President Biden and the Democratic-controlled Congress are poised to continue the federal government’s spending spree, this time through a $2 trillion extravaganza named Build Back Better (BBB). Just before Thanksgiving, the House of Representatives narrowly passed its version of the measure, and the Senate is now mulling possible changes to the package.
President Biden and the Democratic-controlled Congress are poised to continue the federal government’s spending spree, this time through a $2 trillion extravaganza named Build Back Better (BBB). Just before Thanksgiving, the House of Representatives narrowly passed its version of the measure, and the Senate is now mulling possible changes to the package.
The spending plan would pay for an assortment of climate change and social programs, including a massive expansion of childcare and preschool. Should it pass, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that a near-universal childcare subsidy would add about $273 billion to the federal budget over the next decade, while a universal preschool program would escalate spending by $109 billion during that period. Those numbers, however, underestimate the eventual cost of the programs, as BBB doesn’t provide funding for either of them after FY 2027. If both are reauthorized, the Committee for a Responsible Budget calculates an added expense of roughly $800 billion in the ten-year budget window.
Those big numbers reflect only federal outlays. A full accounting requires consideration of the fiscal impact on state budgets, as well. Akin to a promo rate or loss leader, the feds would pick up the entire tab for expanded childcare and preschool in FYs 2022–24. Thereafter, states are on the hook for covering part of those costs—should they choose to participate in these programs. Here’s the fine print:
What does this mean in terms of real dollars? To get a ballpark sense, consider the potential impacts on Ohio’s budget once the matching requirements kick in. Table 1 begins with the childcare costs under three scenarios (we’ll tackle pre-k next). The low-cost scenario assumes a conservative estimate of the number of families who would opt into the new program and also assumes average childcare costs that are roughly the same as today. Meanwhile, the high cost scenario assumes higher take-up rates along with escalating childcare costs, something many analysts predict will occur. One could, of course, test a whole range of assumptions, but these simple examples help to illustrate costs. Even with a modest 10 percent state match—an assumed average across the three childcare spending categories—Ohio would be looking at an additional $150 to $350 million per year in childcare spending.[2]
Table 1: Projected annual childcare costs to Ohio under BBB
Notes: BBB’s income eligibility threshold for childcare is 250 percent of the state median income. Approximately 90 percent of Ohio taxpayers report incomes below $132,000—roughly 2.5 times the state’s median for a family of four—so I multiply the number of children age 0–3 (about 413,000) by 0.9.[3] I then subtract the number of children age 0–3 who would likely be covered under existing public childcare programs (roughly 43,500). The participation rate is uncertain, but 75 percent of children participated in Quebec’s universal childcare program five years into implementation. The average center-based childcare cost in Ohio is $9,919 per child. However, BBB requires states to link childcare payments to cost studies that would likely produce higher amounts. To receive subsidies, childcare providers must increase childcare workers’ salaries to match elementary school teachers and participate in the state’s quality system, which awards credit for meeting certain staff-to-child ratios.
But childcare is only half of the story. Turning back to universal preschool, we see a bigger fiscal impact, which reflects the larger state share in comparison to BBB’s childcare proposal. In a low-cost scenario, Ohio would spend an additional $294 million per year in FY 2027 when the 36 percent match applies. In the higher cost scenario, expenses would be nearly two-thirds of a billion per annum.
Table 2: Projected annual preschool costs to Ohio under BBB
Notes: There are no income limits on BBB’s preschool program, so the number of 3–4-year-olds in Ohio (roughly 275,800) is used as the number of eligible children. I then subtract the number of children participating in existing publicly funded preschool programs; about 71,600 children are in the state’s preschool program, Head Start, and preschool special education. Somewhat lower cost assumptions are applied to the preschool program as childcare. Although BBB likewise calls for higher wages and staff-to-pupil requirements for preschools, analysts assume lower pre-K costs than childcare. This table excludes additional expenditures for preschool “state activities” (e.g., administration and data systems); states would pay 47 percent of those costs.
