Loading ...
July 3rd, 2012 |
Merry Ann Moore
Measure 5, Oregon Brain Drain – and a Plea to Our Political Leaders
“The undercutting of funding for both K-12 education and OSU was the driving factor in our decision to move, wrenching as it was. We don’t have a control group on this, but it is interesting to think about what might have been had we felt able to stay in the community we loved so much and hated to leave.”
–Jane Acker, resident of Corvallis, 1984-1995
Take a trip in a time machine with me. It’s 1984. Reagan is wrapping up his first term. MTV is three years old (Madonna, Van Halen, Huey Lewis and Billy Joel videos are duking it out at the top of the charts), and Apple’s newest product (launched with the famous Super Bowl ad) was a Macintosh 128K.
My sister-in-law Jane had just moved with her young family to Corvallis, Oregon. Her husband David Acker was pursuing his PhD at OSU, focused on international development and agriculture. With four- and one-year-olds, and a one-quarter-time job between the two, the couple had put a high premium on settling where there were good public schools.
The family was pleased with the good teachers, strings music options and enrichment opportunities provided at Wilson Elementary School. Years went by, a third child came along, David completed his PhD. Jane, with a bachelor’s from Stanford and a master’s in Chinese studies from Yale, was very active in the community, serving on Wilson’s site council and, as president of Friends of the Library, getting a new library built in Corvallis.
Then came Measure 5.
Jane describes the impacts of the law that gutted education funding in Oregon as immediate and debilitating to her kids’ classrooms. “My youngest started as a kindergartner in 1992 at Wilson,” she recalls. “Over the next three years he was never in a class with fewer than 31 kids.” Schools began combining principals. They went to a block schedule. At the high school, students were only being scheduled for three out of four class periods. CIM-CAM, a massive reform program—and unfunded mandate—was being rolled out at the same time. There was insufficient money to train teachers in such proficiency-based education, and high anxiety on the part of parents and students on how out-of-state colleges might perceive “portfolios” rather than traditional measures of performance.
Sound familiar yet?
The same cost-cutting measures are being rolled out throughout Central Oregon schools once again. Also similarly, we are seeing significant flight of families from here as a consequence of declining schools.
Granted, people are leaving in part because the economy here is still in recession. But it’s always been difficult to earn a living in Central Oregon. They don’t call it “poverty with a view” for nothing. Strong educational systems are a powerful anchor, and families will do a lot—one parent commuting to a far-away job during the week for example, a fairly common model here in Sisters—before they will uproot and leave high-quality schools.
The Ackers, back in the early ‘90s, explored every option to stay where they believed they belonged, in a community they loved where they had invested so much. They researched private school options, even though they were costly and would have required a daily commute to Eugene.
David’s work as director of the Office of International Research and Development was grant-dependent and tenuous at best. When a job in international programs at Iowa State University opened up—at a 50% salary increase, with tenure, in a community with excellent public schools—the Ackers couldn’t refuse.
What Might Have Been
Corvallis’ loss was Ames’ windfall. Here’s a short list of what the Ackers have accomplished since relocating 17 years ago.
- David is now Assistant Dean of Academic and Global Programs for ISU’s College of Agriculture, overseeing undergraduate education, student study abroad opportunities and the Center for Sustainable Livelihood in Uganda, among other duties.
- As a Parks & Rec Commissioner, Jane was instrumental in getting a $12 million community aquatic center built. During her time as school board president, she helped secure passage of a multi-million dollar bond for a new middle school and improvements to Ames High School. Her current projects include serving on the public library board of trustees, which is overseeing a $20 million library remodel, and chairing the $1.75 million United Way campaign for Story County.
- The three kids are all successfully employed, with one working at Google, another part-way through his emergency medicine residency, and a third working at a software company.
“We were literally in despair, we so didn’t want to leave Oregon,” says Jane, recalling how reluctant the family was to give up on the state. “We loved our community, our friends. But we were so worried about our kids’ education and the school funding situation. We felt pushed out, not pulled.”
Salem, is anybody home? Do you read the papers, or listen to the news? History is repeating, while yet another generation of Oregon public school students gets cheated of opportunities. And perhaps some of the people who are the state’s best and brightest give up on Oregon.
Hello Merry Ann,
I struggle with your attempt to re-write history.
You said, “Jane describes the impacts of the law that gutted education funding in Oregon as immediate and debilitating to her kids’ classrooms”.
Jane’s recollection was not accurate. Oregon’s “expenditures per K-12 student” were above the the median state in every year for the decade following passage of Measure 5. Oregon’s “expenditures per student” were higher than California, Washington, Idaho, Nevada (and Iowa) in every year for the decade following passage of Measure 5. (I can give you the numbers for every year if you would like)
The real problem which is very seldom mentioned within education circles is that Oregon compensated K-12 teachers considerably more than most states at the cost of fewer teachers hired. That relatively very high cost produced large class sizes, shorter school years, deferred maintenance and a host of other problems for Oregon. In 1995 (when Jane was experiencing her problem) Oregon average K-12 teacher salary was $39,650, while Iowa K-12 salaries were $32,376. Naturally, by compensating lower Iowa had considerably more teachers per student (smaller class sizes) and considerably higher academic results. In that same year Oregon and Iowa had almost identical “per capita personal income. An interesting note, there were only three states (Michigan, Alaska and Pennsylvania) which had a higher ratio of “average teacher salaries” to “per capita personal income” in 1995.(NEA Research)
There would be zero teacher layoffs in Oregon due to the economy if PERS were not such a disaster. Unfortunately, those within education stifle that conversation because that community fought against every PERS reform for the last three decades. Now the newly hired (and Oregon’s students) are paying the price for that collective greed.
