When state budgets are slashed, cuts must be made to superfluous spending. Specialized programs and other nonessentials have to forgo funding so that absolute basics, such as K-12 education, can keep going.
But the state has decided to take away $5 million in funding for K-12 education. This is a preposterous cut that will have negative repercussions for years to come.
On Tuesday the school board approved roughly 9,000 layoffs for employees in Los Angeles Unified School District, including both teachers and other personnel.
While the layoffs are not final until the board votes to approve them in June, the decision is poor nonetheless.
California has had a history of promoting meaningful public education for all, dating back decades. In recent years, however, school districts around the state have been forced to break that promise due to budget cuts.
In the 2007″“2008 school year, California spent around $59 million on K-12 education. This year’s budget calls for only $54 million in K-12 funding.
California has long patted itself on the back for being a beacon of light on education, but that reality only exists in the minds of state lawmakers, who refuse to effectively address the issue.
A study showed that California has one of the worst student-teacher ratios in the country with 20.9 students per teacher. The national average student-teacher ratio is about 15 to 1, and in Vermont, it’s just under 11 to 1.
The pupil-teacher ratio for the LAUSD last year was 20.5, a number that will surely go up with the 5,500 teacher layoffs that the school board approved as a part of the total number of job cuts.
Moreover, the average class size in the district last year was 24.9 students per class, a number that will probably also go up given that the district will face an almost $700 million deficit within the next year and a half.
What do all of these numbers mean, in practical terms, for the district and the state at large?
To begin, unless a different course of action is taken, Los Angeles may put itself in such a bad position that it will take decades to reverse the effects of the cuts. As time goes on, and the education our students receive remains subpar, Los Angeles will no longer be able to produce the kinds of students who can compete for spots at competitive universities.
Along with this decrease in the quality of students will come a decrease in the value of education students receive at our schools. Without funding for personnel staff, key programs such as special education and after-school care may, and most likely will, have to get cut.
Rather than trying to address the budget problem in Los Angeles by firing teachers and staff, the school board should try to find ways to cut out wasteful spending within the district.
For instance, instead of spending up to $150 million on evaluating students, the district should redirect funding to paying for more and better teachers.
These are the policies that will benefit the district in a meaningful way, as opposed to personnel cuts that will only hurt the district.
The bottom line is that Los Angeles, and California at large, must begin to rebuild the educational system of this great state. The city must look to make any other possible cuts before it degrades basic education for its citizens.