Thank you Eric for your thoughts. I don't think people are trying to be disrespectful of education. The reality is the public schools aren't performing. They haven't been performing for years. People realize there is a problem and are looking for ways to make things better. I wonder if we might want to keep an open mind, think outside the box, and encourage people to generate ideas? Is there anything specific we might be able to do without increasing spending?
Thank you Lisa for expressing your concerns. It is understandable that home school families are nervous, like many other families, about how legislation might impact how they educate their children. Fortunately, for you and other home school families, there does not appear to be anything in these bills that forces home school families under state regulation. The problem is there are huge performance and cost issues with the current public school model that are not sustainable. The goal of the post is to come up with solutions. Thank you for mentioning better parent supervision. Also, thank you for voicing your support for spending money on education. I think the place you and other people differ, is that for over $1 billion per year most taxpayers want to see results. Right now many people feel their money is being wasted and as a result want change. If the home school community is worried about regulation, maybe it would be reasonable to discuss that matter openly. After all, home schooled children are a very high performing segment of the overall education system. If the goal is to improve overall performance, getting rid of the innovation that occurs in the home school segment seems unwise.
So, you are advocating further cutting funding to our public schools and cutting pay to our already lowest paid teachers in the country. There aren't enough "illegal aliens" in South Dakota to make any significant difference even if you could deport them. Remember, Christ, Mary, and Joseph were aliens in Egypt. HB1020 is the WRONG solution to our education problem.
Noel, thank you for your comment. If HB1020 is the wrong solution, what would you suggest we do to improve performance and reduce costs? People seem to be upset about spending over $1 billion per year and having less than 1/3 of the students educationally proficient.
I agree with Noel 100 percent. Improving teacher pay might improve outcomes. Higher pay is the accepted method of improving the performance of CO'S, coaches and property athletes, so the same should work with teachers. Cutting costs should be secondary to improving outcomes and the ESA proposal doesn't cut costs, it simply takes money from public schools and gives it to parents who might use it to pay for private school tuition. On the other hand, a high school dropout, welfare recipient, single parent with 6 kids could stay home and pocket $18k without teaching the kids anything. Keep in mind, the bill doesn't require much anything. No curriculum requirement, no teacher qualification standards, no testing of the kids' proficiency and no sanctions for failure to perform. Four things are certain. First, it will cost more than advertised as it has in those states that adopted a similar law. Second, there will be people who will scam the system. Third, it will harm public schools. Fourth, the number of kids with a substandard education will increase, which in turn has adverse consequences for society such as increased incarceration and homelessness.
Thank you for mentioning teacher pay. Would there be a way that we could reduce money for buildings and administration and allocate that to teachers? Would there be a way that we could offer bonuses based on performance?
Across South Dakota, about five percent of students are designated as English Language Learners, which represents more than 6,700 students. The state Department of Education reports fewer than one-third of those students are academically “on track.”
In Huron, a community of about 15,000, ESL Director Jolene Konechne has learned just how fast ESL services can become essential.
“We have quite a few English as a Second Language families that work at Dakota Provisions, the turkey plant, and Jack Links in Alpina – and they brought children with them," Konechne said. "So, what started out as 100 or 200 kids, we’re now over 1,000 ESL students for a total student body a little under 3,000.”
...Huron now employs 13 dedicated ESL teachers, along with interpreters to help with school business...
In RC, Hill City, Custer, Keystone, and Pine Ridge Reservation, you will find illegals as well as in Sioux Falls, Mitchell, etc. There are more than you think.
Across South Dakota, about five percent of students are designated as English Language Learners, which represents more than 6,700 students. The state Department of Education reports fewer than one-third of those students are academically “on track.”
In Huron, a community of about 15,000, ESL Director Jolene Konechne has learned just how fast ESL services can become essential.
“We have quite a few English as a Second Language families that work at Dakota Provisions, the turkey plant, and Jack Links in Alpina – and they brought children with them," Konechne said. "So, what started out as 100 or 200 kids, we’re now over 1,000 ESL students for a total student body a little under 3,000.”
...Huron now employs 13 dedicated ESL teachers, along with interpreters to help with school business...
South Dakota Voices Response: Steve and Catherine, thank you for joining the conversation and sharing your concern.
Email from S&CB: "FAIRSD Strongly Opposes HB1020
HB1020, an act to create education savings accounts, was filed last week. Families for Alternative Instruction Rights in South Dakota (FAIRSD) STRONGLY opposes this bill. Read the bill here.