***
Taken together, Ohio should expect to add somewhere between $450 million to $1 billion per year to its budget to pay its share of childcare and preschool costs starting in 2027. That’s not peanuts. It amounts to 5 to 10 percent of the current state budget for primary and secondary education. Think about the opportunity costs this way: A half billion dollars would allow Ohio to double its funding for economically disadvantaged K–12 students. Or it could help the state pay down its new (and more expensive) funding model. Yet tying up millions in childcare and preschool spending will constrain state lawmakers’ ability to fund other important initiatives, or lead to tax increases.
There’s much commentary and analysis about the merits of expanding public childcare and preschool programs. For now, we’ll leave those debates to others. But one thing is clear: There are serious costs to making these programs a universal entitlement, both to the federal government and to states. States can opt-out of these programs at any time, either on the front end or, more perilously, when the state share comes into effect. Should BBB pass, only time will tell whether state policymakers, including those in Ohio, feel the federal “incentives” are worth the squeeze.
[1] The state share of quality activities costs (e.g., facilities and “supply building”) would vary by jurisdiction, as those are linked to Medicaid reimbursement rates. (Ohio’s is 36 percent.) States would cover 47 percent of administration.
[2] Those numbers are higher than the projections in an analysis by Angela Rachidi of the American Enterprise Institute who cites an added cost of $79 million per year by 2027. However, her analysis only looks at the “direct services” share.
[3] Although children ages three and four are eligible for childcare under BBB, I assume that they’ll participate in the universal preschool program.
In the wake of the November elections, hundreds of new school board members will soon take their seats overseeing Ohio’s 600 plus districts. From media accounts, the winners appear to be a mix of school establishment candidates and grassroots contenders running on culture-war issues. While this doesn’t necessarily indicate a widespread mandate for change, there is likely more momentum than usual for challenging the status quo at the local level. Yet beyond addressing touchy issues around critical race theory and masking, what might reform-minded board members tackle? Here are a couple ideas.
Build choice-friendly communities
It’s no secret that most local school boards—and their national and state affiliates—have long opposed educational alternatives that are not under district control. They have traditionally viewed public charter and private school options as the enemy, and seem to understand their role to be defenders of districts’ institutional interests.
Unfortunately, that’s a cramped, territorial view of educational leadership in a community. Let us first note that school board members are not bound by oath to protecting adult jobs or district budgets. Instead, they are elected by the public at large to work in the best interest of students and to represent the broader community. Board members can work towards both of those purposes by supporting school choice. Studies show that expanding choice often improves achievement among students attending both traditional public schools and other alternatives. Moreover, supporting choice might win over more constituents; choice does poll well, and yes, parents of non-district students vote, too. And a choice-friendly posture could make levies just a little bit easier to pass and even prevent culture war clashes from dominating board meetings, as Neal McCluskey at the Cato Institute has argued.
One might counter that there’s little a board member could do to advance choice. It’s true that district boards in Ohio do not oversee the operations of charter and private schools, nor are they responsible for their outcomes. Yet districts can and do impact the choice environment in ways that either encourage or stifle these options. Consider the following ways that board members can help build choice-friendly communities:
Ensure district schools follow the “science of reading”
While choice issues are more akin to foreign policy, board members must also pay attention to domestic matters—and that means improving district performance. There are many ways to work towards this goal, such as overhauling archaic teacher compensation structures, encouraging more advanced coursework in middle and high schools, or evaluating superintendents based on objective measures of academic improvement. But one particularly ripe area for board advocacy is early literacy, most notably insisting that district elementary schools follow the science of reading. This refers to a large body of evidence finding that children learn foundational reading skills best through explicit, systematic phonics instruction as opposed to “whole language” or “balanced literacy” type approaches.
School boards are legally responsible for prescribing the curriculum used by district schools, but how exactly can board members ensure their schools adhere to this science and are helping all children read well? Here are a few ideas:
***
School boards have significant powers to shape K–12 education in local communities. By working towards a more choice-friendly community culture and pushing for effective reading practices, board members can use those powers in ways that support parents, benefit students, and unite communities.
In early November, the Code.org Advocacy Coalition, the Computer Science Teachers Association, and the Expanding Computing Education Pathways Alliance teamed up to release the 2021 State of Computer Science Education. It offers a plethora of national and state-level data on policy, access, and participation, which is important information given the growing prominence of computer science in society and the abundance of open jobs in the sector.
