Leaders, not more cash, will fix APS

IF “IT’S time for school officials to right-size and seize opportunities to improve student performance” (Journal, April 28), decision-makers may want to look at which investments are likely to yield the biggest, most sustainable, results.

Using data on APS’ website, a recent study linked investments to outcomes by comparing the 70 Title I Elementary Schools with 23 non-Title I schools. Despite additional investments in curriculum experiments, staff development, longer school days and more days in school years, Title I schools benefit from smaller school sizes, +18%; higher per pupil staffing ratios, +20%; and additional expenditures per pupil, +35%. The district average English language arts score of 25.5% is nine points below the state. The data suggests implementing proposals to extend school days and the school year, essentially more of the same, may show marginal gains but by themselves aren’t likely sufficient to raise achievement levels overall or close gaps.

Yet, there are Title I schools and English language learner schools that perform better than many non-Title I schools. The gap between the highestperforming Title I school, 52.9 E/ LA, and the lowest-performing Title I school, 4.1 E/LA, is 48.8. For non-Title I schools E/ LA proficiency is 72.2 top and 16.5 bottom, a gap of 55.5. (So) correlation is not causation, family poverty isn’t the problem and money isn’t the solution.

The data — supported by expert opinion, over 50 years of studies about what it takes to make an effective school, and independent evidence of success at schools in New Mexico — tell us the best investment to gain proficiency and sustain success is to invest in leadership and the tools leaders need to identify and replicate what works.

DAVID FOSTER

Albuquerque