equitable, maybe then, all of the districts in Texas would be funded equitably. Our legislatures need to develop a funding plan where all of districts would receive the same amount of funding for all of our students. Therefore, we would more apt to provide all of the students of Texas an equal, equitable, and adequate education.
History of Texas Education
I found the history of educational history evolving in Texas to be amazing. I have a new found respect for education as it relates to our state's forefathers. Although there were several contributing factors in history for education in Texas, there were three I found most important. The first factor being the Constitution of 1869. This constitution established compensatory education for students ages eight through fourteen. A poll tax to establish support for education and an ad valorem tax for education was created. The second most important act was the establishment of the Permanent and Available School Funds. This was established by the adoption of the new 1876 Texas Constitution. It was then mandated that 25% of the state's general revenues be dedicated to education. The new constitution set the foundation for school finance dealing with equity, adequacy, and efficiency in the state of Texas. The third most important event affecting education in Texas was the Gilmer-Aiken Laws that were passed during the 51st Legislative Session. These laws developed and organized approach to the way the state supplemented local taxes to fund public education. These three historical events were a great beginning to the development of education in Texas. For some reason, education does not appear to be a priority to our current legislatures. As educators, we have to force our legislatures to take a closer look at the injustices they are now forcing on our students.
Comparison of Two District Improvement Plans
In comparing the Austin I. S. D. plan to my district, there were several components that were similar, but there were also many differences. Both plans address long and short term goals. The plan for the district that I work in only stated the goals and listed some of the short term goals to accomplish the long term goals. The Austin I. S. D. plan, in my opinion was better organized. In addressing the comprehensive system for continuous improvement, Austin not only stated the policy, but it also illustrated the alignment of the district's planning efforts (Figure 2). However, my district completed a comprehensive needs assessment, and included the data documentation for the assessment. Austin I. S. D. did not include a needs assessment, but made reference to one being conducted.
In the plan for the district that I work, each area to be addressed is outlined in a table format that indicates the following: 1) the goal that is to be addressed; 2) the person(s) responsible; 3) resources; 4) the timelines for implementation; 5) timelines for monitoring; and 6) evidence of completion. The Austin I. S. D. does not include any of the fore mentioned. The AISD plan uses a balanced scorecard to monitor performance. A template of the scorecard should have been included.
The Austin I. S. D. Plan presented a very detailed strategic plan along with three principal components. Although both plans refer to and list the Vision, Mission Statement, Values, Goals, Measurable Outcomes and Strategies, the Austin I. S. D. plan discusses it as a part of its strategic plan. The Austin plan goes on to discuss Departmental and Employee Plans. These components are not a part of my district’s plan. I also like the fact that AISD has established stakeholder groups that are a part of the decision-making process. My district has individuals from the community listed.
The AISD plan did not include enough data based on student performance. Since student performance is the basis for any school district’s improvement plan, more emphasis should have been placed on student performance data. In fact, there is no real data, only reference made to addressing the data. It also referred to Figure 3 that was to list annual actions for 2010-2011. I could not locate Figure 3.
Although there are major similarities and differences between the two plans, the most important components are included in both. The major differences are the presentation and the format in the two plans.
In the plan for the district that I work, each area to be addressed is outlined in a table format that indicates the following: 1) the goal that is to be addressed; 2) the person(s) responsible; 3) resources; 4) the timelines for implementation; 5) timelines for monitoring; and 6) evidence of completion. The Austin I. S. D. does not include any of the fore mentioned. The AISD plan uses a balanced scorecard to monitor performance. A template of the scorecard should have been included.
The Austin I. S. D. Plan presented a very detailed strategic plan along with three principal components. Although both plans refer to and list the Vision, Mission Statement, Values, Goals, Measurable Outcomes and Strategies, the Austin I. S. D. plan discusses it as a part of its strategic plan. The Austin plan goes on to discuss Departmental and Employee Plans. These components are not a part of my district’s plan. I also like the fact that AISD has established stakeholder groups that are a part of the decision-making process. My district has individuals from the community listed.
The AISD plan did not include enough data based on student performance. Since student performance is the basis for any school district’s improvement plan, more emphasis should have been placed on student performance data. In fact, there is no real data, only reference made to addressing the data. It also referred to Figure 3 that was to list annual actions for 2010-2011. I could not locate Figure 3.
Although there are major similarities and differences between the two plans, the most important components are included in both. The major differences are the presentation and the format in the two plans.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Superintendent's Interview
The time that I spent interviewing Dr. Mark Porterie, the Deputy Superintendent of Port Arthur Independent School District was not only enlightening but pleasurable as well. Although I have known him and work with him for many years, I was impressed with several of his responses. The response that really made an impact on me was his answer to “What does ethical leadership look like?” He responded by stating that he believes in telling the truth even if it will get him into trouble. He believes that living with himself would be the hardest thing do if he knew he had done something that was not right. He is a young man, but very wise beyond his years.
