study says...

Democratic governors boost funding for schools with more black, Hispanic students. (Test scores, not so much.)

PHOTO: Andy Cross, The Denver Post

Elections have consequences, goes the common saying — and that turns out to be true in schools.

A new study finds that electing a Democrat for governor leads to more money being spent in districts with more students of color, though there’s no evidence that meant higher test scores or smaller achievement gaps.

“School districts with a high share of minority students receive significantly greater transfers from the state government than other districts when a Democrat is elected,” write researchers Andrew Hill and Daniel Jones in the peer-reviewed Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization.

It’s one of only a few studies to directly examine how politicians’ partisan affiliation affects education policy. Another recent analysis found that Democratic school board members in North Carolina led to more racially integrated schools.

Of course, state governors don’t unilaterally make education policy, but they are likely to have significant sway, as this study suggests.

In order to isolate the effect of electing a Democrat versus a Republican, the latest study looks at governors’ races between 1990 and 2013; the paper focuses on 67 closely decided races of the nearly 300 elections. The idea of this common research approach is that the results of a narrowly decided election are essentially random.

First the researchers look at whether a governor’s party led to a greater overall increase in education spending. The effects here were modest: Democratic governors increased K-12 spending by about $100 per person more than Republicans, though there was no difference in higher education expenditures.

But when looking at how resources were distributed — rather than how much money was spent overall — the results were more stark.

Electing a Democratic governor led to an increase of about $500 per student for districts with a majority of black and Hispanic students, relative to whiter districts, simply because under them the money was distributed evenly between high-minority and whiter districts. In contrast, under Republicans total spending was higher in whiter districts.

Similarly, the study finds that Democratic governors targeted additional money to colleges and universities that serve more students of color.

So did this this distribution of spending lead to higher achievement or smaller test score gaps? Apparently not, according to the researchers’ analysis of the federal NAEP test.

“We find no evidence that a Democratic governor leads to higher NAEP scores during her term,” Hill and Jones write. “Moreover, despite the large shift in funds to school districts with a large share of minority students, we do not observe a shrinkage of the black-white score gap.”

It’s not clear why that’s the case — and perhaps surprising in light of recent research showing that students benefit when more money is spent on schools.

It could be that other policy changes by governors swamp school spending effects, that gains from school spending take several years to manifest on NAEP, or that spending went to areas that might be beneficial but don’t show up in test scores. It’s also possible that the increase in spending was simply not an effective way to improve schools.

The paper also examines why governors from different parties distribute money differently — is it based on politics or policy? It looks to be more the latter. Democrats were not any more likely to send money to districts with higher share of Democratic voters or electorally competitive districts.

But in other respects governors do seem to be affected by politics. “Lame duck” Democrats — those in their final years in office who could not run for re-election — seemed to lead to a greater increase in overall spending.

K-12 education spending “increases when a Democratic governor is elected, and this increase is substantially larger during ‘lame duck’ terms,” the study says. “It seems as if governors are constrained by political considerations when increasing spending on elementary and secondary education; although it increases, their preferences might be for even larger increases.”

state of the state

Gov. Rick Snyder proposes more money for Michigan schools in final State of the State

Gov. Rick Snyder delivers his eighth and final State of the State address, Jan. 23, 2018.

Gov. Rick Snyder hopes to send more money to schools around the state next year.

He announced during his eighth and final State of the State address Tuesday that his budget proposal will include “the largest increase in the basic per pupil student foundation allowance in the last 15 years.”

This proposal comes just a week after Amazon delivered a major rebuke to the state’s educational system.

The retail giant cited the poor state of schools and the lack of qualified professionals in the state when it eliminated both Detroit and Grand Rapids from consideration for the future home of its second headquarters.

Snyder, who will be forced from office by term limits at the end of the year, said he’s determined to use his final year in office to help improve education and to better prepare Michigan students for technology jobs.

“Let’s invest more in education,” he said.

The governor did not get into details about how the money should be spent. He made no mention of a major report that came out last week recommending a different way of distributing education dollars.

But in addition to promising more K-12 spending in his upcoming budget proposal to the legislature, Snyder said he’s also developing a “Marshall Plan for Talent.”

He did not provide details about that plan but said it “is going to lay the groundwork for a new way of producing talent in Michigan.”

The plan, he said, “is going to prepare Michigan students to invest in the future and to be ready for what comes next and to break down the walls that have traditionally existed between educational institutions and businesses.”

The state “learned some things” from its Amazon proposals, he said. “We can do better.”

Watch the full speech here:

money matters

After Cuomo calls for belt-tightening, New York’s Board of Regents look to lawmakers for more school aid

PHOTO: Monica Disare
Chancellor Rosa at Thomas A. Edison Career and Technical Education High School

Less than a week after Gov. Andrew Cuomo proposed a modest increase in school spending, the state’s top education policymakers began plotting ways to secure more funding.

Board of Regents Chancellor Betty Rosa rallied her fellow board members at a meeting Monday, urging them to shift their focus onto the state legislature, which must negotiate a final budget with the governor. She said the board should come up with a unified plan for pressuring lawmakers, adding that State Education Commissioner MaryEllen Elia would continue to make the case for more funding in public and in private conversations with legislators.

Now the question becomes: What else can we do to continue to move that agenda forward?” Rosa said to the group. “I’d like us to do it in a collective kind of way so that it doesn’t become a free-for-all.”

In the 2018 spending plan that Cuomo released last week, he proposed a $769 million increase in education funding — less than half the amount that the Board of Regents had called for. Rosa and Elia issued a statement soon after the budget came out saying they were “concerned.”

They may face an uphill battle as they prepare to urge lawmakers to haggle for more school aid. New York is staring down a projected budget deficit, responding to a federal tax overhaul that could limit the state’s ability to raise revenue, and bracing for the possibility of further federal cuts.

Even as the Regents got set to resist Cuomo’s spending plan, Commissioner Elia pushed back against another one of the governor’s proposals.

In his budget plan, Cuomo suggested that the state education department and his budget office be given final approval of local school-district budgets. The added oversight is meant to ensure that the neediest schools receive their fair share of funding, but Elia raised concerns that it could usurp local officials’ authority.

“I think there’s some concerns, clearly, on someone from [the state education department] and or the division of budget separated from a school and their community saying you can’t do something on your budget,” Elia told reporters Monday outside the Regents meeting.

Now that the governor has submitted his budget, lawmakers in each chamber will craft counteroffers. Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, a Democrat, has already signaled that he wants a sizeable increase in school funding this year. But Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan, a Republican, has spoken in general terms about spending restraint.

The board is also pushing for extra funding for specific purposes, such as support for students learning English. The Regents had called for spending an additional $85 million on English learners this year, but this request did not make it into the governor’s budget.

Regent Luis Reyes, a longtime advocate for English learners, asked how the board can ensure that this goal does not get lost in the shuffle.

“How do we spend the rest of January, February, and March publicly and/or privately to get this pillar to be built and not to be dismantled?” he asked.