A ‘tired argument’
Under the plan, low-income-area schools are defined as schools with 60 percent or more of students qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch, which for a family of four is an income of $44,955 or less.
To qualify — at least until the state overhauls and reinstates its school Ato-F rating system — the Governor’s Office proposes that at least 41 percent of a school’s students must pass math and English language arts standardized testing. For higher-income-area schools, the passage rate was set at 65 percent.
Based on that criteria and schools’ current test results, here is a look at how the numbers would break down:
» 65 percent of the money would go to schools in middle- and higher-income areas.
» 40 percent of the money would go to the highest-income-area schools, in which 10 percent of students or fewer — and, in the majority of cases, zero students — qualify as low-income.
» 26 percent of the money would go to charter schools, as opposed to district schools; charter schools educate 16 percent of Arizona’s public-school students.
» 12 percent of the money would go to two charter-school companies: Basis and Great Hearts.
The idea of funding the state’s highest-performing schools — with an added emphasis on successful schools serving low-income students — has support among some education advocacy groups.
Ducey’s Classrooms First Initiative Council, which included teachers and school administrators, listed it among its top priorities, saying schools that successfully serve the poorest students need additional money to meet needs such as clothing, extra food, health-care services and school supplies that parents typically can’t afford.
A for Arizona, an education advocacy group under the umbrella of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, appears to be the biggest voice of support for the proposal. The group is led by former state schools Superintendent Lisa Graham Keegan, a school-choice advocate.
“In the mindset of the school leaders we work with at A for Arizona, they see results-based funding as the best chance of significantly moving the
“It was painted as a way to help close the achievement gap. But 65 percent of the money goes to high-income schools. It was designed that way. I’m sure they worked a long time on a formula to make it come out that way.”
needle on achievement,” said A for Arizona Senior Program Director Emily Anne Gullickson. “Behaviors like this will continue to move our students forward to be where they need to be to succeed.”
She defended the plan’s formula, saying it still allocates more money per student to kids in the lower-income areas and that middle- and higher-incomearea school students also need and deserve additional funding to encourage their continued success.
In a recent column to the organization’s members, Arizona Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Glenn Hamer argued that the plan is not a funding structure designed to boost “a few select schools,” because students in low-income areas would receive almost double the amount of money that other students would get.
“Schools with 30-59 percent of their kids in poverty are not wealthy,” he said. “They have a diverse population and the challenges that go with it.”
He called it a “tired argument” that higher-income-area schools don’t also need additional support.
Chamber spokesman Garrick Taylor said the program does what it should — reward the best schools.
“The idea of recognizing and rewarding excellence is a radical idea in education funding. Let’s credit Gov. Ducey,” he said. “He struck a good balance, acknowledging the challenges that all schools face, but sweetening the deal for schools challenging the conventional wisdom.”
Under a federal grant program, Arizona provides some additional funding to failing schools. Taylor said this proposal begins to change that mentality, moving in the right direction.
Scarpinato said schools that have fewer than 60 percent of the students qualifying for free or reduced-cost lunch are not all “high income.”
“I don’t think most middle-class families whose kids are not on free or reduced lunch would consider themselves high-income,” he said.
He said the program recognizes that schools in the state’s poorest areas face additional challenges. But he said the program is also focused on helping excelling schools with waiting lists tap into additional funds, which may allow them to expand and serve more students.
Ducey has often referred to Basis and Great Hearts charter schools as examples of successful programs he’d like to help expand, and Scarpinato said there are a number of district examples, as well.
The details of the plan could be adjusted as part of the budget process.
Senate President Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler, said the fate of Ducey’s results-based funding program hinges on several other areas of the budget, particularly teacher raises. Ducey proposed a 2 percent raise spread over five years. Republican legislative leaders want a 2 percent raise spread over the next two years, and there’s a bipartisan push for more as budget talks continue.
“It has the potential of being part of the discussion when we try to decide how to move all the pieces around,” Yarbourgh said. “The governor is still asking for it.”