School Funding & School Choice

Repeal and Replace Robin Hood Funding Scheme

I don’t know who likes the Robin Hood funding scheme that recaptures money from high property wealth districts and uses it to redistribute to low property wealth districts. This was the “brilliant” fix to the funding formula found to be be unconstitutional in the 1990s (history). Wealthier property districts (not necessarily wealthy school districts) keep their property tax rate higher to offset what they will pay in recapture to the state. Less wealthy property districts keep their property tax rates higher to maximize what they can raise locally.

When I hear calls for property tax reform, I agree in some regards, but I know that real reform will not address a key driver of the tax rates—recapture. The state uses the recapture funds as the first fund for providing needed funds to offset differences in local funding resources instead of state sources to fulfill the state’s constitutional obligation to provide for a free public school system.

Sec. 1. SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE OF SYSTEM OF PUBLIC FREE SCHOOLS. A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.
(Feb. 15, 1876.)

When I heard of the 30+ billion surplus in the 2023 88th legislative session, I hoped for a chance to repeal and replace Robin Hood by providing funds that would allow the state to shoulder the larger burden of school funding through the transition and create new revenue funds to support it moving forward. My hopes were short-lived as the Texas Republican government majority threw their weight towards property tax relief–a temporary pay-off to their base that does not eliminate the ongoing burden of local property taxes. (During this same session Governor Abbot tied the passage of additional funding to districts to his campaign goal of vouchers. After multiple special sessions failed to achieve his goal, the money earmarked in the state budget was held over.)

Again in 2025, we will have a large budget surplus (Tx Comptroller projections). Groups like the Texas Public Policy Foundation pushes for eventual property tax elimination. I’m not sure how local entities will function without their portions of annual property taxes, but I know that I don’t trust it from a school funding standpoint, considering that the state has already pushed off part of its funding responsibility to the recapture funds. 

I don’t have any high hopes that revamping school finance will gain any serious traction with the Texas GOP. The stronger fight right now is defeating Abbot and Patrick’s push for vouchers funded by billionaire donors from Texas and beyond. 

Improve Existing School Choice and Keep Public Money in Public Schools

First of all, we have school choice in Texas. Students who attend a failing school according to the TEA ratings, can transfer to another school in their school district. We already fund charter schools and have open enrollment districts. Larger districts have schools-of-choice, magnet schools, and charter schools. School choice exists; students are not limited to the school in their attendance zone in more populous communities. Choices are limited in rural areas, but vouchers will do little to nothing to improve that in rural areas. Most counties in Texas do not have any private school options.

Providing vouchers to be used at private schools isn’t about the money following the child, which it already does, but about funding private, often religious schools with our tax money but no accountability or requirements like we demand of the public schools. Don’t forget that the state constitution already forbids it, but AG Paxton has said that certain Supreme Court rulings have negated that. (What this means is immediate lawsuits will be filed if the voucher bill passes to see who is right at taxpayer expense.)

Sec. 5 (c) The available school fund shall be applied annually to the support of the public free schools. Except as provided by this section, the legislature may not enact a law appropriating any part of the permanent school fund or available school fund to any other purpose. The permanent school fund and the available school fund may not be appropriated to or used for the support of any sectarian school. The available school fund shall be distributed to the several counties according to their scholastic population and applied in the manner provided by law.

Some will contend that the private schools already show better results or that they are accountable to the parents of students. However, the “better results” are often tied to a mix of factors:

• vastly different demographics,
• the ability to push out non-compliant or disruptive students, and
• the typical higher level of parental involvement of families choosing private schools. (The last item also applies to charter schools and magnet or specialized public schools.)

I fully support learning from the success of other schools and school systems, but to ignore the gaping disparities in the students being educated is disingenuous at best. How many private schools’ (even charter schools) student population reflect similar demographics as Texas public schools.  We serve 5.5 million students in public schools: 62.2% economically disadvantaged, 53% at-risk, 35.9% emergent bilingual/English Learner/English as a Second Language, 21.2% 504 and special education, 25% White.

Currently, the federal and state government are working to diminish, if not outright eliminate, public schools’ responsibilities towards English language learners and 504 students. Both of these groups are commonly not being admitted to private schools because those schools are not required to provide them services.

