Nov 7, 2006

Schools too low-tech, report finds

By Kristina Peterson

Palo Alto lags behind other top-performing school districts when it comes to classroom technology, according to a study recently released by Partners in Education.

The study compared the district to five of the nation's best school systems and found that levels of staffing, language classes in elementary schools and the number of high school graduates heading off to two-year colleges were also trouble spots for the district.

"Performance-wise, we're right in there ... but we're operating with a lot less staff than other school districts," said Susan Bailey, president of Partners in Education, a nonprofit organization that raises private funds for Palo Alto schools.

The six-month study conducted at no cost by five Palo Alto mothers, including four with consulting backgrounds, compared Palo Alto to districts in Scarsdale, N.Y.; New Trier/Wilmette, Ill.; Wellesley, Mass.; Chapel Hill, N.C. and Edina, Minn.

With a budget that allows $11,970 per student, Palo Alto spent the least per capita of the five districts but managed to maintain a firm academic standing in English and math classes and provide the widest range of alternative programs, such as Spanish immersion, according to the report.

But the district has lower staffing levels, offers no language classes at the elementary level and has the lowest percentage of graduates enrolling in four-year colleges. In the 2005-06 academic year, 74 percent of high school seniors went on to four-year institutions, while 18 percent enrolled in two-year colleges.

"This is potentially because our two-year colleges are such an excellent feeder into the state system," Bailey said.

Palo Alto has both the fewest and oldest computers, according to the report.

The district spent $57 per student last year on technology, a figure that includes $33 per capita from parent-teacher associations. In contrast, the New Trier school district spent $208 per child last year.

Superintendent Mary Frances Callan said the district is already at work finalizing a "bridge plan" to help the district "upgrade and refresh our technology" until the 20-year facilities master plan secures ongoing funds.

In a statement, Partners in Education said funding woes stem from the fact that California schools have "the most restrictive public funding model due to Proposition 13 and no ability to adjust funding annually, except through private donations."

Proposition 13, passed in 1978, reduced property taxes on homes.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, a watchdog group dedicated to protecting the proposition, countered that "the problems with education have nothing to do with money."

"We are now spending 30 percent more per pupil, on an inflation-adjusted basis, than we were just prior to Prop. 13, when education in California was thought to be the nation's best," Coupal said.

Muneerah Merchant, executive director of Partners in Education, said the group is still working with the district to pinpoint the areas most in need of private funds. This year's fundraising goal has been finalized. Last year's goal was $2 million.

E-mail Kristina Peterson at kpeterson@dailynewsgroup.com