To lay the blame for current and past K-12 economic problems on Measure 5 is not a valid conclusion. “Jane” is/was not very well informed.
I would agree that the politics of this state are lacking. What is the solution?
1) Are you suggesting we vote on Measure 5 again? My guess would be that it would pass with a greater percentage than the first time.
2) Do we get serious about PERS and make major changes? My guess is that it will not happen and a primary reason would be objections by the education community.
3) Do we raise taxes in Oregon when people are losing their homes at a record rate now and our per capita income is dropping steadily in Oregon?
4) Do we reduce state sponsored health care in Oregon and give the revenue to education?
5) Do we do a serious revamping of how education revenue is spent in Oregon?
I am asking because I don’t see a viable solution to this situation without major objections by the education community.
Correction in the above post, it should read “our per capita income is dropping steadily in Oregon in relation to the other states? (Oregon presently ranks 31st in per capita income)
It would be so refreshing/helpful to hear the education community echo the words (and acknowledgment) of OHSU President Joe Robertson. It is difficult, I would guess, because the education community has been a primary force for the last three decades to suppress any PERS reforms. So, silence about the PERS problem seems to be the programmed response. Do we have to have a disaster before the silence is broken?
“Being good stewards of our resources means figuring out a way to address the unsustainability of PERS,” OHSU President Joe Robertson told employees.
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2012/07/ohsu_looks_to_cut_runaway_pers.html
I guess that Kona doesn’t stand for Kona Coffee- judging by the sleepy repetition of conventional criticism of the PERS and the Educational Community that stands in for critical thinking on school funding issues. Measure 5 turned out to be a great tax break for corporations and business- not so much for the middle class who got radically underfunded schools who became unable to offer the quality of education that even it’s legislature envisioned. Kona’s comparison of post Measure 5 spending with post Prop 39 levels in California is little more that a ruse. To make that comparison after Prop 39 destroyed California’s world class educational system is a sham. To trumpet keeping Oregon’s head above the median is give statistical relevancy to Mississippi, Alabama, and do I need to go on. I left the west where I grew up and went to school and doubled my beginning teacher’s salary in Iowa. So maybe Kona should wake up and smell the coffee – The recently slimmed down version of PERS is really Retirement-lite in my view. PERS is not the villain here and for Kona to focus on teacher salaries as the cause of school funding problems is a clear case of blaming the victim. K-12 teachers didn’t get a golden parachute from PERS they got the retirement promised them for entering and enduring a difficult and demanding occupation. No less than firefighter and police officers they contribute to the stability and safety of society. I wonder the mass killings in Colorado could have been identified and prevented if the schools in California where he went to school were properly funded. So, Kona check out how many schools have elementary or middle schools guidance counselors since Oregon funding has fallen short.
1) You said, “Measure 5 turned out to be a great tax break for corporations and business- not so much for the middle class who got radically underfunded schools who became unable to offer the quality of education that even it’s legislature envisioned.”
I agree that Measure 5 did ease the tax burden of businesses. That is a side issue because it did not affect the funding of K-12 education. The “quality education you mention was “pie in the sky”. Oregon would be the highest funded of all states if the education model were funded. Very difficult for a relatively poor state (Oregon currently ranked 31st).
2) You said, “Kona’s comparison of post Measure 5 spending with post Prop 39 levels in California is little more that a ruse.”
Why is it a ruse? I compared Oregon’s K-12 funding with all of the adjacent states. Oregon has funded K-12 education (per student) higher than Washington in every year except two since the passage of Measure 5. Similarly, Oregon has funded K-12 higher than California in every year except two since the pass age of Measure 5. Oregon has funded the other adjacent states in every year since the passage of Measure 5.
3) You said, “To trumpet keeping Oregon’s head above the median is give statistical relevancy to Mississippi, Alabama, and do I need to go on.”
Yes, go on. Oregon has funded K-12 (per student) higher than all but six of the 24 states west of the Mississippi River since Measure 5 was passed.
4) You said, “PERS is not the villain here and for Kona to focus on teacher salaries as the cause of school funding problems is a clear case of blaming the victim.”
Do you have any data to support your opinion about PERS? You are one of the few (all without supporting data) to defend the economical innocence of PERS. As far as high teacher compensation, it has been a limiting factor in the ability to hire more teachers (smaller class sizes. Oregon K-12 teachers have been among the highest compensated in the U.S. Oregon, being a relatively poor state, cannot afford to compensate among the highest of states AND hire enough teachers to reduce class sizes.
5) You said, “K-12 teachers didn’t get a golden parachute from PERS they got the retirement promised them for entering and enduring a difficult and demanding occupation.”
They (Tier I) did get a “golden parachute” AND among the highest salaries and health benefits of all states since the passage of Measure 5. This has zero to do with how demanding the job is in Oregon. I would venture that teaching in Oregon is not much more difficult than any other state, especially with the shortest school year in the U.S.
6) You said, “Kona check out how many schools have elementary or middle schools guidance counselors since Oregon funding has fallen short.”
Oregon has fewer teachers (and counselors) primarily because the individual compensation (per teacher/counselors) has been so much higher than most states.
Oregon made a poor programmed choice three decades ago by pushing for higher individual compensation at the expense of having large class sizes, short school years and a debilitating backlog of deferred maintenance.
Thank you Oregonian. Now if we could just get the educational community on board.
“But we do want Oregon to lengthen its appallingly short school year — or at least stop cutting instructional days so often. This will require the state to control the unsustainable growth of PERS, the state pension plan that has local schools backed against a wall.”
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/08/dont_let_pers_make_oregon_scho.html