The Secret to Reduced Class Sizes


If the school-aged population in Utah grew at a slower (or flat) rate, it would soon become easy to get a handle on the problem of crowded classrooms in Utah. Since we can't force people with school-aged children to stop moving into the state nor those already here to stop having children, I have a better idea.

Inflation usually outpaces rising incomes. The only way for incomes to catch up with inflation is to stop inflation. In much the same way, increases in the school-aged population outpace the ability to provide for the education of that population. Faster increases mean more difficulty.

If Utah were a state where people stopped having children and where families from other states were not allowed to come, school-aged children would gradually become a smaller proportion of the population. This would result in a larger proportion of the state's population being tax payers, and their tax payments would go farther because they subsidize a smaller proportion of the state's population--i.e. those who don't pay taxes but use the product (education) for which the taxes are paid. In this scenario, we would ultimately have enough tax revenue to reduce class sizes and probably at the same time be able to pay their teachers more.

The reason that we can't 'get on top' of the class size issue is because we have a continually increasing school-age population. And the growth is predicted only to get worse. Since we can't solve the problem by forcing families to stop having children, and since we can't close our state borders, there has to be another solution.

There is.

A few years ago, we held a debate in a political caucus meeting about whether we should support an initiative that would raise the mill levy in our school district. I said I didn't support it, but most everyone else there (many of whom were public educators or their relatives) disagreed with me and was surprised at my stance.

I expressed my concern at that time, which was "If we provide educational choice in Utah (through vouchers or tax credits), we won't have to increase the mill levy, because you will have fewer students in your schools, but you will actually have more money to subsidize the students that remain, because only a portion of the money allocated for the public education of each child would be given to finance the child's alternative educational choice."

Their response was, "But that won't work, because you still have the same number of school buildings, administrators, and school teachers that you have to pay even if you take away a handful of students."

That is true. And that's why we should have been thinking about providing more educational choice (through vouchers or tax credits) for at least the last 10 years. If my school district had successfully encouraged 1,000 children to seek alternative forms of education over that 10-year period, they likely would not have had to request a mill levy increase. Because they wouldn't have had to build any new buildings.

And their class sizes would have been smaller.

If we really want smaller class sizes, an easy way to accomplish it without burdening the Utah taxpayer is to reduce the growth of the public school population. An easy way to reduce the school population growth is to encourage other educational alternatives.

There's no time like the present to begin planning for a brighter future.

Comments

  1. Kudos for this post.

    In a future post, perhaps you could take on another arugment against school choice. Opponents are quick to point out that while each student would carry the same voucher value, students actually carry varying educational costs.

    For example, my third son likely carries a very low educational cost, while my fourth son has a few issues that result in a much higher educational cost.

    School choice opponents claim that private schools would be able to cherry pick lower cost students, leaving the public schools with higher cost students. Since the funding for each student would not differ, private schools would actually have a higher margin, while they fear that public schools would end up under funded.

    Is this problem a red herring, or are there plans in the voucher proposals to mitigate the problem?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Frank, I really like your blog site, very impressive and great writing. When I get a few more minutes, I'll read more carefully, but wanted to acknowledge I visited. Best to you.

    I have to sign in as anon only because I seem to have problems with blogger and have never been able to log into their system.
    Lee

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lee,

    Thanks for visiting! I hope my site will give a perspective that is insightful without being dogmatic, although sometimes I may fail in my task.

    PS - I have trouble with blogger from time to time, especially using FireFox, but at the same time Firefox is causing me fits, Internet Explorer will usually seem to work. Opera seems the best when I'm not trying to post a new post, but I haven't tried to comment with it yet.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

How LDS Censorship May Have Led to Less LDS Faithfulness: The Ronald E Poelman Conference Talk of 1984

Changing the Narrative of the LDS Church: 35 Years Later

"Mormon Leaks": What They Really Said-Senator Gordon Smith Discusses Politcs