Time for a new plan

Thursday, Aug. 19, 2010 | 2:01 a.m.

The way Nevada determines funding for the state’s 17 school districts is based on such an old formula that Lyndon Johnson was president at the time it was devised by lawmakers. The world has changed dramatically since the Nevada Plan went into effect in 1967 and so, too, have the children who attend public schools.

As reported Tuesday by the Sun’s Anthony Ramirez, the Clark County School Board has proposed that the Nevada Legislature redo the formula to provide adequate funding to educate all students, regardless of their needs. Included are students who are gifted and talented, those in career and technical education, those learning English as a second language and those who range from mildly physically handicapped to profoundly autistic.

State lawmakers ought to consider this issue when they meet next year because the school funding formula should reflect today’s student body, not that of yesteryear. The problem with the formula is that it accounts for only two broad categories — students with special needs and those without.

These classifications are outdated for at least two reasons. One is that educators know more about students with learning disabilities than they did 40 years ago. Some students who may not have been diagnosed with a learning disability in the 1960s are more likely to receive specialized education today.

Another reason is that the Clark County School District has experienced changing demographics. This is reflected in the growing need to serve students who are learning English as a second language. The county’s Hispanic residents increased from 11 percent of the population in 1990 to an estimated 28 percent in 2008, according to the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington.

As Ramirez reported, a typical class with 33 students would include 15 who are poor and qualify for free or subsidized meals, six who are learning English as a second language and three with physical and learning disabilities.

The funding formula should reflect each type of special needs education rather than treat it as one broad category. The hard part comes when retooling the formula so it is still fair to the smaller, rural school districts that may not have as many students who need specialized education. Many rural districts have razor-thin budgets because they, too, are struggling with joblessness and shrinking tax bases.

The Legislature will certainly have its hands full dealing with a projected state budget deficit of $3 billion for the next biennium. But lawmakers also should muster the courage to deal with antiquated ways the state conducts business, whether through taxation or funding formulas such as the Nevada Plan that have outlived their usefulness. The goal should be to ensure that every student who attends a public school receives a quality education. We can think of few greater accomplishments that lawmakers could achieve in 2011 than to help schools deliver the quality students deserve.