FAIRSD stands adamantly opposed to any legislation seeking to change the current laws for Alternative Instruction which operates free and independent from any government funding or interference. Currently, there are three legal options in SD for a parent to choose to educate their children; public, private, or Alternative Instruction. Any school choice bill that creates ESAs or vouchers should create a fourth legal option for parents to choose that is separate and distinct from Alternative Instruction. States like Arizona are making this distinction clear in the language of their laws. To be clear, FAIRSD is not opposing education savings accounts for families who want that option. However, this bill as written imposes on the current Alternative Instruction laws. It invites regulation and puts us at risk for more in the future. FAIRSD’s position is consistent and we are neutral on another school choice bill that has been pre-filed this year. You can see both bills on our website. https://fairsd.net/action-alerts. HB1020 already includes restrictions on Alternative Instruction that do not exist in current law; a provider of Alternative Instruction becomes a qualifying school; the Department of Education is empowered to approve curriculum; curriculum choices are limited to those approved; and new definition of microschool is created that confuses parent-directed, free enterprise ventures with enrollment in state-registered, tuition based schools. A precedence for regulating Alternative Instruction is set in this bill should it pass. It also puts a much larger target on all Alternative Instruction families for future government control and interference when a segment of families are receiving money. It may not matter if you opt-in to receive ESA funds or not when future regulations are proposed. All we are asking is that families who would like to choose to utilize an ESA are legally defined separately and distinctly from Alternative Instruction; we are calling this the 4th lane.The very roots of Alternative Instruction in South Dakota, which is commonly known as homeschooling and includes unaccredited schools, are parents who chose to direct the educate of their own children free of government involvement. We will not deviate from that mission. HSLDA stands with us in opposing this bill. https://hslda.org/legal/legislation"
Taking more money away from public education is not the answer. We all need to contribute to our public education system whether you have kids that use it or not. I have no children in school but am glad to pay so that we will have an educated workforce years down the road. If you choose to educate your child in a different way that’s fine but that doesn’t release you from your obligation to help pay for public education.
Also if any school gets funds from taxpayers they should have to have the same regulations as public schools and not be able to turn any child away.
Also they are CHILDREN not illegal aliens. You don’t know that their parents aren’t citizens or on a work visa. We need workers and those children will probably grow up to be workers as well. It will benefit our state if they are educated.
Thank you very much for your thoughtful comment. The problem is we are spending a lot of money (over $1 billion per year) and most of the children are not getting educated. And worse of all the performance has been very bad for well over 20 years. People are having trouble paying their property taxes and no one wants more sales tax or an income tax. How would you suggest we get better performance?
There is a significant school cost burden associated with the rapid influx of non-English speaking children. Statewide there are 6700 ESL students. 6700 X average $11,020 per student cost = $73,834,000 (Nearly 74 Million dollars).
So 13 ESL teachers x average $73,000 = $949,000 potential extra budgetary burden in a town of 15,000 with a school district of 3,000 (1,000 of those students require interpreters and ESL training).
Whether their parents are here illegally or on a work visa for companies like Dakota Provisions in Huron or Jack Links, the large number of non-English-speaking children is having a significant impact on resource allocation in school districts and tax burden on citizens.
This whole line of thinking is interesting to me; I haven't really interacted much with non-English speaking people I guess. I don't know if this is relevant, but SD Codified law 13-27-3 (for Alternative Instruction) says "All instructions shall be given so as to lead to a mastery of the English language". This implies to me that knowing English is expected in the South Dakota educational system.
I don't know how the schools handle English as a second language. Do they attempt to teach them along with the other students? Or is there a separate class with kids that speak the other language? What if there are multiple foreign languages?
This is where it might be wise for one of those teachers to create a microschool for a specific language (multiple ages). At $7500/student (HB1009) a teacher could have a similar salary with only 10 students. Not sure if that would save the school district any money, but it might be more effective for those kids.
And maybe a company would be willing to make a nice donation or two to a specialized school that caters to their employees?
OK, I base my comment on having been brought up in a Republican household in Wisconsin and in my 85 1/2 years have never before heard that the Republican Party was against education.
During our 25 years of living in Northern Illinois, I witnessed empire building in the rural school district my children attended. This was an internal program to raise the cost of education thru higher and higher salaries for all those in administration. That same school district is now trying to force another high school on their taxpayers even tho it has been turned down by the voters 3 times. Yet they are going to try again.
My sister-in-law worked her entire career in education and she and her friends complained about how much of administration's work was being put on the shoulders of the teachers in addition to their normal lesson planning and teaching. At one gasthering of teachers I attended there were two conversational threads: 1) Boy am I glad I'm retired! and 2) I can't wait until I can retire!
I think many of the problems with education are internal.
The Church we attend in Southern Californicate runs a K-12 school and produces good results. Some of their students are children of wealthy foreigners sent there to get a better educatioin than they can at home. I believe their college acceptance rates are very high. And this come from a person that does not think college is for everyone.
