Michigan education summit

I attended the Education Town Hall meeting sponsored by the Center for Michigan this morning. It was very interesting. There were three panels of speakers to discuss the main issues facing Pre-K Education, K-12 Education, and Higher Education in Michigan. The panelists were asked to focus on three big-picture questions: performance, funding and affordability, and innovation. Not surprisingly, all three panels thought that the state needs to make education funding a priority and direct more, not less, funds into it.

The Pre-K panel (Jack Kresnak & Judy Samelson) touted an investment in this segment of education as having a high return on investment. When the audience had a chance to vote, they agreed by saying that if they could only invest in one sector of education, the money would go here. Michigan currently does not have universal public pre-k education.

The tenor of the K-12 panel (Mike Flanagan, David Hecker, Christine Johns, Tim Melton, & Dan Quisenberry) was much more contentious with Michigan's Superintendent of Public Instruction Mike Flanagan encouraging schools to Reduce, Reform, and Reimagine, Representative Tim Melton saying that Michigan's schools need to face the hard reality that our state has lost a lot of jobs and therefore a lot of income, David Hecker advocating for paying for quality teachers and the need to negotiate any changes in teacher contracts, and other speakers pushing the need to train students to participate in the global economy by teaching 21st century skills.

The Higher Education panel (Marilyn Schlack, Nikki Searle, Lou Anna K. Simon, & Cynthia Wilbanks) didn't have a coherent theme. The University of Michigan's representative made the argument that research institutions play a crucial role in innovation and creativity, vital aspects of the economic development of our state. Michigan State University's president discussed its Shaping the Future initiative that has been cutting costs and increasing the effectiveness of the university. The student representative from Grand Valley State University made a plea for more money for higher educational institutions in light of the plight of students trying to make ends meet with high tuition costs.

What struck me the most about this series of panels was the divergent views on how serious Michigan's economic situation is and how it will affect our public education system. Some speakers, most notably Rep. Tim Melton and President Lou Anna Simon, are actively engaged in re-working the system to grapple with Michigan's harsh economic reality. The figures that were given during the event said that we have lost 1 million jobs in the state and that we've fallen from in the top 10 in per capita income to 38th. Other speakers, the ones asking for more money without seriously considering how to use the current funds more effectively, seemed stuck in the past, hoping that somehow more money for education will materialize as it always has. Although that would be nice, I don't think that is going to happen. So, when asked what structural changes should be made to Michigan's education system, the audience said that teachers' health care and pension costs should be addressed (i.e. cut) first. I think this is a difficult choice but one that is going to have to be seriously considered in Michigan.

Comments

[Joel VerDuin]

I'm a former Michigan teacher (and Grand Valley State Alumnus), so I have "some" experience locally in this issue, albeit some 12 years ago.

The characterization of Michigan's condition, and I believe schools nation-wide, will take on the persona of the urban perspective. Michigan is a lot like the nearby midwestern states (Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio) which have a lot of rural and small communities, and a small handful of very large urban centers.

I live in Wisconsin now, but our demographic is a very similar to Michigan. We have over 400 districts, and of those, more than 200 have less than 1,000 students (so about 60% are smaller than a single high school in Milwaukee).

The issues and problems associated with the large urban centers become the focus of people who want to talk about "the problem" and "the solution". However, the problems and solutions are often not a good fit for all of those other school districts.

On the issue of pension and benefits, I think you are right about the increased scrutiny on these. The irony is that this is occurring in a state with significant union presence in the United Auto Workers and at a time when public sentiment seems to be a lot more skeptical about how unions are viewed. This conversation will play out in public K-12 and also in city, county and state government.