“Proffitt said despite the report being tabled in the form released Monday, it is still concerning because it shows attitudes held by some legislators about what changes need to be made to K-12 education.

“The report found that the current system is not adequate and that the funding system needs to be revamped. He said he found many concerning things in the report.
Proffitt quoted a section of 11-page report, which reads:
‘The old school funding system did not require districts to make efficient use of taxpayer money … To be clear, ‘efficient’ does not simply mean cutting a service or purchasing a sub-standard quality of materials; rather, ‘efficient’ should be understood to mean providing necessary services and commodities of the same or better quality at the best possible price.’

“Other sections of the report called for greater accountability and transparency on the part of school districts.

“’I don’t see how we can get any more transparent,’ Proffitt said.

“The report says that schools have become ‘one stop fits all’ institutions that go far beyond academic pursuit, stating, ‘Perhaps the overall concept of what a school should provide needs to be defined. Consideration must be given to the degree to which providing non-academic services impacts learning, particularly with regard to special education.’ The report goes on to say that mainstreaming may have some benefit, but that the impact on other students needs to be considered and other agencies may be better for helping special education students reach their potential.

“On Tuesday, Proffitt said that there is a belief that ‘mainstreaming’ or ‘inclusion,’ where special education students are in general education classrooms, reduces the level of rigor for students who aren’t identified for special needs, and that special education students need to be separate to prevent a negative impact on general education.

“Proffitt said that this belief is unfounded, that no negative impact on educational rigor has been found, and often a positive impact is witnessed. He also stressed that completely separating special ed students from general ed students would violate the federal Intellectual and Disability Education Improvement Act…

“Proffitt had the strongest criticism for section that discussed recommendations for at-risk funding.

“From the report: ‘The definition for ‘at risk’ is any student that receives free or reduced lunch. That implies that poverty determines an individual’s ability to learn. This thinking is discriminating and has no place in education.’

“The report calls for at-risk funding to be based solely on poverty statistics from the Kansas Department of Labor and Department of Revenue, and any further funding requests for individual funding to be audited at the state level.

“The report claims that at-risk funding has failed to close the achievement gap and that more accountability is needed to ensure that at-risk funding is directed specifically at the achievement gap.

“Proffitt said that the term ‘discriminating’ is inflammatory and not appropriate.
On Tuesday, he said that calling at-risk funding for poverty ‘discriminatory’ politically charges school leadership efforts to get more funding for disadvantaged children.

“’Bottom line is, it takes more money to educate some students than others,’ he said.
Proffitt said that students in poverty are just as intelligent and just as creative as students who are not in poverty, but they have disadvantages that affect their ability to learn. These disadvantages need to be addressed through more resources, especially in communities like Chanute where the poverty percentage is high.

“The report also calls for outsourcing certain services to service centers like Greenbush and the private sector. It calls for services like transportation, accounting, information technology, food service, building and grounds maintenance, payroll, human resources, and purchasing to be coordinated and provided through service centers and outsourced to private companies. The report claims this will bring about major cost savings.

“Proffitt’s testimony to the committee included statements that the trust has broken between school administration and the legislature, and that trust needs to be restored in a new partnership between public policy and education leaders.”

Read more here: http://www.chanute.com/news/article_046fc246-b42e-11e5-8a64-4fe16cd2afde.html