Thank you for your insightful comments and for identifying issues teachers are facing. Also, thank you for calling attention to the issue of the balance between administrators and teachers. Do you have any suggestions on how we might be able to solve these issues?
I'm pretty good at observing things, but fixing them, short of taking them out and shooting them, takes some real thought. It's kinda like inflation. How do we back down from that. I guess the local school boards or the taxpayers would have to decide the salaries of some of these administrators is way over what the job really needs to pay and cut them down. Most of these people are on lucrartive contracts and a battle would ensue, but when the dust settles, the taxpayers would win and there would be money to pay the teachers a fair wage for what they do.
Note: the other school choice bill is HB1009. I do not understand why news outlets are ignoring this option. It offers much more flexibility for the parents to use the resources necessary for their child's education, including educational therapies & tutoring services. (the one-on-one help that students can't always get in a school classroom)
It does have a higher amount per student - but that is what is already allocated for each public school student, so people shouldn't complain about that (hypothetically).
Thank you Michelle for mentioning HB1009. That is why there is a question in the subtitle of the post. I think the problem is there are so many Federal mandates that you have to be careful what you propose or you will be shot down. Is there any way to merge HB1009 and HB1020 and get something that handles all the legal pitfalls? Does HB1009 avoid these problems?
The main difference between 1020 and 1009 is who is in control. HB1020 has the Dept of Ed approving curriculum that the money can be used for. It redefines microschools (of which there are already quite a few in the state) and it places Alternative Instruction students under the umbrella of "Qualifying Schools"...albeit only if they apply to take the money. This bill makes the whole situation even more confusing.
HB1009 clearly delineates 3 forms of education: public school, ESA, or Alternative Instructions. Pick one and no overlap. (I assume private schools are under the ESA category as ESA money can be used for tuition; there isn't really a separate category for accredited nonpublic schools otherwise).
So no, I don't see these two bills being merged, except in the sense of HB1009 pulling a couple of aspects from the other bill:
* lowering the amount per student to 40% of the cost equivalent per student
* allowing part-time access to public schools by ESA students whose monetary allotment would then be pro-rated (& that money given to the schools instead)
Ok sounds good. Has someone been in contact with the prime sponsor of 1020 to get the discussion rolling. Most of us are for anything that improves performance and keeps costs under control.
Quite a few people that I know have been emailing and contacting legislators for the past week or two, especially about HB1020 (but also HB1009). Two key Alternative Instruction organizations are against HB1020 (but neutral on HB1009).
I think the primer sponsor of HB1020 is well aware that some changes need to be made. Two of the organizations lobbying for that bill - SD Family Voice and Americans for Prosperity - are also very aware. But it is always good for citizens to get involved and let their legislators know their thoughts!
Excellent. People need to get involved. This is the way we get good legislation! Please post information on specific things people can do to help. It is probably best to post at the top of the comments so everyone can see them easily.
This post mentions that the South Dakota K-12 education budget is being used by only about 15% of the population. Proponents of HB 1020 use this rhetoric to incite tax payers to believe that they are being ripped off because they do not receive direct benefit (ie. money to send their kids to private school or money to homeschool) from the use of the tax money that they pay in.
Parents who homeschool their children or send their children to private schools are not being ripped off by the state. The primary goal of the collection of taxes is to amass funds in order to provide resources and services that benefit society (ie. keep it up and running). The citizens of South Dakota value an education for all its children for the good of society. We share the cost of public education because we, as citizens, deem that it is in the best interest of society that every child receive an education. We use state money to fund public education because of the benefits that all the citizens gain from having educated citizens. That is why people who never even have children contribute tax money to the cause.
We homeschool our children. I do not feel ripped off by our state. Our state is providing an education for any student whose parents are not choosing to or not able to provide their children an education elsewhere. Is that education perfect? Of course not. Neither is the one we are giving our own children. Perfection is unattainable in this world. Could the public education system do better? Certainly. I am sure we could do better too. I disagree wholeheartedly with this kind of approach of "helping" either the public school system (by giving them competition for funds) or the homeschool and private school parents (by giving them public funds). Such an approach misunderstands the use of public funds for the education of its citizens.
Interesting takes. The problem is most people want their tax money used in a productive way. If less than 1/3 of the students are getting educated that means we are wasting over $666 million per year of taxpayer money. Over the course of 10 years this is $66 billon. Perhaps I am missing something, but I have not heard anyone suggest we should get rid of public education. They just don't want to waste their money. Do you have some suggestions on others ways we could increase performance and reduce costs?
It's not accurate to claim that less than 1/3 of students are getting educated. All students are getting educated, some more so than others. Some excellent, others substandard, but all are educated to some extent. Just as in runners in a race, one will win and one will finish last, but all run the race.
Thank you for clarifying this information. I think the concern is the huge cost to get a few students performing at level. Is there something else could we do to improve performance without spending more money?
