By MARK TALLMAN
Local school leaders are encouraged to be engaged when the 2022 legislative session starts Monday, Jan. 10 as education issues from classroom funding to COVID-19 to Critical Race Theory and much more has drawn the attention of legislators.
The debate surrounding K-12 funding will be under greater scrutiny than usual because legislators want to see results as school districts receive the final installments of the six-year Gannon school finance plan. Many educational measures fell during the COVID pandemic, while schools faced deep divisions over health policies. Some legislators say they are hearing from parents concerned about school materials, programs and performance, which could lead to either new restrictions or requirements or more pressure to give more educational options to some parents, such as private school vouchers.
All of these issues could affect local school boards and the communities they serve. If school leaders want to have a voice in the decisions that will affect them, they need to remain informed about legislative proposals, understand and explain what they mean for students, families and communities, and talk with their legislators before and during the 2022 session.
This is a report on some of the major issues KASB expects to be considered by the Legislature. As the session begins, we will provide daily updates on Legislative developments on our webpage under KASB News; through Facebook Live reports and social media, and through regular weekly summaries, podcasts and other messages. We are always ready to answer questions and help local school leaders advocate for their communities.
School Funding
K-12 Appropriations: Major school funding programs have been appropriated for the current year (2022) and next year (2023) to fund the final steps in the Gannon school finance plan for base state aid and supplemental general (LOB) state aid.
Funding for special education aid, capital outlay aid, bond and interest aid, KPERS contributions and Department of Education programs was appropriated for 2022 but not 2023.
Funding for 2022 and 2023 can be adjusted by legislative action. New estimates have reduced the cost of the school finance law in the current year by $90 million, due to lower enrollment and a lower KPERS payroll rate. The cost of the formula is expected to increase by $115 million next year, primarily due to the final step in the six-year Gannon plan.
State Board Enhancement Requests: In addition to funding already approved for FY 2023, the State Board is also requesting the following major enhancements: a five-year phase-in of special education funding to 92 percent of excess costs as directed by state law at a cost of $74 million per year; increasing mentor teacher funding by $1 million and state professional development aid by $3 million; and expanding the mental health pilot program by $3 million.
Federal ESSER Aid: Federal COVID aid requires states to meet Maintenance of Effort requirements for both K-12 and higher education or receive a waiver. For 2022, the Legislature assumed it met 50% of the MOE requirement for higher education and is well above the requirement for K-12, waiting for federal response.
There will be scrutiny of school districts’ use of federal COVID dollars. Already some concerns have been raised about funds being used for costs that will outlive federal appropriations.
State Revenues: The official state consensus revenue estimate in November for the current fiscal year (FY 2022, ending June 30) was increased by $1.308 billion, or 17.3 percent, above the previous estimate (made in April and subsequently adjusted for legislation enacted during the veto session). The projected ending balance for FY 2022 based on approved budgets is 36 percent. The initial estimate for FY 2023 is $9.048 billion, which is $177.9 million, or 2.0 percent, above the newly revised FY 2022 figure.
Next: The Governor will present budget recommendations at the beginning of the 2022 session.
Educational Outcomes and COVID Impact
To resolve the Gannon school finance case, the Kansas Supreme Court and Legislature agreed to a six-year phase-in of funding, beginning in 2018-19, to restore general operating aid to inflation-adjusted 2009 levels after eight years of falling behind inflation, with the intention of improving educational outcomes, particularly among “at risk” students who lag behind on many measures.
Many legislators want to see positive results for increased funding. After a new state assessment system was adopted in 2015, results in reading and math declined from 2015 through 2017, and were basically flat in 2018 and 2019, the first years of additional funding under Gannon. Due to the COVID pandemic no state tests were given in 2020, and as expected, results fell lower for 2021 due to COVID-related learning disruptions and other factors. The biggest decline was in math.
Among other measures, Kansas ACT scores had been increasing for a decade until beginning a decline in 2015. This was likely due in part to increased percentage of students taking the tests in 2019 and 2021 after the state began paying for any student take the test at no cost. After two years of COVID impact, results fell further in 2021.
Despite declines in state and ACT tests, since 2015, Kansas graduation rates and postsecondary participation rates were increasing until the COVID pandemic.
