Arkansas R.F.D.

I do not see how helping a teacher with their loans helps put cash into the local school system. Your idea is an old one. I think the system used with medical students has proven ineffective for the communities in which they served. It does not produce lasting change for the community. The doctors do not stay after their time commitment is finished. Paying student teachers will not help the school system's cash problems, which is the issue at hand.

Honestly, I think there must be some secret society that desperately wants to pay student teachers money. Anytime a new problem arises in government schools someone drags out this dead horse of a program and tells us how great the ride could be. If we are unwilling to submit the government schools to strict guidelines for financial stewardship and hold them accountable for their progress, they will never be anything but strapped-for-cash money sinkholes. Throwing money alone at this problem will not solve it (certainly throwing money to the wrong people as was suggested by your blog post will not solve Prescott's problems). It has to be money with some very carefully watched parameters.

Maybe you haven't talked to any "student teachers" in awhile, David, but I talk with many of them every day. There is little or no desire in that part of the academic community to go teach in these small, financially failing, crony-driven, boondock districts (& I say that being the product of one such district). In fact, many "student teachers" are looking to Texas, Oklahoma, and Tennesse for careers because the state of public education in Arkansas seems in constant disarray.

The "student teachers" of Arkansas have been in college during the time of the Lakeview decision. They see that the State and many districts do not have a handle on the situation, and there seems little hope in the future.

So, if you have a financially solvent district, what good is it if you can't get anyone to teach there? What good is it if you can't compete with larger districts to get the BEST teachers?

This is a two-pronged problem: Stablize the small districts and find ways to attract teachers to them.

I don't think the doctor analogy works here b/c teachers tend to become more attached to their students and community than doctors do to their patients. In fact doctors are trained to avoid attachement, but teachers are trained to take a personal interest in the lives of their students. There is no emperical proof that the loan forgiveness program wouldn't work.

David From Gurdon:

Infusing a school with funding doesn't fix its problems. The ultimate problem is there's a tremendous brain-drain that occurs in our state. Our best and our brightest too often leave for greener-pastures. That's a problem for the state. Furthermore, students with degrees in advanced science and math tend not to go into teaching. This is a national problem. Why become a teacher when you can make far more money and garner far more respect in some other math or science career?

My proposal addresses this need. Politics aside, school funding is easy. Pass a tax. Get it from the state. Attracting teaching talent is the real challenge. Newsflash, a twenty something with a newly-minted education degree in physics doesn't want to move to Prescott Arkansas so they can make a salary in the low 20's. This is nothing against Prescott. It's just unlikely that an advanced math or science teacher will simply fall into their laps. That teacher is likely to go off to Dallas, Tulsa, or wherever. The world is their oyster. If they do stay in Arkansas, then they will likely choose their home town or one of the larger districts that can afford to pay them a higher salary.

As for your point that the teachers would not be likely to stay in the community: Arkansas Student makes a fine point but I would submit to you that even if they don't stay in the community, having them there temporarily is better than not having them there at all.

Again, the point is money. What good is it if you convince a student teacher to go to Prescott if the school system is insolvent and does not exist? Prescott does not need teachers (and even if they do, that is not the issue at hand). They need someone, apparently from outside, to carefully watch how they spend their school money.

There is no need for a "two-pronged" answer if the location does not exist. Keeping teachers in the state is a fine and noble calling and worth finding alternative solutions. However, Prescott's doors will be closed and the teachers there are going to have to go somewhere else to find jobs.

Can we stay on the issues please? It is no good finding solutions for problems we are not addressing and will not affect the outcome of the Prescott issue. There is a disparity between the problem (Prescott's school system failing because they cannot convince the people to pass a tax increase) and retaining teachers in the state. That was my point. The article attempted to apply the solution of new teachers for the problem of a cash-strapped schools system. There is no logical connection. One does not follow the other. Therefore, the solution (more teachers) does not begin to address the problem (no money).

Let me be very clear. Do not hear what I am not saying. I am not trying to throw money at Prescott. That is their solution. In fact, I have not asserted one solution except to provide financial oversight to help school systems maintain some accountability for their spending. I am not saying we don't need to keep teachers in the state. Retaining teachers is a necessary component for our state's schools. Attracting bright, talented, and excellent teachers is a great goal. However, it does not work as a solution to a school system that could not pay these teachers if they showed up.