I find your response to be rude. Opposing HB 1020 and other so called "school-choice" education welfare bills in no way requires one to provide solutions to the problems within public education. If you must have an idea from me though, I will offer one. Encourage parents and taxpayers to personally get involved in the children's education and schools.
Of course we all know that no one has suggested we get rid of public education. I never even hinted at any such thing. You are being rude and inflammatory.
Lisa thank you again for joining the conversation. About "interesting takes"-- its a way of saying I appreciate your viewpoints and am thinking about them. The point of my comments was not to be rude or unkind, but to get as many potential issues on the table as possible so any legislation makes things better and not worse. Thanks again for sharing your viewpoints. They are a very helpful part of the discussion.
1) Parents choose how the child will be educated: public school, Alternative Instruction, or Educational Empowerment Account (EEA).
2) $7500 is put on a debit card for the EEA students (the same amount that goes to the public school for each student - via property taxes & sales tax I believe). EEA students may not participate in any public school offerings.
Alternative Instruction law does not change - those students are still able to attend public school classes, sports, etc. and they receive no money.
3) Parents may spend the EEA dollars on whatever combination of educational resources are necessary for that child's individual learning needs, including:
(1) Tuition fees;
(2) Fees for sports programs and fine arts programs;
(3) Textbooks, curricula, or other instructional materials and supplies;
(4) Tutoring Services (amended version of the bill)
(5) Educational therapies
(6) Registration fees for testing (AP test, ACT, etc)
(7) Transportation services between the student's residence and classes
(8) Technological devices, instruments, and equipment necessary for the student to participate in any form of educational pursuit listed in this section.
Random audits will be performed, and a parent may be prosecuted for fraud if warranted.
Thank you for the comment. Who should pay for the extra costs when companies bring in foreign workers that cannot easily integrate into the public school system (and require extra staff and teachers)? The company or the taxpayer?
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I am not sure how this is a party issue. Baltimore and Chicago are Democrat and the educational performance is abysmal. In South Dakota we are spending over a billion dollars a year and less than 1/3 of the students can read at grade level and even fewer are proficient in math. The public education system has been performing poorly (in South Dakota and in most of the rest of the country) for a long time. South Dakota is a small state and people are maxed out on taxes, so it appears we are going to have to do something to improve quality without spending more money. What specifically are you suggesting?
People in South Dakota only think they're maxed out on taxes. Fact is it's one of the lowest taxed states in the nation. Humans always complain that they're overrated. Taxes could be cut in half, and a year later, they'd be complaining that taxes are too high. Reality is that some things are worth paying for and you get what you pay for. Low teacher pay is a likely cause of low student performance. Illegal immigrants are an easy scapegoat. Once deportations get going, the illegal impact will be solved. Vouchers won't solve any problems, but they will create new problems.
Thank you for bringing out the issue of money allocation. Most people agree the US needs to stop the endless wars. This seems to be a significant issue regardless of political party. I think the frustration is related to the total public education dollars per student in South Dakota have been steadily increasing, but the performance is still abysmal. In the case of public eduction, it is burning so much money in South Dakota that we have to supplement the state allocation with money from the counties and the Federal government. Many people do not believe this type of money burn is sustainable.
Thank you for talking about the money. I think the frustration might be over the huge amount of money (and the increasing per student cost) and that the schools have not been able to improve performance. Is there something else we should consider other than money to solve the problem? For example, is too much being spent on buildings, administration,...? Does more of the money need to to allocated directly to teachers? Does teacher credentialing need to change?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and bringing up the point that we need an educated populace. Perhaps what we are hearing is frustration. People saw what was being taught during Covid and they aren't satisfied. They are further frustrated because of the huge price tag. Do you have any ideas on how we might be able to better focus our energies without spending more money?
Thank you Eric for your thoughts. I don't think people are trying to be disrespectful of education. The reality is the public schools aren't performing. They haven't been performing for years. People realize there is a problem and are looking for ways to make things better. I wonder if we might want to keep an open mind, think outside the box, and encourage people to generate ideas? Is there anything specific we might be able to do without increasing spending?
Thank you Lisa for expressing your concerns. It is understandable that home school families are nervous, like many other families, about how legislation might impact how they educate their children. Fortunately, for you and other home school families, there does not appear to be anything in these bills that forces home school families under state regulation. The problem is there are huge performance and cost issues with the current public school model that are not sustainable. The goal of the post is to come up with solutions. Thank you for mentioning better parent supervision. Also, thank you for voicing your support for spending money on education. I think the place you and other people differ, is that for over $1 billion per year most taxpayers want to see results. Right now many people feel their money is being wasted and as a result want change. If the home school community is worried about regulation, maybe it would be reasonable to discuss that matter openly. After all, home schooled children are a very high performing segment of the overall education system. If the goal is to improve overall performance, getting rid of the innovation that occurs in the home school segment seems unwise.
