OPINION EDITORIAL

October 20, 2004

Teacher says “no” to I-884 education tax hike

By Tim Mason
This election season, Washington voters are being told Initiative 884 and its many provisions will help teachers like me by reducing class sizes and giving promised raises.

Believe it or not, I want to talk you out of increasing my salary (at least right now!) by voting “no” on this well-intentioned but harmfully expensive initiative. I know of no profession in which people think they are overpaid, especially teachers. However, people in other industries are not dependent on larger paychecks by robbing their neighbors’ hard-earned wages by increasing an already exorbitant sales tax.

I-884 promises to solve many educational problems by increasing the state sales tax 15.4% at a time when the economy is finally beginning to gain momentum. Ironically, it would hit the low income families it is intending to help the hardest. Additionally, it would spend millions of dollars on one of the biggest myths popular in the education community today: that small classes result in better performing students.

Contrary to what many supporters say, there is no definitive research that small class sizes will help students who struggle. The “smaller class size” concept can best be described as the latest education du jour. Any veteran teacher can name multiple education reforms and theories that have come and gone over the years. One colleague I worked with estimates she saw at least twenty reform/curriculum movements through the forty years of her career that all promised to be the magic bullet. No one ever mentions the hours, days, years and dollars that unproven but well-meaning reform efforts cost. Think how much money would be available if shortsighted reforms were not implemented, resulting in fewer bureaucrats being hired at the Educational Service Districts (ESD), the State Superintendent of Public Instruction’s Office (OSPI), or in your child’s school district. Perhaps the savings could be passed directly on to the classroom teacher instead of to consultants and mid-level educrats.

At first the smaller classes concept sounds wonderful, but if this was the solution then rural schools would be outperforming every suburban school and the one-room school house of the past, led by the gray-haired spinster teacher, would have provided a Harvard quality education that would still be a model today.

Teachers do appreciate smaller classes because it creates a lighter workload, allowing them more time to prepare lessons and grade papers. But that does not necessarily translate into smarter students; it simply creates less stressed out teachers. Personally, I would gladly trade smaller classes for additional preparation time during the school day.

As always, educational issues are more complicated when you focus on different grade levels and I am sure an elementary or middle school teacher may disagree with my assessment.

Class size is only one tool among many for increasing school performance. Higher standards is the other component constantly missing when talking about school reform. As a public high school teacher, I know citizens would be shocked to learn of the multiple chances the system gives students to pass courses at taxpayer expense. Some students take their core classes two or three times, or enroll in special credit recovery programs, or (in increasing numbers) stay on for a fifth year. Students quickly learn they can “work” the system, failing an entire year of English or history, and then easily make it up during summer school or through on-line classes that are about as academic as pre-school. They also know they can choose other high-school completion programs that will be much easier than a traditional school.

Many teachers argue these multiple second and third chances at least keep struggling teens from dropping out. What these students become is dead weight that distracts from any high expectations a teacher may have. They also take time away from motivated students and leech off of the system because they know yet another “second chance” awaits them if they choose to fail again. Of course, their very presence (in body only and not their minds) brings in money for the district and the school they are enrolled in. Maybe this is why tough standards that hold students and parents accountable are never put into place. Have schools and districts become dependent on keeping non-performing students around as a revenue generator?

The dirty little secret in public education reform efforts is this: good schools -- and, more importantly, self-motivated, actively engaged students -- begin with parents who value education. Reading, writing, and mathematics can be emphasized during every minute of the school day, but if parent support is lacking at home then our public schools will continue to be nothing more than an expensive form of day care, and smaller classes will do nothing to change that.

Simply put, Initiative 884 attempts to solve educational problems by spending vast quantities of tax dollars without a guaranteed outcome. Reform efforts that ignore high standards and parental accountability are nothing more than false promises of educational improvement. Yes, I eventually want a raise like everyone else, and maybe even smaller classes to make my job easier, but not at the cost of wasting millions of dollars of public money and raising the sales tax until it’s the highest in the nation.

Tim Mason teaches high school in a Seattle-area public school.

Contact: Marsha Richards | Education Reform Center Director | 360-956-3482

Evergreen Freedom Foundation P.O. Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507 Phone: (360) 956-3482, Fax: (360) 352-1874 Email: effwa@effwa.org