Home

About
- Who We Are
- Community Guidelines
- Right to Respond

Advertising on BOR
- Advertise on BOR
- Buy on all Texas Blogs

Advertisements

Search




Advanced Search


The 65% Solution (Divided by Two, Over Three Years, Plus Football)


by: Ryan Goodland

Sat Jul 29, 2006 at 11:07 PM CDT


Last August the governor issued an executive order requiring that public schools spend sixty-five percent of all funds on "in the classroom" expenses. The plan isn't anything more than a stalking horse for vouchers, which is why I was surprised to read a headline today that the Texas Education Agency was reversing some of the most egregious elements of the plan. ("Libraries, counselors and nurses to count as instructional expenses in 65 percent plan"). Then I read the story:

Rules released Friday by the Texas Education Agency split in half a new requirement that schools spend 65 percent of their budget on instruction.

One part, to be phased in over three years, follows the U.S. Department of Education's definition of instructional spending, which does not include money spent on nurses, counselors or libraries.

The other part, effective this coming school year, includes spending on nurses, counselors and libraries among instructional expenses.

The result is that there will be two standards to define instructional spending. Schools will be expected to put 65 percent of their money toward instruction under both definitions within three years.

Both rules will be part of a larger rating system that the state uses to evaluate districts' financial health. Schools that do not meet the 65 percent rule, ordered by Gov. Rick Perry last year, could avoid penalties if they meet other benchmarks.

These rules seem convoluted; does this mean there are two sets of standards, both of which schools should try to reach but that they won't be penalized if they don't meet the more stringent ones? Are the first set temporary, and the latter to be imposed later? And (as the AAS story points out) are sports still being considered as an in-the-classroom expense?

The most basic reading here is that the governor now has the right to say, "We are counting salaries for nurses, counselors and librarians as in-the-classroom expenses," even though in just a few years (after a gubernatorial election, say) they won't be counted. But the TEA ruling still seem hazy. If there's anyone who understands the background here of what these new rules mean, use the comments below to elaborate.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
It's The 65% Ruse (0.00 / 0)
Having written the original post at Eye On Williamson County, Where Did The 65% Rule Come From?, several things have changed.  There were subsequent posts on the "One Size Fits All" aspect of it.  Meaning that a district, in many cases, can spend more than 65% in the classroom and perform worse than a school spends less than 65%.  This is an arbitrary standard that is not based in educational fact of any kind.  This is makes for a catchy phrase and an easy marketing tool for the most of people now who think that's all it takes to fix something.  The people will buy the "65% Solution" like they but their "new and improved" products or their "compassionate conservative" politicians.

Those involved in creating this in Texas have also watered this proposal down so much that all they're trying to do is get it on the books.  The "punishment"  is non-existent for non-compliance and even during the special session the TX House had this debate which shows that it has no teeth.

But once it's on the books, no matter how watered-down it is then they can amend it and then the serious trouble starts.  The 65% "Ruse", as I have taken to calling it, is nothing more than a cog in the Conservative Republican plan to help bring about the complete destruction of our public schools by pitting teachers v. administrators, in an attempt to break the teacher's unions. 


65% Ruse (0.00 / 0)
Thanks for the insight, wcnews.

That post on Eye on Williamson lays out the case really well on why the 65% rule is bad public policy; you'll see I linked to it at the top of my post.


[ Parent ]
Yes,, (0.00 / 0)
..I saw your link to my originial post.  That along with this new information is what prompted my comment.  Thanks for bringing this to our attention.  They always try and bury stories like this in a Saturday paper.  Why is that?

65% rule a way to shut down rural schools (0.00 / 0)
A superintendent from a rural school district told me that the 65% rule will affect schools that fail in any category, including financial. In other words, say a rural school district that has a large bus route, with no control over the spiraling costs of gasoline, goes beyond the 35% allowed on all other costs due to having to pay so much for gas. The law the legislature passed last session will permit the Education Commissioner to come in and take any school that is failing in any category and turn it over the a private entity to run. I think it is a set up to shut down public rural schools, and the urban ones will be next.
We've got to elect people to our government who have a commitment to public education. As a former public school teacher (band director), I am committed to public education- to making our schools among the best in the nation!
Kathi

Kathi Thomas, SD 25

Connect With BOR
Your source for Texas politics.

On Facebook: BOR
On Twitter: @BOR
On the Go: Mobile App

Upcoming BOR Events

"Do I Look Illegal?"
Arizona GOP Debate Watch

Wednesday, February 22
6:00-9:00 p.m.
Angie's Restaurant
1307 E. 7th Street
RSVP on Facebook

Save The Date:
Super Tuesday Super Watch Party!
Tuesday, March 6
6:00-10:00 p.m.
Scholz Garten
1607 San Jacinto



Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Shared On Facebook

Advertisement

Best of Texas Left
- (Complete Directory)
- B & B
- Bay Area Houston
- Blue Bloggin
- Bluedaze
- Brains and Eggs
- Capitol Annex
- Collin County Democrats
- Collin County Observer
- Community Forum
- Dog Canyon
- Dos Centavos
- Easter Lemming Liberal
- Eye on Williamson County
- Feet to the Fire
- Grading Texas
- Greg's Opinion
- Grits for Breakfast
- Half Empty
- Houtopia
- In the Pink Texas
- Kiss My Big Blue Butt
- Letters from Texas
- McBlogger
- Mean Rachel
- Musings
- North Texas Liberal
- Off the Kuff
- Panhandle Truth Squad
- Para Justicia y Libertad!
- Pink Dome
- San Antonio Mayor
- South Texas Chisme
- StoudDemBlog
- Texas Clover Leaf
- Texas Kaos
- The Caucus Blog
- There..Already
- Three Wise Men
Best of Texas Right
- Blogs of War
- BlogHouston
- Boots and Sabers
- Lone Star Times
- Publius TX
- Rick Perry vs the World
- Safety for Dummies
- Slightly Rough
- Urban Grounds
Other Texas Reads
- Burka Blog
- D Magazine
- DOT Show
- Statesman Elections
- Strong Political Analysis
- Texas Monthly
- Texas Observer
- The Texas Blue
- Quorum Report Daily Buzz
Around Austin
- Austin Bloggers
- Austin Chronicle
- Austin Contrarian
- Austin Metblogs
- Austin on Two Wheels
- Austin Real Estate Blog
- Austin Statesman
- Austin Texas Bike Shit Stuff
- Austin Towers
- Austinist
- Capital MetroBlog
- Daily Texan
- Do512
- Downtown Austin Blog
- East Austinite
- Elise Hu
-
Flash Mob Austin
- Keep Austin Blue
- M1EK
- Travis County Democrats
- University Democrats
TX Progressive Orgs
- ACLU Legislative Blog
- Atticus Circle
- Criminal Justice Coalition
- Equality Texas
- NOW Texas
- PFAW Texas
- Public Citizen
- SEIU Texas
- Tejano Insider
- Texas AFT
- Texas HDCC
- Texas Watch
- TFN
- TSTA
- TSEU
- Texas Young Democrats
- United Ways of Texas
TX Elections/Returns
- TX Returns 1992-present
- TX Media/Candidate List

- Bexar County
- Collin County
- Dallas county
- Denton County
- El Paso County
- Fort Bend County
- Harris County
- Jefferson County
- Tarrant County
- Travis County

- CNN 1998 Returns
- CNN 2000 Returns
- CNN 2002 Returns
- CNN 2004 Returns
- CNN 2006 Returns
- CNN 2008 Returns
Traffic Ratings
- Alexa Rating
- Quantcast Ratings
-
Syndication

Powered by: SoapBlox