One key feature of this report is the nine policies it identifies as critical to expanding computer science education and ensuring that growth is both sustainable and equitable. States that adopt more of these policies tend to have more of their high schools offering computer science. Six states have adopted all nine policies—Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Maryland, and Nevada. The policies are:
Over the last year, a total of thirty-one states have adopted or revised their policies on computer science education. States allocated over $65 million for K–12 computer science education in FY 2022. All fifty states and the District of Columbia now allow computer science to count toward a graduation requirement, and three states—Arkansas, South Carolina, and Nevada—require it for graduation. A total of twenty-three states mandate that all their high schools must offer computer science courses.
To measure access and participation, the report focuses on schools that offer a foundational computer science course. This means the course is offered during the traditional school day and requires students to apply learned concepts through programming for at least twenty hours. Nationally, 51 percent of high schools offer such classes. That’s up from last year, but there are still some worrisome access disparities. For example, rural and urban schools are less likely to offer computer science than their suburban counterparts. Schools with high percentages of economically disadvantaged students are less likely to offer courses, and Black, Hispanic, and Native American/Alaskan students are less likely to attend schools that offer it.
Seventy-eight percent of high school students attend schools that offer foundational computer science, but within the thirty-seven states with enrollment data, just under 5 percent of students are actually enrolled in a course. One bright spot is participation in AP computer science, which has increased over the last several years and includes two courses: AP Computer Science A and AP Computer Science Principles. Even during the 2019–20 school year, when the number of exams given in most AP subjects decreased due to the pandemic, participation in AP computer science exams increased 13 percent. The number of female students and students from underrepresented racial and ethnic subgroups who are taking AP computer science exams has also increased, yet disparities remain. Black and Hispanic students only account for 6 and 16 percent of AP computer science exams, respectively.
The report also offers detailed summaries of policy, access, and participation within each state. For example, Fordham’s home state of Ohio has implemented six of the nine key policies. During 2019–20, half of the Buckeye State’s public high schools offered foundational computer science courses, up from 42 percent in 2018–19. In total, 65 percent of Ohio high school students attend schools that offer computer science. But there are gaps and disparities here, too: 67 percent of Ohio’s suburban schools offer foundational computer science, compared to 34 percent of urban schools and 48 percent of rural schools. Only 36 percent of schools where more than three quarters of the student body are eligible for subsidized lunches offer computer science, compared to nearly 50 percent of schools where fewer than a fourth of students are eligible. Black students are 1.7 times less likely than their White and Asian peers to attend a school that offers AP computer science. And only 26 percent of the AP computer science exams administered last year were taken by female students. These disparities can and should be addressed quickly, as Ohio has an average of 18,628 open computing jobs each month and these jobs offer an average salary of $86,842.
Finally, the report outlines four recommendations for leaders, educators, and advocates to expand participation in computer sciences. First, it’s important to ensure that opportunities are available to students from underrepresented populations. Second, states and schools should leverage students’ own devices, school broadband access, and educators’ increasing experience in teaching with technology. Third, schools should create K–12 pathways for computer science that will lay a foundation for more diverse enrollment and retention in high school courses. And fourth, school leaders should prioritize foundational computer science courses so that students are prepared for advanced pathways.
SOURCE: “2021 State of Computer Science Education: Accelerating Action through Advocacy,” Code.org, CSTA, and ECEP Alliance (November 2021).
In 2012, Tennessee lawmakers created the Statewide Dual-Credit program (SDC) to help more students earn college credit while completing high school. SDC was meant to provide a new set of accelerated course options to reach students typically missed by traditional college-preparatory Advanced Placement (AP) courses or dual enrollment (DE) classes taken on college campuses and taught by professors. It was designed to appeal particularly to those interested in applied and technical fields and likely to pursue two-year college degrees or postsecondary technical programs. A new study in the journal Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis looks at the rollout of and participation in the program, as well as effects on AP offerings.