So, you are advocating further cutting funding to our public schools and cutting pay to our already lowest paid teachers in the country. There aren't enough "illegal aliens" in South Dakota to make any significant difference even if you could deport them. Remember, Christ, Mary, and Joseph were aliens in Egypt. HB1020 is the WRONG solution to our education problem.
Noel, thank you for your comment. If HB1020 is the wrong solution, what would you suggest we do to improve performance and reduce costs? People seem to be upset about spending over $1 billion per year and having less than 1/3 of the students educationally proficient.
I agree with Noel 100 percent. Improving teacher pay might improve outcomes. Higher pay is the accepted method of improving the performance of CO'S, coaches and property athletes, so the same should work with teachers. Cutting costs should be secondary to improving outcomes and the ESA proposal doesn't cut costs, it simply takes money from public schools and gives it to parents who might use it to pay for private school tuition. On the other hand, a high school dropout, welfare recipient, single parent with 6 kids could stay home and pocket $18k without teaching the kids anything. Keep in mind, the bill doesn't require much anything. No curriculum requirement, no teacher qualification standards, no testing of the kids' proficiency and no sanctions for failure to perform. Four things are certain. First, it will cost more than advertised as it has in those states that adopted a similar law. Second, there will be people who will scam the system. Third, it will harm public schools. Fourth, the number of kids with a substandard education will increase, which in turn has adverse consequences for society such as increased incarceration and homelessness.
Thank you for mentioning teacher pay. Would there be a way that we could reduce money for buildings and administration and allocate that to teachers? Would there be a way that we could offer bonuses based on performance?
From this SD Public Broadcasting article: https://www.sdpb.org/education/2023-12-04/demand-grows-for-english-as-a-second-language-programs
Across South Dakota, about five percent of students are designated as English Language Learners, which represents more than 6,700 students. The state Department of Education reports fewer than one-third of those students are academically “on track.”
In Huron, a community of about 15,000, ESL Director Jolene Konechne has learned just how fast ESL services can become essential.
“We have quite a few English as a Second Language families that work at Dakota Provisions, the turkey plant, and Jack Links in Alpina – and they brought children with them," Konechne said. "So, what started out as 100 or 200 kids, we’re now over 1,000 ESL students for a total student body a little under 3,000.”
...Huron now employs 13 dedicated ESL teachers, along with interpreters to help with school business...
Thank you for sharing the information on the number of ESL teachers. Data is very helpful when we are trying to make complicated decisions.
In RC, Hill City, Custer, Keystone, and Pine Ridge Reservation, you will find illegals as well as in Sioux Falls, Mitchell, etc. There are more than you think.
From this SD Public Broadcasting article: https://www.sdpb.org/education/2023-12-04/demand-grows-for-english-as-a-second-language-programs
Across South Dakota, about five percent of students are designated as English Language Learners, which represents more than 6,700 students. The state Department of Education reports fewer than one-third of those students are academically “on track.”
In Huron, a community of about 15,000, ESL Director Jolene Konechne has learned just how fast ESL services can become essential.
“We have quite a few English as a Second Language families that work at Dakota Provisions, the turkey plant, and Jack Links in Alpina – and they brought children with them," Konechne said. "So, what started out as 100 or 200 kids, we’re now over 1,000 ESL students for a total student body a little under 3,000.”
...Huron now employs 13 dedicated ESL teachers, along with interpreters to help with school business...
South Dakota Voices Response: Steve and Catherine, thank you for joining the conversation and sharing your concern.
Email from S&CB: "FAIRSD Strongly Opposes HB1020
HB1020, an act to create education savings accounts, was filed last week. Families for Alternative Instruction Rights in South Dakota (FAIRSD) STRONGLY opposes this bill. Read the bill here.