A special interim committee was appointed to study the impact of Gannon funding and other issues and met Nov. 30 and Dec. 1. Some Legislators and conferees stated that the decline in state assessments since 2015 and the approximately $1 billion in increased base operating funding under Gannon from 2018 through 2023 indicated additional funding does not – or at least has not – improved student outcomes. They say state assessments should be the primary measure of accountability because such tests were the focus of school finance cases in the Kansas Supreme Court.
Others argued that the decline in state assessments and other measures since 2015 began during an eight-year period when funding declined compared to inflation; that results in 2018 and 2019 were supported by only one-third of the six-year funding plan that will not be completed until 2023 and changes in educational outcomes take time to implement; that results since 2019 have been strongly and negatively impacted by COVID; and that other measures in addition to state assessments should be considered because both the Kansas Supreme Court and the Kansas Legislature have adopted the “Rose capacities” to measure outcomes, which are much broader than state assessments.
At-Risk Funding
High Density At-Risk Funding. The 2021 Legislature extended the “sunset” on high density at-risk weighting to 2024, but without Legislative action, this weighting that provides approximately $50 million to districts with higher percentages of low-income students will expire. The Legislature also required a new Legislative Post Audit study of at-risk funding in calendar year 2023.
At-Risk Funding Count. Both regular at-risk and high-density at-risk funding are based on the number of students qualifying for free meals. Because the federal government is providing free meals to all students, families are not required to fill out requests for meal support. An alternative form is available, but some districts are reporting fewer students will be counted as low-income, reducing funding for at-risk programs. This could result in the consideration of alternative ways to calculate at-risk funding.
COVID Actions
Emergency Powers: The 2021 Legislature passed SB 40, which made revisions to the Kansas Emergency Management Act and specific policies for emergencies such as the COVID pandemic. One provision provided that school boards had total “local control” over actions related COVID, but any such actions could be challenged by any “aggrieved” student, parent or employee through expedited hearings before the board and appeal to the court. That provision has expired, but similar language applies to other units of government.
A district court found the school provisions violated the separation of powers and found the entire act unconstitutional. The Kansas Supreme Court will consider an appeal of that decision this fall.
Although the school provision has expired, continuing controversy over school board actions regarding masks, vaccinations, school closures and quarantine mean the Legislature may consider new requirements or limits on school board actions.
Remote Learning: There may be some attempts to change or clarify what is meant under HB 2134, which prohibits schools from providing more than 40 hours of remote learning to any student. The local board may request an exemption due to illness, medical condition, injury or extraordinary circumstances. The local board must notify the State Board of Education, which may authorize up to 240 hours due to a disaster restricting operation of public schools for an inordinate period of time.
Curriculum, Graduation and Student Policies
Graduation requirements: Last session, a Governor’s veto was sustained on a bill that would have required students to pass a civics test and a financial literacy course to graduate high school. The Legislature is expected to consider these and other proposals again.
Supporters say these proposals address deficiencies in student learning under general legislative powers. Opponents say the State Board of Education has constitutional authority to determine graduation requirements; that such proposals place additional burdens on school districts to staff new requirements and restrict student choices; and that such requirements are inconsistent with the “Kansans Can” approach to more relevant instruction and assessment and more individualized education.
The State Board of Education has created a task force to study graduation requirements, with recommendations expected in the Spring of 2022.
Teaching about race; programs and materials: Proposals have also been made to restrict teaching of what some call “critical race theory” in public schools. In other states this has meant bills to prohibit concepts of “group” superiority, blame or victimhood. Concerns include that such proposals intrude on the traditional ability of school boards to set local curriculum and may have a “chilling” effect on the teaching of history, current events and addressing inequities. While the State Board of Education has stated that critical race theory is not part of state academic standards, presenters at the interim education committee cited examples of school district programs and materials they said were influenced by CRT concepts. Parents and Legislators have also expressed concerns about sexuality-themed books or other materials that have been criticized by some parents. This could result in legislation regarding parental challenges, reviews or “opt-outs.”
Transgender athletes: Another bill vetoed last session and expected to be reconsidered would have prohibited transgender females from participating on girls or women’s sports teams. A U.S. Supreme Court decision on whether this issue is addressed by Title IX is expected, but the timing is unknown. Such legislation would overrule current policies of the Kansas State High School Activities Association.
