School Funding Interim Commission - Audio Only [Source] Translate

The meeting began with a resolution of a technical issue and a positive reflection on previous discussions. The main focus was on identifying successful schools or districts in the state, led by consultants Justin and Amanda. The agenda included team introductions, an overview of the successful school district methodology, and discussions on metrics for measuring success, particularly in the context of Montana. The study team was introduced, including Justin Silverstein (project lead), Amanda (commission support), Dr. Robert Reichert (statistical support), Michaela Tonking (expenditure analysis), and Jen Piscitelli (policy analysis). Justin explained the history and purpose of the American Institutes for Research, which has been involved in school finance since 1983, emphasizing a data-driven approach to identifying effective schools and determining necessary funding. The methodology involves defining base funding levels, considering additional resources for special needs students, and analyzing district characteristics. The team stressed the importance of consistent data across districts to measure success effectively. The successful schools methodology aims to identify high-performing districts and establish funding benchmarks for others. The meeting highlighted challenges in selecting and analyzing successful districts, particularly the representativeness of wealthier communities. The discussion emphasized the need for a sufficient number of successful districts to establish replicable practices and the importance of recognizing success under different criteria. Concerns were raised about the initial performance data not capturing success among higher-needs districts, prompting a shift towards considering growth over time and the performance of special populations. Senator Byrd inquired about analyzing individual components of success, and it was noted that commonly collected data, such as graduation and attendance rates, could be examined. Commissioner Schreiber raised concerns about the relationship between spending and outcomes, emphasizing that spending is important but not the sole driver of success. The necessity of surveying successful districts to identify commonalities in programming and policies was also discussed. The selection process for successful districts will include multiple criteria, and efficiency screens will evaluate how funds are spent across different categories. Concerns specific to Montana regarding data comparability across districts of varying sizes were raised, highlighting the unique challenges posed by small district populations. The meeting also addressed the need for granular data on fund usage and the limitations of existing methods in capturing the full picture of school success. The importance of defining success in education was emphasized, with various stakeholders having different perspectives. The potential for analyzing data at both school and district levels was discussed, considering the diverse range of district sizes in Montana. The conversation included the complexities of funding formulas for schools of varying sizes and the need for different funding approaches for different school sizes. The importance of analyzing data at the district level was emphasized due to the complexity of policies set at that level. Student performance data was identified as critical, with a focus on state assessment results and the challenges posed by recent changes in testing systems. Concerns about the reliability of using free and reduced lunch eligibility as a measure of at-risk students were raised, with alternative measures suggested. The meeting also focused on the analysis of school funding, particularly regarding expenditures for special populations. The need for better data collection methods and the importance of demographic data in understanding spending impacts were discussed. The conversation included the need for a robust study to define quality education and reconcile funding amounts with educational adequacy. As the meeting transitioned to defining success in education, it was noted that most states have historically used performance-based metrics. The complexities involved in measuring educational success were acknowledged, and a break was called before continuing with the next agenda section. The meeting continued with discussions on evaluating school district performance, emphasizing the need to assess results after significant periods rather than just growth. The use of special education metrics in evaluating performance was highlighted, with examples from other states illustrating different accountability approaches. Concerns about the percentage of districts identified as successful were discussed, with a consensus leaning towards identifying around 10% to 15% based on performance metrics. The meeting concluded with a recommendation to conduct a "beat the odds" analysis to identify districts outperforming expectations based on demographics. The group emphasized the iterative nature of the process, seeking input as they refine their criteria for success, with plans to present initial findings in April. The meeting also involved discussions about including various student populations in assessments and the importance of transparency in data sharing among districts. Public comments included insights from stakeholders praising the depth of data analysis and highlighting the unique challenges faced by Montana's education system. The meeting concluded with a commitment to continue refining data analysis and reconvene in April to discuss findings and further steps. The meeting also addressed financial mechanisms related to school funding, including property tax laws and specific funds. Concerns were raised about new property tax laws and their potential impact on funding. The discussion included various funds, such as the Bus Depreciation Reserve Fund and the Technology Fund, emphasizing the need for centralized approaches to technology funding. The meeting transitioned to a panel discussion on school facilities, highlighting the importance of consistent state support and long-term planning. The discussion included the challenges of deferred maintenance and the need for better funding practices to ensure schools meet modern educational standards. Overall, the meeting underscored the critical need for improved funding, effective governance, and community engagement to address the challenges facing school districts in Montana. The complexities of school funding, maintenance, and the need for strategic planning were emphasized throughout the discussions.