FAIRSD stands adamantly opposed to any legislation seeking to change the current laws for Alternative Instruction which operates free and independent from any government funding or interference. Currently, there are three legal options in SD for a parent to choose to educate their children; public, private, or Alternative Instruction. Any school choice bill that creates ESAs or vouchers should create a fourth legal option for parents to choose that is separate and distinct from Alternative Instruction. States like Arizona are making this distinction clear in the language of their laws. To be clear, FAIRSD is not opposing education savings accounts for families who want that option. However, this bill as written imposes on the current Alternative Instruction laws. It invites regulation and puts us at risk for more in the future. FAIRSD’s position is consistent and we are neutral on another school choice bill that has been pre-filed this year. You can see both bills on our website. https://fairsd.net/action-alerts. HB1020 already includes restrictions on Alternative Instruction that do not exist in current law; a provider of Alternative Instruction becomes a qualifying school; the Department of Education is empowered to approve curriculum; curriculum choices are limited to those approved; and new definition of microschool is created that confuses parent-directed, free enterprise ventures with enrollment in state-registered, tuition based schools. A precedence for regulating Alternative Instruction is set in this bill should it pass. It also puts a much larger target on all Alternative Instruction families for future government control and interference when a segment of families are receiving money. It may not matter if you opt-in to receive ESA funds or not when future regulations are proposed. All we are asking is that families who would like to choose to utilize an ESA are legally defined separately and distinctly from Alternative Instruction; we are calling this the 4th lane.The very roots of Alternative Instruction in South Dakota, which is commonly known as homeschooling and includes unaccredited schools, are parents who chose to direct the educate of their own children free of government involvement. We will not deviate from that mission. HSLDA stands with us in opposing this bill. https://hslda.org/legal/legislation"
South Dakota Voice Response: NS, thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Email comment from NS: "Privatize the schools, bullshit. Okay to kick out the illegals, perhaps, make their employers pay for their cheap labor."
Taking more money away from public education is not the answer. We all need to contribute to our public education system whether you have kids that use it or not. I have no children in school but am glad to pay so that we will have an educated workforce years down the road. If you choose to educate your child in a different way that’s fine but that doesn’t release you from your obligation to help pay for public education.
Also if any school gets funds from taxpayers they should have to have the same regulations as public schools and not be able to turn any child away.
Also they are CHILDREN not illegal aliens. You don’t know that their parents aren’t citizens or on a work visa. We need workers and those children will probably grow up to be workers as well. It will benefit our state if they are educated.
Thank you very much for your thoughtful comment. The problem is we are spending a lot of money (over $1 billion per year) and most of the children are not getting educated. And worse of all the performance has been very bad for well over 20 years. People are having trouble paying their property taxes and no one wants more sales tax or an income tax. How would you suggest we get better performance?
There is a significant school cost burden associated with the rapid influx of non-English speaking children. Statewide there are 6700 ESL students. 6700 X average $11,020 per student cost = $73,834,000 (Nearly 74 Million dollars).
According to Salary Explorer (https://www.salaryexplorer.com/average-salary-wage-comparison-south-dakota-esl-teacher-s108j10317), the average salary for a South Dakota ESL teacher is $73,000. There are 13 dedicated ESL teachers in Huron schools (not including the interpreters).
So 13 ESL teachers x average $73,000 = $949,000 potential extra budgetary burden in a town of 15,000 with a school district of 3,000 (1,000 of those students require interpreters and ESL training).
Whether their parents are here illegally or on a work visa for companies like Dakota Provisions in Huron or Jack Links, the large number of non-English-speaking children is having a significant impact on resource allocation in school districts and tax burden on citizens.
This whole line of thinking is interesting to me; I haven't really interacted much with non-English speaking people I guess. I don't know if this is relevant, but SD Codified law 13-27-3 (for Alternative Instruction) says "All instructions shall be given so as to lead to a mastery of the English language". This implies to me that knowing English is expected in the South Dakota educational system.
I don't know how the schools handle English as a second language. Do they attempt to teach them along with the other students? Or is there a separate class with kids that speak the other language? What if there are multiple foreign languages?
This is where it might be wise for one of those teachers to create a microschool for a specific language (multiple ages). At $7500/student (HB1009) a teacher could have a similar salary with only 10 students. Not sure if that would save the school district any money, but it might be more effective for those kids.
And maybe a company would be willing to make a nice donation or two to a specialized school that caters to their employees?
Interesting idea.
Very well stated, SFMama4! Thank you!
OK, I base my comment on having been brought up in a Republican household in Wisconsin and in my 85 1/2 years have never before heard that the Republican Party was against education.
During our 25 years of living in Northern Illinois, I witnessed empire building in the rural school district my children attended. This was an internal program to raise the cost of education thru higher and higher salaries for all those in administration. That same school district is now trying to force another high school on their taxpayers even tho it has been turned down by the voters 3 times. Yet they are going to try again.
My sister-in-law worked her entire career in education and she and her friends complained about how much of administration's work was being put on the shoulders of the teachers in addition to their normal lesson planning and teaching. At one gasthering of teachers I attended there were two conversational threads: 1) Boy am I glad I'm retired! and 2) I can't wait until I can retire!
I think many of the problems with education are internal.
The Church we attend in Southern Californicate runs a K-12 school and produces good results. Some of their students are children of wealthy foreigners sent there to get a better educatioin than they can at home. I believe their college acceptance rates are very high. And this come from a person that does not think college is for everyone.
Thank you for your insightful comments and for identifying issues teachers are facing. Also, thank you for calling attention to the issue of the balance between administrators and teachers. Do you have any suggestions on how we might be able to solve these issues?