Computer science: Rep. Steve Huebert, R-Valley Center, and chairman of the House Education Committee, has said he will file legislation to make computer science more available for students, although he didn’t provide any further details. Recently, the State Board of Education voted to allow school districts to count computer science as a math or science credit for high school graduation. Many school districts already offer computer science as an elective.
Reading: A bi-partisan group of education/legislative leaders reached a consensus at the conclusion of the Special Committee on Education meetings to work on ways to ensure third graders are reading on grade level at the end of third grade and expressed desire to work with the State Board of Education.
Postsecondary Preparation and Participation
Remedial Courses: Last session, the House Appropriations Committee considered a proposal that would have required school districts to pay for the cost of students placed in remedial or development courses in college. The proposal did not pass, but the Legislative Post Audit Committee authorized an audit on why Kansas high school graduates need developmental courses.
Approximately one-third of community college students and 10 percent of state university students are placed in developmental courses. At least one possible reason is that high school graduation requirements do not include taking “college prep” level courses. State universities have required students to take a college prep curriculum or have minimum ACT or SAT scores (with 10 percent exceptions window), while community colleges continue to be open to all students with a high school diploma regardless of courses taken. It should be noted, the number of 17-19-year-olds in remedial college courses in Kansas dropped between 2010 and 2019 from 39.1 percent to 33.3 percent in community colleges and 15.2 percent to 8.9 percent in state universities.
Next: The Post Audit report is due early in 2022.
Work-Based Learning Liability: One goal of the Kansans Can vision is to increase the number of students participating in “on the job” learning experiences in high school. One barrier is concern about the legal liability for accidents and injuries in these programs. Last session, the Kansas House passed SB 91, which would exempt businesses from certain liability claims arising from a secondary student engaged in a work-based learning program, provided the school district of the secondary student has purchased the applicable insurance coverage. The bill would broaden the concept of school sponsored activity to include transportation to and from a work-based learning program, which would then grant discretion to the school district to purchase liability insurance. School leaders have expressed concerns that districts may not be able to find insurance for such programs.
Next: the bill is in conference committee.
Postsecondary enrollment: Increasing postsecondary attainment is an outcome of the Kansans Can vision, and is linked to higher individual earnings, higher employment and lower poverty, and state workforce needs. Although Kansas educational attainment had risen to record high levels prior to the COVID pandemic in 2020, postsecondary enrollment dropped in 2020-21 and has not recovered. Additional funding is available from state and federal programs for student assistance.
Voucher-type Private School Aid
The 2021 Legislature significantly expanded student eligibility for an existing program providing state income tax credits for students to attend private schools accredited by the state or by accrediting agencies approved by the State Board of Education for teacher licensure purposes.
Another bill which will carry over to the 2022 session would create a new program called Education Savings Accounts, which would transfer an amount equal to base state aid per pupil to student accounts that could be used for costs of attending private schools or other educational costs. Under last year’s proposal, students who were designated by school districts to receive at-risk services would be eligible.
School Budget and Management Policies
There are several issues that may arise concerning district operations: a Legislative Post Audit that found generally weak district IT security; perennial concerns about school district cash balances; questions about whether districts are following state law regarding school building needs assessments (raised by the interim education committee); and review of a new law requiring hearings and notice for adopting local government budgets that raise property taxes.
Student Health and Safety Issues
The Legislature is expected to consider bills or review various policies concerning children and students, such as foster care oversight, mental health services, vision screening standards, vaping and school bus safety.
School districts have been expanding mental health services to students, adding counselors and social workers and expanding transportation services. Districts may be able to use federal COVID aid funds for some of these efforts, but these are temporary revenue sources and may have difficulties finding employees to staff these programs.
School District Personnel
Districts are reporting increasing difficulty in hiring both licensed professional staff and classified employees. With increased state funding since 2017, salaries for teachers and other employees have been increased, but districts also added more positions and are competing with other employers for a shrinking workforce. These trends may raise issues around use of funding for salaries and bonus payments; licensure, mentoring and professional development; and working after retirement policies.
. . .
Mark Tallman is the associate executive director for advocacy for the Kansas Association of School Boards.