$470,000 RIDE tech grant - looking for info

This short ProJo story about a technology grant open to all RI schools caught my eye - interesting. I haven't researched it, don't know what's funding it or into what policy context it fits. Here's the story in full:

The Rhode Island Department of Education will award a $470,000 grant to help a school use technology to redesign its instruction. 

The school would become a pilot program to help launch a statewide initiative in technology-driven improvements. Applicants will propose a school site where they will create a technology-rich learning environment that uses tools such as digital curriculum, gaming, virtual learning and expanded learning. 

RIDE has scheduled a conference on Saturday, Feb. 11 from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Rhode Island College that will feature expert speakers from across the country.

Not sure how the conference connects or if it's open to the public. Also don't know what the proposal process is for the funding, nor whether this proposal is supposed to launch a new school or support technology implementation in an existing school. I'm posting this here now in the hope that someone already connected to the work might weigh in. I'll also hit up the RIDE website and other sources to see what else I can find when I have a few minutes.

I'm interested in this issues as I see the challenges that are happening as a result is and isn't happening with technology use in the schools in which I regularly spend time. I'm thinking a lot about opportunities met and opportunities missed and will be focusing more on that in the weeks to come.

In the meantime, any insight into the deal with this grant? Please share if so.

RI equitable school funding formula: now! but how?

This past Sunday's ProJo featured "State aid formula is desperately overdue," in which Edward Fitzpatrick looks at two equitable school funding formulas that will be before the General Assembly. Rep. Edith H. Ajello, D-Providence's bill phases in a new formula over three years: 25% the first year, 50% the second, and 100% the third. Sen. Hanna M. Gallo, D-Cranston, is introducing another bill that calls for a funding approach in which "no districts would see their state aid fall under a new formula. Instead, they would stay at current levels until the formula says they deserved an increase."

Describing Ajello's bill, Rhode Island Policy Reporter wrote:

There was a bill introduced in the House last week calling for a real school aid
formula. It had 38 co-sponsors, including much of the leadership. You'd think
this was enough to pass it, wouldn't you? Silly you. A fair education formula
would cost money, and nothing that costs new money can pass this legislature,
because no one in a position of influence will endorse paying for it. They'll
"call" for a program like this, and talk about how wonderful and fair it
would be, but they won't pay for it, so it won't happen.

While the lack of will that RIPR describes make Gallo's strategy more politically viable, we're far less likely to get the results our state's education system so desperately needs, and in this case, something may not be better than nothing. Without an established implementation date, and without certainty about when funds will be available, Fitzpatrick observes, states won't get the funding predictability they require to create budgets that allow them to carry out instructional initiatives that make a real difference to learning and ultimately--as Deborah Gist, our new state education commissioner has pointed out--the state's bottom line.

Ajello's approach forces reconciliation, shifting money to some towns and away from other in order to address the inequities that have become status quo in the system. In the real money (ha) quote of his piece, Fitpatrick observes, "...while there would be winners and losers under a new formula, there are winners and losers now — meaning some districts are getting more than they should and some are getting far less." Facing that political reality and summoning the collective courage and will to address it is the most meaningful way the General Assembly can make a positive difference to the most disadvantaged populations in our state and, ultimately, to our bottom line. No one wants anyone to lose funding--there should not be losers, and with many others, I hope that state leadership will reassess priorities and combine the best of Ajello and Gallo's approaches, thereby raising all boats and damaging none.

In this financial climate, choices must be made, and the best choice is not to continue to try to ostrich the problem away. Put Ajello's funding in place, and work over its three-year phase-in to identify funds to supplement districts' budgets that may take a hit. Let the sand fall from the General Assembly's eyes so the see that this is a challenge to our state's welfare and sustainability that can't be ignored any longer.

Bus Monitors and more

Most of us following education news know that Governor Carcieri's proposals last week include eliminating bus monitors statewide. Not silent on this issue is the Rhode Island's Twelfth blog (hat tip to rifuture.org for this). RI's 12th's latest post advocating keeping bus monitors is here. Scroll down the main page for a few more. The takeaway is: school bus monitors save kids' lives.

Or are they a "costly mandate?" That's how Providence Superintendent Tom Brady is quoted in this ProJo piece on the effect of the governor's cost-cutting proposals on Providence's schools. School bus monitors cost $4,000,000 annually in Providence, says the article.

Of course, in the category of costly mandate is the ongoing commitment to bus students from private schools, not to mention buying their textbooks. Good news, then: if costly mandates are what we're going for, it's nice to know more are there to cut before we resume cutting the heart of our schools' essential programs and services. (I'll save you some Googling if this is new info: citations of RI state law on these points are here.)

There's a flip side argument, of course: pupils' attendance in their home districts is ostensibly costlier than their transportation and books. I don't have time to gather data to test this now, but it strikes me as wrong: with additional pupils comes additional state funding (inequitably distributed as it may be), and, of course, additional public support and advocacy for school funding which could be an eventual gamechanger.

I'll be back with more on how these cuts may affect Providence and what we can do to raise our voices to advocate for the funds our schools need to keep our kids not only well-educated but safe.

Statewide finance views from rifuture.org

This blog entry is a learning out loud effort, sparked by two finance-related state education posts on rifuture.org yesterday.

"Creating our own problems" is about reduced (and reallocated) statewide education spending. I caught it just now when I went there to grab this one, "Will our lack of a education funding formula hurt our chances for stimulus dollars?" Anything to raise the stakes on this issue is useful, and the observation in the post that yes, the lack of a statewide funding formula clearly makes us less accountable and therefore possibly less likely to get those federal stimulus dollars resonates with me.

RI is the only state without such a formula. Hence, there are 49 models out there. Question to explore here: which state have an equitable education funding formula that resembles and exemplifies what would work best here? Quite a different question from: which state has a formula that is likely to be the most mutually acceptable, the least unpalatable, and therefore likely to pass here?