I'm pretty good at observing things, but fixing them, short of taking them out and shooting them, takes some real thought. It's kinda like inflation. How do we back down from that. I guess the local school boards or the taxpayers would have to decide the salaries of some of these administrators is way over what the job really needs to pay and cut them down. Most of these people are on lucrartive contracts and a battle would ensue, but when the dust settles, the taxpayers would win and there would be money to pay the teachers a fair wage for what they do.
Note: the other school choice bill is HB1009. I do not understand why news outlets are ignoring this option. It offers much more flexibility for the parents to use the resources necessary for their child's education, including educational therapies & tutoring services. (the one-on-one help that students can't always get in a school classroom)
It does have a higher amount per student - but that is what is already allocated for each public school student, so people shouldn't complain about that (hypothetically).
https://sdlegislature.gov/Session/Bill/25724
Thank you Michelle for mentioning HB1009. That is why there is a question in the subtitle of the post. I think the problem is there are so many Federal mandates that you have to be careful what you propose or you will be shot down. Is there any way to merge HB1009 and HB1020 and get something that handles all the legal pitfalls? Does HB1009 avoid these problems?
Thirteen states currently have some form of school choice as of 2023 (https://hslda.org/post/how-esa-funding-could-undermine-homeschool-freedom) - so I assume that there is a way to work with the current laws/regulations.
The main difference between 1020 and 1009 is who is in control. HB1020 has the Dept of Ed approving curriculum that the money can be used for. It redefines microschools (of which there are already quite a few in the state) and it places Alternative Instruction students under the umbrella of "Qualifying Schools"...albeit only if they apply to take the money. This bill makes the whole situation even more confusing.
HB1009 clearly delineates 3 forms of education: public school, ESA, or Alternative Instructions. Pick one and no overlap. (I assume private schools are under the ESA category as ESA money can be used for tuition; there isn't really a separate category for accredited nonpublic schools otherwise).
So no, I don't see these two bills being merged, except in the sense of HB1009 pulling a couple of aspects from the other bill:
* lowering the amount per student to 40% of the cost equivalent per student
* allowing part-time access to public schools by ESA students whose monetary allotment would then be pro-rated (& that money given to the schools instead)
Ok sounds good. Has someone been in contact with the prime sponsor of 1020 to get the discussion rolling. Most of us are for anything that improves performance and keeps costs under control.
Quite a few people that I know have been emailing and contacting legislators for the past week or two, especially about HB1020 (but also HB1009). Two key Alternative Instruction organizations are against HB1020 (but neutral on HB1009).
I think the primer sponsor of HB1020 is well aware that some changes need to be made. Two of the organizations lobbying for that bill - SD Family Voice and Americans for Prosperity - are also very aware. But it is always good for citizens to get involved and let their legislators know their thoughts!
Excellent. People need to get involved. This is the way we get good legislation! Please post information on specific things people can do to help. It is probably best to post at the top of the comments so everyone can see them easily.
This post mentions that the South Dakota K-12 education budget is being used by only about 15% of the population. Proponents of HB 1020 use this rhetoric to incite tax payers to believe that they are being ripped off because they do not receive direct benefit (ie. money to send their kids to private school or money to homeschool) from the use of the tax money that they pay in.
Parents who homeschool their children or send their children to private schools are not being ripped off by the state. The primary goal of the collection of taxes is to amass funds in order to provide resources and services that benefit society (ie. keep it up and running). The citizens of South Dakota value an education for all its children for the good of society. We share the cost of public education because we, as citizens, deem that it is in the best interest of society that every child receive an education. We use state money to fund public education because of the benefits that all the citizens gain from having educated citizens. That is why people who never even have children contribute tax money to the cause.
We homeschool our children. I do not feel ripped off by our state. Our state is providing an education for any student whose parents are not choosing to or not able to provide their children an education elsewhere. Is that education perfect? Of course not. Neither is the one we are giving our own children. Perfection is unattainable in this world. Could the public education system do better? Certainly. I am sure we could do better too. I disagree wholeheartedly with this kind of approach of "helping" either the public school system (by giving them competition for funds) or the homeschool and private school parents (by giving them public funds). Such an approach misunderstands the use of public funds for the education of its citizens.
Interesting takes. The problem is most people want their tax money used in a productive way. If less than 1/3 of the students are getting educated that means we are wasting over $666 million per year of taxpayer money. Over the course of 10 years this is $66 billon. Perhaps I am missing something, but I have not heard anyone suggest we should get rid of public education. They just don't want to waste their money. Do you have some suggestions on others ways we could increase performance and reduce costs?