Public schools are required to enroll any student within their attendance or school zone. We can’t expel a student for low grades or typical behavior problems. When charter and private schools do so and then tout their success, they manipulate their numbers; and the students pushed or forced out return to public schools because we are required to enroll them. 

Can we improve existing school choice? Yes! Let’s consider changes like the following that increase access to choice and work to improve all schools:

• Make all districts by default open enrollment. (Still have a process to opt out.)
  • Secondary allotment to districts with out of district students, reduced by number of students living in the district but enrolled outside the district.
• If the most sought after schools have maxed enrollment, replicate these schools’ practices and systems in other schools. (This generates better school improvement because it’s based on best practices already in place.
• Create a state fund that helps districts with capital infrastructure for open enrollment increases instead of local bonds.
• Work with regional service centers and TEA to further assist rural districts to expand offerings via college partnerships and provide infrastructure funding for technology that is too costly for them to absorb on their own.
• Provide supplemental ESA for special education needs beyond what a district can provide or during out-of-school time periods. (This ESA is already available from the 87th session.) This should also be offered to students in private schools or homeschooled environments as well.
• Require registration of homeschooled students with simple registration that identifies student(s) and curriculum being used and assessment/standardized test participation if relevant. Allow homeschool students access to free textbooks and curriculum through the instructional materials allotment. (Simple monitoring of homeschooled students is about minimum guardrails to protect those children who have little or no contact with any mandated reporters. Education is a child’s right; the parent is the advocate and facilitator for that education.)
• Fund teaching internships for new teachers to partner with veteran teachers to stem the exodus of new teachers in the first five years. Support veteran teachers by sponsoring teaching-leadership dual roles to allow the best teachers to still teach but also increase their salaries with leadership/administrative roles and mentoring of newer teachers. Student achievement improves with highly-qualified teachers.
• Critically evaluate behavior concerns of schools and parents. I think part of our behavior issues stem from a shift in our understanding of child development and changing behavioral modifications. Many educators and parents today have shifted away from the authoritarian model that we experienced. There is a middle ground between authoritarianism and a free-for-all. Instead, we now seek to understand behavior and child development. We don’t expect them to be mini-adults. This does not mean we throw consequences and limits out the window. We work to help them understand in developmentally appropriate ways why their behavior is inappropriate or harmful and help them correct the behavior to lead them to self-control.
  • Address behavior concerns by funding appropriate counseling and social worker services in all schools to understand the underlying causes for the behavior and then work with staff and home to develop and enforce behavior change. 
  • Acknowledge that “least restrictive environment” does not mean automatic placement in the traditional classrooms. More students may currently need smaller, more restrictive environments for student safety and learning. 
  • Assure due process and monitor for disproportionate application of removal practices, but expand the ability of schools to expel students for violent and disruptive behaviors and (high school level) refusal to participate in learning. Provide, as now, alternative programs, JAEP, and virtual options to still provide education opportunities. Allow return under behavior and academic contract provisions and non-traditional programs.
• Prioritize school improvement locally. What do the stakeholders in communities, districts, schools, etc. identify as the needs for reform? What do they identify as the causes, main & contributory, immediate & remote? What are practical solutions that involve family, community, and the school to improve? Use best practices to implement programs and services that improve learning. If “failing schools” are the rationale for vouchers, then the state has decided to privatize its constitutional duty for all and only benefitted a few.
• Shift away from the reliance on standardized tests to evaluate student and school performance. Focus on student learning and growth over time. Return our earliest grades to being engaged learners who don’t define themselves by test scores instead of being test-ready by 3rd grade.

I don’t pretend that public schools are perfect. They are not, but everyday dedicated faculty and staff enter these schools determined to provide a quality education that respects the dignity and needs of all students, despite the often bad policy decisions and systems created by those far-removed from the classroom. My experience in public education over three decades has convinced me that the problems in schools and problems with students are created mostly by the adults. Kids are kids, regardless of time and place. They need safety, support, limits, structure, dignity, and respect. If the programs and systems mandated don’t work towards those needs, students and educators suffer the effects.

Contact your representatives in the legislature and the SBOE to support public schools. Check out Raise Your Hand Texas for advocacy information. Follow their YouTube channel and see more video resources like this one.