One of the positive aspects of being in a leadership position is the ability to change things that are unfair into things that are right for everyone involved. He is especially concerned about fair treatment of all students. He feels that a superintendent also has the ability to mold and create dreams that all stakeholders have and would benefit from. On the other hand, there are difficulties that arise. He stated the most difficult part of being a leader is accepting the responsibility of decisions that have gone wrong, knowing that you had nothing to do with that decision. He believes that a good leader protects his or her staff and students at all times.
Since I realized that Competency 4 was one of my weakest areas, we talked in depth about developing a good working relationship with the Board. According to him, in order to build a solid working relationship with the District’s Board of Trustees, it is a good idea to find out what platform each of them has set as a priority. Never should the board ever think that the superintendent or staff is trying to play one side against the other. It is important to acknowledge the politics, but don’t play them.
The superintendent accomplishes wide rang strategic planning by working with the board and staff leadership team to follow a knowledge-based decision-making process. In doing so, we review and update exiting mission, vision and goal statements for the district. We also establish goals and identify trends and issues that are likely to have significant impact on achieving those goals. The board and leadership team will assess the strategic objectives periodically in collaboration with the community. Everyone then works toward the common goal(s).
When asked to discuss the importance of organizational leadership, as well as decision-making and problem-solving skills in addressing these compliance areas and maintaining positive change, he stated that the first thing a superintendent has to realize that there are laws that must be followed. The second thing is to use common sense when making decisions. Finally, his last statement dealt with the rule that he lives by. He stated, “The most important rule, by which I have tried to live my life and conduct my career, is to always tell the truth. If you do that, you do not have to be afraid of outcomes. If you do this, when your career is over, you will not be left with a lot of “what-if’s.”
The time that I spent interviewing Dr. Mark Porterie, the Deputy Superintendent of Port Arthur Independent School District was not only enlightening but pleasurable as well. Although I have known him and work with him for many years, I was impressed with several of his responses. The response that really made an impact on me was his answer to “What does ethical leadership look like?” He responded by stating that he believes in telling the truth even if it will get him into trouble. He believes that living with himself would be the hardest thing do if he knew he had done something that was not right. He is a young man, but very wise beyond his years.
One of the positive aspects of being in a leadership position is the ability to change things that are unfair into things that are right for everyone involved. He is especially concerned about fair treatment of all students. He feels that a superintendent also has the ability to mold and create dreams that all stakeholders have and would benefit from. On the other hand, there are difficulties that arise. He stated the most difficult part of being a leader is accepting the responsibility of decisions that have gone wrong, knowing that you had nothing to do with that decision. He believes that a good leader protects his or her staff and students at all times.
Since I realized that Competency 4 was one of my weakest areas, we talked in depth about developing a good working relationship with the Board. According to him, in order to build a solid working relationship with the District’s Board of Trustees, it is a good idea to find out what platform each of them has set as a priority. Never should the board ever think that the superintendent or staff is trying to play one side against the other. It is important to acknowledge the politics, but don’t play them.
The superintendent accomplishes wide rang strategic planning by working with the board and staff leadership team to follow a knowledge-based decision-making process. In doing so, we review and update exiting mission, vision and goal statements for the district. We also establish goals and identify trends and issues that are likely to have significant impact on achieving those goals. The board and leadership team will assess the strategic objectives periodically in collaboration with the community. Everyone then works toward the common goal(s).
When asked to discuss the importance of organizational leadership, as well as decision-making and problem-solving skills in addressing these compliance areas and maintaining positive change, he stated that the first thing a superintendent has to realize that there are laws that must be followed. The second thing is to use common sense when making decisions. Finally, his last statement dealt with the rule that he lives by. He stated, “The most important rule, by which I have tried to live my life and conduct my career, is to always tell the truth. If you do that, you do not have to be afraid of outcomes. If you do this, when your career is over, you will not be left with a lot of “what-if’s.”
Sunday, September 4, 2011
9450 Washington Blvd.
Beaumont, TX 77707
Phone (409) 866-2720
E-mail sboutte@paisd.org
Vita for
Sharon K. Boutte
Objective
A challenging career in educational administration where a highly trained individual with excellent experience and education can succeed, while contributing to the overall goals of the organization.
Work experience
July 1, 2008 – Present
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Director of Special Education
• Manage, supervise and evaluation of diagnostic, speech and teachers of special education students. Select and create educational programs that improve the academic performance of students receiving services from the special education program. Writing and managing the budgetary components of special education program.
July 1, 2001 – June 30, 2008
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Principal
• Manage, supervise and evaluation of the professional and non-professional building staff; evaluating and selecting instructional materials; planning and implementing staff development activities; managing behaviors of the student body; etc.
