Oakland Local

Students at Fremont High School said new funds coming to their school should be spent on counselors and mentors for students. Their peers at Skyline High said they’d like to see higher teacher salaries to assure getting good teachers. And Castlemont High students asked that money be spent to improve safety at their school.

The topic at issue for these teenagers and dozens of parents, teachers, and administrators who gathered with them at a forum last week was Local Control Funding, the new formula passed into law for how state education money will flow to schools and how it will get spent.

The Local Control Funding Formula means big changes for California. For starters, the Formula calls for increasing the state’s education spending for the first time in eight years, a big relief after years of recessionary cuts. Every public school in the state will receive more per student enrolled.

Beyond a slight increase in the base grant districts receive for each student, the state’s new funding formula will give districts supplemental grants for each student who is low-income, an English language learner, or a foster child. For districts that have a majority of students who fit in these categories, the state formula gives a concentration grant. In Oakland Unified School District, two thirds of students come from low-income families. About a third are English learners and a number are foster children.

Then, as the name Local Control Funding Formula implies, the law states that local school communities get to make many of the decisions on how to spend these supplemental and concentration grants. Districts are beholden to include parents and students in the decision making process. (See more about LCFF from Children Now.)

“This a great thing when we can get parents, students and teachers here for a positive event, an opportunity,” said Fremont High School Principal, Emiliano Sanchez. “I am hoping we can stop the bleeding in the budget. We need more money. We need to be providing our students with a holistic education that includes art and music again.”

fundingforum2

On long sheets of paper where students, parents, teachers wrote their wishes, the words described basic wishes, “counselors that know students, ability to feel safe, teachers move involved in student learning.”

The event was organized by the California Endowment, a large health and education foundation, and is one of twelve so-called “School Success Express” forums, stops the Endowment is making around the state to galvanize communities around the opportunity to make decisions. Representatives of several other nonprofits were there, as were Oakland’s Acting Superintendent of Schools Dr. Gary Yee and  State Board of Education member Bruce Holiday.

“There is all of a sudden political will” in the state to improve education spending and to listen to local voices, Yee said.

And there was a great deal of interest among the approximately 300 people there to have their voices heard. “What we’ve been fighting for in LCFF (Local Control Funding Formula) is to make it right for schools like Fremont and Castlemont at getting what is needed to educate our students,” said Akua Jackson of Youth Together.

lcff5

Decision making at the local level is very different from the way things have worked in California for the past couple of decades, when numerous state laws dictated how districts had to spend their money. Beyond a basic requirement about instruction following certain curriculum guidelines that would be expected in any state, California has had a slew of “categorical funding” streams where money going to school districts for very specific purposes could not be used for other things. For instance, money earmarked for earthquake retrofits of school buildings could not be used to fix a leaky roof.

Now, districts — with input from teachers, parents and students — get to decide how to spend what used to be the various categorical funding grants, or funds beyond those for providing instruction towards academic subjects. The theory is that local people know best whether funding for after-school programs or smaller classes would most help English language learners or children from backgrounds where enrichment activities were out of financial reach.

lcff6

Dr. Yee said Oakland has not yet been informed how much additional money it should expect to receive from the state this year. As the formula is rolled out to full implementation over the next five or six years, however, Oakland should receive $3,000 to $4,000 more per student or upwards of $12,000 per student. By comparison, state education spending was about $9,000 per student last year.

As parents contemplated what the extra spending could mean, organizers of the School Success Express provided translators in Spanish, Cantonese and Mandarin so more voices could be heard. At the end of the evening, parents, grandparents and students all took to the microphone to share what their circle or table had expressed in wishes for their students.
California Endowment officials promised to bring the lists of their wishes to Sacramento where state legislators and Department of Education staff are putting on final touches to implementation of the new funding law.

3 thoughts on “Oakland students, parents, talk about Local Control Funding for schools

  1. If we currently have spent $9,000 per student per year and now we will spend $3,000-4,000 more because of this new funding (thanks in large part to the wise guidance of Govenor Brown), all this happy talk about student and parent and teacher empowerment is fine.

    The ONLY request I have is that objective and quantifiable metrics be used to show how this added spending improves student educational outcomes.

    Right now, way too many students in OUSD either drop out or graduate as illiterate and/or unskilled in math. The current performance of our students is shameful.

    Will spending 35-45% more money accomplish this?

    Don’t tell me, show me. And prove that my dark suspicions are misguided.

  2. As long as charter schools do not get any control over how the funds flow, this will be great. Otherwise its just more public money lining private pockets.

  3. I am a Castlemont alumni and it is rediculous to read that Skyline students/staff are asking for higher wages for their teachers when in reality they receive all the funds from the other schools. First of all, Castlemont and Fremont are the schools that struggle the most to help their students succeed and I find it incredibly inbelievable that Castlemont students want their school to be safer. This is just insane because these students should not have to worry about the safety of their school. Instead, they should worry about the poor education they are receiving. The education at Castlemont is terrible because they do not count with teachers that teaching credentials so they just bullshit throughout the whole school year. This is what the OUSD should consider when distributing the money.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>