SDC course topics were chosen by representatives from the University of Tennessee system, the board of regents, and the state department of education. They were meant to be attractive and practical, with consideration to workforce demand, existing postsecondary pathways, and student interest. Teams of high school and college instructors designed the courses, aligned to Tennessee Transfer Pathway standards. Ten courses were created at the outset: statistics, pre-calculus, world history, sociology, psychology, criminal justice, plant science, agricultural business, college algebra, and health information technology. (The latter two were discontinued during the study period.) No GPA or course prerequisites were required for enrollment; high schools were allowed to use their own judgment about students’ readiness. SDC courses were taught in high schools by teachers who completed specific training provided by the state. Students earned college credits by passing end-of-course exams, a more rigorous requirement than some dual enrollment programs and more akin to AP.
The researchers looked at data from 2009 to 2017, covering four school years before and four school years after the launch of SDC. School-level analyses include 324 buildings across Tennessee that serve both eleventh and twelfth graders. Student-level analyses covered 100,000 eleventh and twelfth graders.
Overall, 48 percent of schools offered at least one SDC during the study period, ranging from 17 to 35 percent in any given year. The typical school offered just one course. By comparison, 76 percent of schools offered at least one AP course. Unfortunately, no data were available related to dual enrollment utilization at any point in the study period. Relative to statewide averages, schools with SDC and AP courses had higher student achievement and fewer disadvantaged students. However, SDC-offering schools had higher proportions of White students than average, whereas AP-offering schools did not. SDC schools were less likely than AP schools to be in urban areas. School size was the main predictor of offering SDC and AP courses—more kids, more college credit options.
Ninety-three percent of students who took an SDC took only one, which makes sense given the single course offering in a typical school. Relative to the average student, SDC takers were more likely to be White, higher achieving, and female. Relative to AP takers, SDC students were more likely to be White, but less likely to be female or high achieving. The courses deemed more “academic” in nature (math and sociology) attracted students with higher prior academic achievement compared to the career-tech-focused courses. Sociology and criminal justice SDCs attracted the most students of color while the students choosing agricultural business and plant science were almost entirely White.
Within schools, Black students were as likely to enroll in an SDC as their White peers, but were 3.8 percentage points less likely to enroll in an AP course. Hispanic students were as likely to enroll in both SDC and AP as their White peers. Students who participated in AP courses prior to SDC launch were more likely to continue on with AP rather than pick up an SDC; however, there was some evidence that SDC college algebra—wherever it was offered—served as a precursor to participation in AP math courses. Students were more likely to enroll in a career-tech-focused SDC if they had taken a related elective from the high school curriculum previously. The researchers suggest that elective requirements in Tennessee, into which the new SDCs were added, led to such a course-taking pattern. Offering SDCs did not appear to decrease AP offerings overall.
Unfortunately, student success in SDCs was extremely low during the timeframe under study. Just 3 percent of SDC students passed the criminal justice exam, while the highest pass rate, for the plant science exam, was just 35 percent. Evidence suggests that these low passing rates within schools were a factor in local officials’ decisions to discontinue their SDCs after a year or two. However, more than 78 percent of schools that discontinued the agricultural business SDC offered a traditional high school version of it the following year, indicating that student interest was not among those negative factors.
Thus, while the SDC plan achieved its initial goal of attracting a number of new and more diverse high schoolers into college-credit-bearing classes in Tennessee, some serious changes were likely in order if the overarching goal of increased postsecondary attainment was to be assisted by SDCs. The researchers discuss the possibility that either the teachers were underprepared to deliver the material at the high level required at the outset, or that these eleventh and twelfth graders were simply unprepared for college level coursework, no matter the format. The program remains alive in Tennessee and now offers eleven courses. But it seems inescapable that the road to postsecondary credential attainment starts long before students step foot in high school. Today’s underprepared third grader is tomorrow’s low-performing ninth grader. Without some foundational work, states are bound to struggle to “accelerate” college students who have not yet been taught up to high school proficiency, no matter how cleverly that acceleration is designed.
SOURCE: Steven W. Hemelt and Tom Swiderski, “College Comes to High School: Participation and Performance in Tennessee’s Innovative Wave of Dual-Credit Courses,” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (November 2021).
