Calculation of the Cost of an Adequate Education in Kentucky: A Professional Judgment Approach

Abstract

What is an adequate education and how much does it cost? In 1989, Kentucky’s State Supreme Court found the entire system of education unconstitutional-“all of its parts and parcels”. The Court called for all children to have access to an adequate education, one that is uniform and has as its goal the development of seven capacities, including: (i) “sufficient oral and written communication skills to enable students to function in a complex and rapidly changing civilization . . . .and (vii) sufficient levels of academic or vocational skills to enable public school students to compete favorably with their counterparts in surrounding states, in academics or in the job market”. Now, over a decade later, key questions remain regarding whether these objectives have been fulfilled. This research is designed to calculate the cost of an adequate education by aligning resources to State standards, laws and objectives, using a professional judgment approach. Seven focus groups were convened for this purpose and the scholarly literature was reviewed to provide multiple inputs into study findings. The study produced a per pupil base cost for each of three prototype school districts and an total statewide cost, with the funding gap between existing revenue and the revenue needed for current operations of $1.097 billion per year (2001-02). Additional key resource requirements needed to achieve an adequate education, identified by professional judgment panels, include: (1) extending the school year for students and teachers, (2) adding voluntary half-day preschool for three and four year olds, and (3) raising teacher salaries. This increases the funding gap to $1.23 billion and suggests that significant new funding is required over time if the Commonwealth of Kentucky is to provide an adequate and equitable education of high quality for all children and youth as directed by the State Supreme Court.

Determining the cost of adequate education: a critical review of the approaches

“…3.2 Cost Function Approach / Statistical Approach (Downes, 2004;Odden, 2003;Harris, 2004;Duncombe and Lukemeyer, 2002;Augenblick and Myers Inc, 2003;Myers and Silverstein, 2002;and Reschovsky and Imazeki, 1999) 3.3 Empirical Identification Approach / Evidence Based Approach / Effective School Approach / Successful District Approach (Downes, 2004;Duncombe and Lukemeyer, 2002;Odden, 2003;Harris, 2004;Verstegen, 2003;and Myers and Silverstein, 2002) 3.4 Whole School Design Method / Costing Comprehensive School Reform Models (CSR) / Comprehensive School Reform Research Based Models (Downes, 2004;Verstegen, 2003;Augenblick and Myers Inc, 2003;Myers and Silverstein, 2002;and Chamber, Parrish, Smith and Guthrie, 2004) …”

A Critical Review of the Methods Used to Estimate the Cost of An Adequate Education

“…After the resources and services are identified, they are priced according to the existing market value which is computed as the cost of education in that particular setting (Verstegen, 2003). This method is quite popular in the education fraternity as it reflects the views of the actual service providers i.e.…”

“…Another criticism against this method is that the recommendations made by teachers are usually based on their current needs without much emphasis on the anticipated needs in the future (see, Verstegen, 2003;Augenblick and Myers, 2003;Myers and Silverstein, 2002). Thus, the dynamic and ever-evolving nature of the education system and technological advances are oft ignored.…”

“…According to Harris (2004) and Verstegen (2003) this approach is objective as it enables non-school factors like family background to be included in determining the cost. Secondly, since this method is based on actual evidence, it therefore does not require further testing.…”

“…Thus, Verstegen (2003) questions the validity of this approach because it does not include these 'outliers' school in the process of computing the cost. In addition, Peyser and Costrell (2004) have questioned the practicality of this approach as they believe that it would be time-consuming to include the data of every student in the education system.…”