fbpx Skip to Main Content

The Mercury News | Opinion: To better support California’s students, change our funding formula

By funding based on enrollment instead of attendance, we can increase resources to schools with the most vulnerable kids

Original article here.
By Mala Batra | CEO, Aspire Public Schools

June 26, 2024

Photo of Mala Batra CEO, Aspire Public Schools

There is no doubt: Kids are missing a lot of school. Nationally, over a quarter of public school students were chronically absent last year — up from about 15% before the pandemic.

Kids in California are no exception. Recent reporting by the Bay Area News Group said the average California student missed 14.6 school days last year.

This is happening for many reasons, including transportation and mental health issues. Perhaps most daunting is the idea that the pandemic altered society’s relationship with schooling, shifting attendance to be viewed as “optional.” We are already seeing the consequences.

The absenteeism increase has also illuminated an inequity in how California funds public schools. Our state’s schools lose about $3.6 billion annually because of student absences, this paper reported. This is because, currently, California funds schools based on the average number of students who attend school each day. That’s different from the number of students enrolled — for whom the school is responsible for educating. We’re one of only six states that still fund schools this way.

Students from low-income families — about 60% of students — are more likely to miss school. Kids who miss a lot of school often need support. Yet when they’re absent, the state does not offer support. Instead, it withholds money for their education. This means schools serving low-income students often wind up with less funding than more affluent schools, hindering educators’ ability to tend to students’ needs and improve academic outcomes. This is inequitable — but we have an opportunity to address it.

Our experience at Aspire Public Schools has taught us that countering chronic absenteeism requires a thoughtful, resource-intensive approach. We serve over 15,000 students, the vast majority of whom are experiencing poverty. We offer attendance incentives, transportation supports, direct outreach to families and mental health supports, to name a few. Those efforts are meaningful — our schools had an average chronic absenteeism rate of about 26% this year (nearly the same as the state’s), down from about 40% two years ago.

We are relentless in our pursuit because we care about our students, we value their presence in our community, and we know that they have to be in school to learn. But it’s a crisis that a quarter of students at Aspire — and statewide — are chronically absent. While hardworking educators will surely continue working to solve this problem, that will not fix the funding inequity under the surface.

California lawmakers should change how schools are funded to provide resources for the number of students schools are charged with serving. We’ve launched a campaign to help make that happen.

By funding based on student enrollment, we can increase resources for schools serving the most vulnerable kids. One report estimates that about 90% of districts would receive more funding under an enrollment-based formula. The biggest boost would happen in districts with high percentages of low-income, English learner and foster youth students.

Sen. Anthony Portantino’s Senate Bill 98, co-sponsored by State Superintendent Tony Thurmond, would require that the Legislative Analyst’s Office study what this funding change would mean and share findings by 2026. (Whether this would require a change to Proposition 98, the voter-approved initiative that sets minimum funding levels for K-12 schools, would likely be addressed in this study, offering legislators a helpful path.)

This bill, which passed out of the Assembly Education Committee unanimously June 12, would be a strong step in the right direction.

There will be costs associated with changing school funding. We recognize the complex budget situation policymakers face and appreciate that they must juggle competing priorities. But it counters California values to maintain such an inequity. And the costs of our children missing out on their education are far greater.

Every student deserves our support — they all have skills and gifts that should be nurtured. By shifting how our funding formula counts students, we allow resources to be more equitably targeted to students’ needs, including the support needed to attend class. We also send our students a message: You are valued, and your place in our community matters.

Mala Batra is CEO of Aspire Public Schools, a network of charter schools serving over 15,000 TK-12 students across 36 schools in historically underserved communities throughout California.

EdSource | Commentary: Academic rigor versus cultural relevance is a false choice

Original EdSource article found here.

COMMENTARY | Black Student Success
By Chris Carr
Executive Director, Aspire Los Angeles

In the current era of education culture wars — banning books, monitoring curriculum, adjusting school policies — supporting students in a culturally sensitive, relationship-focused way is sometimes presented as being in conflict with maintaining academic rigor.

But balancing these approaches is more important than ever as our schools continue to rebound from pandemic-related learning loss coupled with the ongoing social-emotional needs of students. We should not have to prioritize one approach over the other: academic rigor, or supporting students’ social-emotional needs through culturally relevant teaching and experiences. Individually, each approach falls short in providing all students with the support they require for a successful future. By reframing them as mutually reinforcing rather than mutually exclusive, we have the potential to significantly transform education for every child.

Culturally relevant teaching is the conduit to academic success, and rigorous instruction is effective when grounded in culturally relevant teaching. To support our students, we must equip them with the tools for empowerment while also working to create inclusive educational environments that foster support.

In practice, this means everything from ensuring our teachers and staff reflect the demographic makeup of our students, to examining the resources and professional development we bring into our schools to make sure all our students’ needs are met. It means having data-driven conversations, grounded in equity, about how we are serving our most marginalized students.

As a school leader at Aspire Public Schools in Los Angeles, we knew some of our most vulnerable students were those who were chronically absent. Diving into the data, we discovered that many of our students missed school around three-day weekends and holidays. As a part of the implementation of our positive behavioral and intervention support (PBIS) framework, we focused on timing school celebrations and family engagement activities before and after three-day weekends and holidays so that students wouldn’t want to miss out on the fun.  Additionally, teachers reach out to families of absent students to provide a more personal touch and communicate the positive impact their child has in their classroom community when they are at school. The early results of implementing this PBIS approach are showing promise in reducing absenteeism, with a year-over-year decrease in chronic absenteeism rates across our 11 Los Angeles schools.

A data-driven approach grounded in equity can also help serve special education students. For example, at one of our schools, students in special education demonstrated notable progress in math, surpassing the growth rates in math seen among their peers in general education, both in LAUSD and statewide. The schools took a different approach to intervention than they had in the past. Previously, students with individual education plans (IEPs), which are required for all students in special education, were not included in math interventions — an additional 20-minute small-group math instruction during the school day. Last year, students with IEPs participated in these math interventions along with general education students. This additional intervention, combined with regular “teach back” sessions during which teachers practice delivering content to their peers, gathering feedback and strengthening their practice, yielded positive results among our special education learners.

Developing partnerships to incorporate Afrocentric and LGBTQ+ curriculum and resources can also make an impact. This has included everything from the establishment of several Black student union chapters to a Black families advisory council, where families meet quarterly to discuss Black educational content and curricula. I can say firsthand that we’re seeing these partnerships show promising results: Participants in Black student union programs experienced an average reduction of eight days in absenteeism compared to the previous year. Plans are also underway to pilot an LGBTQ+ course that aligns with state A-G standards (courses required for admission in California public universities). Lastly, dedicating resources to cultivate a pipeline of Black educators is critical to establishing a more diverse teaching staff.

To deliver on the promise of excellent education for every child, it is time to chart a path that is both rigorous and culturally relevant. This is how we deliver on the promise of an education model that serves all students.

●●●

Chris Carr is the executive director for the Los Angeles region of Aspire Public Schools, a nonprofit charter management organization.

The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.