At this point, we’re all tired of hearing the word “unprecedented.” But clichés are clichés for a reason, and 2020 has certainly been an unprecedented year. Many of us would like nothing more than to leave this difficult year in the rearview mirror. Unfortunately, the events of 2020 seem likely to stretch into the new year. That’s especially true in education, as several of the biggest issues in 2021 will have a pandemic-related tinge.
Here’s five predictions about what’s in store for Ohio education in 2021.
5. Ohio will continue to focus on career and technical education
The Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act, often referred to as Perkins V, was signed into federal law with overwhelming bipartisan support approximately two years ago. Since then, states have been hard at work creating their plans for how to implement the law. Ohio is no exception. In fact, the Buckeye State was part of national efforts to improve career training and readiness long before the reauthorization of Perkins, and an increasing number of students are earning industry-recognized credentials. Governor DeWine’s first budget contained several CTE initiatives, and it’s expected that his upcoming budget will do the same. As one of the few remaining education policies with bipartisan support, look for Ohio to continue expanding and refining CTE in 2021.
4. State and local leaders will look for creative ways to catch kids up academically
One of the big headlines of 2020 was that school closures and remote learning efforts led to significant learning lags, especially for low-income and minority students. To address unfinished learning and prevent it from becoming permanent, schools will need to get creative about intervention efforts. Research indicates that increasing instructional time can narrow achievement gaps, so expect leaders to call for schools to offer a plethora of additional learning opportunities outside of regular school hours, such as intensive summer school or beefed-up tutoring programs.
3. State testing will return, but accountability consequences will remain on pause
For intervention and remediation efforts to work, schools will need to know where students are academically. This means testing is more important than ever. The type of testing matters, too. Local diagnostic assessments are vital, but so are state assessments that offer leaders and the general public a big picture look at how students are doing—especially low-income and minority students who were probably hit hardest by the pandemic. Although some Ohio lawmakers—with the backing of traditional education groups—have attempted to eliminate state testing for the 2020–21 school year, administering these tests is a federal requirement. That means Ohio can’t lawfully skip them unless it’s granted a waiver by the U.S. Department of Education. It’s unclear whether the incoming Biden administration will grant such a waiver, but high-ranking congressional Democrats and national civil rights groups have expressed their support for state testing in 2021. If the vaccine rollout goes smoothly, and the majority of schools are able to safely reopen in person by the spring, it’s reasonable to assume that the feds will tell states to go forward with administering state exams. Regardless of what occurs with state assessment, though, it’s a safe bet that school ratings and other accountability consequences will remain paused for the 2020–21 school year (as Fordham recommended back in June).
2. Resuming in-person school will be contentious and complicated
Speaking of schools operating in person, the early days of 2021 will probably be a redux of this fall, when reopening conversations were controversial. Holiday gatherings, colder weather forcing people indoors, and pandemic fatigue are just a few of the reasons for skyrocketing case numbers. Experts predict that the next three months—including when students are set to return to school after holiday breaks—could be “horrible.” The fact that we’ll soon have vaccines available for essential workers such as teachers is good news, but it’s important to be realistic. Vaccines won’t make things safe overnight, and families with high-risk members may prefer to keep their students home for longer periods of time. The vast majority of schools are going to be facing tough questions early in the new year related to in-person learning and reopening, and those questions may linger into the spring. With any luck, however, the start to the 2021–22 school year will mark a very welcome return to normalcy.
1. Debates about the school funding formula will dominate the budget cycle
When the Cupp-Patterson plan was introduced in the spring of 2019, Ohio’s long-standing school funding debate took on new life. A pair of companion bills appeared before the House and Senate during their lame duck sessions, but nothing was signed into law. That means that, as budget talks gear up next year, debates over the school funding formula are going to be hotter than ever—especially since budget season will occur in the backdrop of an economic downturn, and the Cupp-Patterson plan would add a whopping $2 billion per year (if not more) to state spending.
***
There you have it, folks. Things are looking up—yay vaccines!—but for better or worse, 2021 will likely retain some of 2020’s drama.
Happy New Year!