It's not accurate to claim that less than 1/3 of students are getting educated. All students are getting educated, some more so than others. Some excellent, others substandard, but all are educated to some extent. Just as in runners in a race, one will win and one will finish last, but all run the race.
Thank you for clarifying this information. I think the concern is the huge cost to get a few students performing at level. Is there something else could we do to improve performance without spending more money?
I find your response to be rude. Opposing HB 1020 and other so called "school-choice" education welfare bills in no way requires one to provide solutions to the problems within public education. If you must have an idea from me though, I will offer one. Encourage parents and taxpayers to personally get involved in the children's education and schools.
Of course we all know that no one has suggested we get rid of public education. I never even hinted at any such thing. You are being rude and inflammatory.
What are you referring to when you say, "Interesting takes."?
Lisa thank you again for joining the conversation. About "interesting takes"-- its a way of saying I appreciate your viewpoints and am thinking about them. The point of my comments was not to be rude or unkind, but to get as many potential issues on the table as possible so any legislation makes things better and not worse. Thanks again for sharing your viewpoints. They are a very helpful part of the discussion.
If you disagree with HB1020, perhaps you should consider HB1009, which is going to be discussed in the House Ed Committee Jan. 22nd.
You can read it here: https://sdlegislature.gov/Session/Bill/25724
Here is an overview:
1) Parents choose how the child will be educated: public school, Alternative Instruction, or Educational Empowerment Account (EEA).
2) $7500 is put on a debit card for the EEA students (the same amount that goes to the public school for each student - via property taxes & sales tax I believe). EEA students may not participate in any public school offerings.
Alternative Instruction law does not change - those students are still able to attend public school classes, sports, etc. and they receive no money.
3) Parents may spend the EEA dollars on whatever combination of educational resources are necessary for that child's individual learning needs, including:
(1) Tuition fees;
(2) Fees for sports programs and fine arts programs;
(3) Textbooks, curricula, or other instructional materials and supplies;
(4) Tutoring Services (amended version of the bill)
(5) Educational therapies
(6) Registration fees for testing (AP test, ACT, etc)
(7) Transportation services between the student's residence and classes
(8) Technological devices, instruments, and equipment necessary for the student to participate in any form of educational pursuit listed in this section.
Random audits will be performed, and a parent may be prosecuted for fraud if warranted.
Thank you for sharing this information. To get good legislation it is important to have all the information.
The education has a book that said that all children must go to the school, and on the other hand, it is contradictory with illegal children.
Thank you for the comment. Could you please explain a little more.
Forcing the illegal aliens to return home and asking companies to pickup the education costs for the children of their foreign workers,
SFBs
Thank you for the comment. Who should pay for the extra costs when companies bring in foreign workers that cannot easily integrate into the public school system (and require extra staff and teachers)? The company or the taxpayer?
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I am not sure how this is a party issue. Baltimore and Chicago are Democrat and the educational performance is abysmal. In South Dakota we are spending over a billion dollars a year and less than 1/3 of the students can read at grade level and even fewer are proficient in math. The public education system has been performing poorly (in South Dakota and in most of the rest of the country) for a long time. South Dakota is a small state and people are maxed out on taxes, so it appears we are going to have to do something to improve quality without spending more money. What specifically are you suggesting?
People in South Dakota only think they're maxed out on taxes. Fact is it's one of the lowest taxed states in the nation. Humans always complain that they're overrated. Taxes could be cut in half, and a year later, they'd be complaining that taxes are too high. Reality is that some things are worth paying for and you get what you pay for. Low teacher pay is a likely cause of low student performance. Illegal immigrants are an easy scapegoat. Once deportations get going, the illegal impact will be solved. Vouchers won't solve any problems, but they will create new problems.
Thank you for bringing up the point of problems with vouchers. What problems do you anticipate?
Thank you for bringing out the issue of money allocation. Most people agree the US needs to stop the endless wars. This seems to be a significant issue regardless of political party. I think the frustration is related to the total public education dollars per student in South Dakota have been steadily increasing, but the performance is still abysmal. In the case of public eduction, it is burning so much money in South Dakota that we have to supplement the state allocation with money from the counties and the Federal government. Many people do not believe this type of money burn is sustainable.
Thank you for talking about the money. I think the frustration might be over the huge amount of money (and the increasing per student cost) and that the schools have not been able to improve performance. Is there something else we should consider other than money to solve the problem? For example, is too much being spent on buildings, administration,...? Does more of the money need to to allocated directly to teachers? Does teacher credentialing need to change?
Do yoiu speak for the Republican Party or are you just making this up?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and bringing up the point that we need an educated populace. Perhaps what we are hearing is frustration. People saw what was being taught during Covid and they aren't satisfied. They are further frustrated because of the huge price tag. Do you have any ideas on how we might be able to better focus our energies without spending more money?