Well David From Gurdon:

You say "I am not trying to throw money at Prescott. That is their solution." But I disagree. Their solution was made our solution by the Lakeview case. The Arkansas Supreme Ct. held that education in Arkansas was inadequate and inequitable. The problem is largely caused by the way that our schools are funded. Local school funding is generated by way of local property taxes. So if you are Springdale or Conway, you generate X. If you are Prescott or Tuckerman, you generate Y. The children educated under taxes generated from X get X level of education. Children under tax scheme Y...you get the picture.

CLEARLY there must be some type of subsidy to the rural schools in order to lift them up to the level of the more affluent school districts in our state. This is the only way that we can meet the mandates of our state Constitution.

In short: The state must help fund school like Prescott!

As for your claim that: "If we are unwilling to submit the government schools to strict guidelines for financial stewardship and hold them accountable for their progress, they will never be anything but strapped-for-cash money sinkholes." The state audits these schools and closes them down for continued financial distress. This is happening now.

Here is the language from the Lakeview case that made the way in which schools are funded in Arkansas unconstitutional:

"There is no doubt in our minds that there is considerable overlap between the issue of whether a school-funding system is inadequate and whether it is inequitable. Deficiencies in certain *73 public schools in certain school districts can sustain a finding of inadequacy but also, when compared to other schools in other districts, a finding of inequality. Bearing that in mind, we first address whether state revenues paid to the school districts under the school-funding formula is the test for deciding equality or whether the test is actual expenditures spent on the students. We conclude it is the latter and that the trial court was correct in so determining. The Arkansas Constitution has the following provisions guaranteeing equal treatment to its citizenry under the law:
"§ 2. Freedom and independence.
All men are created equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness. To secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
"§ 3. Equality before the law.
The equality of all persons before the law is recognized, and shall ever remain inviolate; nor shall any citizen ever be deprived of any right, privilege or immunity, nor exempted from any burden or duty, on account of race, color or previous condition."

Lake View School Dist. No. 25 of Phillips County v. Huckabee 351 Ark. 31, *72-73, 91 S.W.3d 472,**496 (Ark.,2002)

According to theState Supreme Ct.'s reading of the Arkansas Constitution, a school student in Prescott is entitled to an equitable education to that of the student in Rogers or Little Rock.

The following is the Ark. Code that instructs the State Dept. of Ed on what to do when a school is failing:

(a) The State Board of Education may take any number of the actions listed in subsection (c) to address a school or school district failure to meet standards of accreditation any time after a school or school district has received notice of being placed on probationary status pursuant to §§ 6-15-202 and 203.

(b) The state board shall take at least one (1) of the actions listed in subsection (c) to address any school or school district which has failed to meet all standards of accreditation for two (2) consecutive school years, including the year the probationary status is declared pursuant to §§ 6-15- 202 and 203, unless the state board, at its discretion, issues written findings supported by a majority of the state board that the school district could not meet current standards for the relevant time period due to impossibility caused by external forces beyond the school district's control.

(c) The state board shall be allowed to take the following actions to address any school or school district on probationary status for failing to meet the standards of accreditation:

(1) Require a school district to reorganize or reassign the administrative, instructional, or support staff of a public school;
(2) Require a school or school district to institute and fully implement a curriculum that is based on state academic content and achievement standards, including providing appropriate professional development at the cost of the school district;
(3) Remove a particular school from the jurisdiction of a school district and establish alternative public governance and supervision of the school or schools;
(4) Require a school district to close down or dissolve a particular school or schools within a school district;
(5) Annex a school district or districts or parts thereof with another receiving school district or districts pursuant to the authority of §§ 6-13- 1401 et seq. and this subchapter;
(6) Consolidate a school district or districts or parts thereof with another school district or districts or parts thereof to form a resulting district pursuant to the authority of § 6-13-1401 et seq. and this subchapter;
(7) Reconstitute the leadership of a school district by removing permanently or suspending on a temporary basis the superintendent of the school district or any particular board members of a school district. The state board shall have the authority to appoint an administrator or to call for the election of new school board members to administer the affairs and provide governance of the school district, or both; and
(8) Take any other appropriate action allowed by law which is determined by the state board to assist and address a school or school district failure to meet the standards of accreditation.

A.C.A. § 6-15-207