August, 1999 – June, 2001
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Assistant Principal
• Assists in the supervision and evaluation of the professional and non-professional building staff, distribution and maintenance of textbooks; acquiring and placement of substitute teachers; assists in planning and implementing staff development activities; promoting positive school/community relations; numerous other duties and functions as assigned.
August, 1993 – August, 1999
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Educational Diagnostician
• Administered and interpreted a wide range of psycho-educational instruments; consulted and communicated with teachers, parents and administrative personnel.
August, 1988 – May 1993
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Special Education Teacher
• Created, modified, and implemented special academic and behavioral programs for special needs students.
May, 1983 – June 1987
Jefferson County Courthouse
Beaumont, TX
Administrative Assistant
• Performed typing, shorthand dictations, filing, telephone duties, and assisted general public with problems.
Education
December, 1998 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Master of Education in Administration
• Certification in Mid-Management
December, 1992 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Master of Education in Special Education
• Certification as an Educational Diagnostician
August, 1988 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Bachelor of Science in Secondary Education
• Certification in Special Education and Economics
August, 1982 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Bachelor of Business Administration in Marketing
Professional Memberships
Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association
Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.
Top Ladies of Distinction
Additional Information and Excellent References upon Request.
Beaumont, TX 77707
Phone (409) 866-2720
E-mail sboutte@paisd.org
Vita for
Sharon K. Boutte
Objective
A challenging career in educational administration where a highly trained individual with excellent experience and education can succeed, while contributing to the overall goals of the organization.
Work experience
July 1, 2008 – Present
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Director of Special Education
• Manage, supervise and evaluation of diagnostic, speech and teachers of special education students. Select and create educational programs that improve the academic performance of students receiving services from the special education program. Writing and managing the budgetary components of special education program.
July 1, 2001 – June 30, 2008
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Principal
• Manage, supervise and evaluation of the professional and non-professional building staff; evaluating and selecting instructional materials; planning and implementing staff development activities; managing behaviors of the student body; etc.
August, 1999 – June, 2001
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Assistant Principal
• Assists in the supervision and evaluation of the professional and non-professional building staff, distribution and maintenance of textbooks; acquiring and placement of substitute teachers; assists in planning and implementing staff development activities; promoting positive school/community relations; numerous other duties and functions as assigned.
August, 1993 – August, 1999
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Educational Diagnostician
• Administered and interpreted a wide range of psycho-educational instruments; consulted and communicated with teachers, parents and administrative personnel.
August, 1988 – May 1993
Port Arthur I. S. D. Port Arthur, TX
Special Education Teacher
• Created, modified, and implemented special academic and behavioral programs for special needs students.
May, 1983 – June 1987
Jefferson County Courthouse
Beaumont, TX
Administrative Assistant
• Performed typing, shorthand dictations, filing, telephone duties, and assisted general public with problems.
Education
December, 1998 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Master of Education in Administration
• Certification in Mid-Management
December, 1992 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Master of Education in Special Education
• Certification as an Educational Diagnostician
August, 1988 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Bachelor of Science in Secondary Education
• Certification in Special Education and Economics
August, 1982 Lamar University Beaumont, TX
Bachelor of Business Administration in Marketing
Professional Memberships
Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association
Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.
Top Ladies of Distinction
Additional Information and Excellent References upon Request.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Action Research
Action research is an excellent tool to be utilized in school districts large and small. It is designed to allow individuals and groups to work in a collaborative manner to identify problem areas and to problem solve. It allows all stake holders to work towards a common goal to improve the work place or a community. Action research allows those that are knowledgeable about an identified problem to provide input for a solution. Although it has not been utilized in the district in which I work, I now see how a superintendent, a principal, or a teacher would benefit from its use.
As the director of special education, I could utilize the action research approach to address a variety of problems that plague special education. One of the most current areas special education is addressing is planning for administration of the STAAR. Research teams could be developed to investigate and analyze the implications of administering the STAAR to special education students. The teams could also examine the difficulty levels and ways to prepare these special needs students for this monumental task. This tool is a definite advantage to use in any educational research. It is a tool that is vital importance to any school district and its student achievement.
As the director of special education, I could utilize the action research approach to address a variety of problems that plague special education. One of the most current areas special education is addressing is planning for administration of the STAAR. Research teams could be developed to investigate and analyze the implications of administering the STAAR to special education students. The teams could also examine the difficulty levels and ways to prepare these special needs students for this monumental task. This tool is a definite advantage to use in any educational research. It is a tool that is vital importance to any school district and its student achievement.
Blogging
Blogging is a new term for me. I always thought I was somewhat savvy as far as technology was concerned. This course has shown me otherwise. Until enrolling in this course and have to develop a blog, I had no idea that a blog is a blend of the term web log. Blogs are commonly utilied for journaling. Since our students are 21st century learners,m the should feel free to use 21st century tools that are available at their fingertips, their smart phones. Students are now blogging several times per day using Twitter and Facebook. Why not allow the the opportunity to create their own blogs in their classrooms for personal journaling?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)