Ken Hill, Superintendent of Nashville Community High School District #99

     Dr. Leininger, members and ex-officio members of the Education Funding Advisory Board, my name is Ken Hill and I currently serve as superintendent of Nashville Community High School District #99. 1 am embarking on my 3 I"zear in education, and my 21' year as a public school superintendent. This is my 13 year as superintendent of the Nashville High School District. I have also served as the superintendent in Cairo Unit District #1, and Hamilton County Unit District #10. For those not familiar with those names, all of those school districts are located in deep southern Illinois.

     Without appearing to be too patronizing, I would like to thank the members of this committee for accepting a truly challenging task. Attempting to determine an appropriate school funding mechanism within a state that possesses such a wide diversity of educational needs, and an equally wide diversity of wealth, (usually one without the other) is nearly impossible to accomplish. Couple that diversity with our current process of "printout legislation" which attempts to treat all circumstances with a "me first" approach and we have a recipe for continued avoidance of the school equity issue. While on the surface the notion of treating all districts the same under the school funding formula seems commendable, in reality it does not produce equity in terms of educational opportunities. And ladies and gentlemen that inequality of opportunity often manifests itself in the small and highly rural regions of southern Illinois.       

     I wish I were smart enough and insightful enough to come before you today and offer a plan that I could recommend as the best and fairest way to develop a school funding process. Unfortunately I'm not nearly that smart. What I would like to offer is one idea that I hope you will consider as you deliberate and develop your recommendations for future school funding. 

     I would like to ask you to keep in mind the absolute reality that it cost more to educate a high school student than it does students at other grade levels. We also know that it cost more to teach students at the primary grade level. However, since the creation of the new general state aide formula, which eliminated all forms of weighting adjustment, our current funding formula suggests that the cost to educate a student is exactly the same regardless of his or her grade level.

     As I have suggested, I believe that there is more than one financial differential that should be considered. However, for the purpose of my discussion with this committee, I will emphasize the high school level because that is my area of familiarity.       

     Whether it is right or wrong the American high school has evolved into a multi- faceted program. The diversity of that program has become a community expectation. As I begin to read you some of the reasons why it costs more to educate a high school student, please ask yourself whether or not your community would allow your high school to drop any of these programs.

     I have grouped these added costs factors into five sub-groupings that were provided within your materials from the High School District Organization. However, even though this information is provided by the high school organization, I would like to emphasize that these factors apply equally to ALL high school students including those enrolled within unit school districts.

Curriculum Differences

Support Services Differences

• High schools provide a broader and more intense range of counseling services.  Social/emotional and career counseling needs are greater at the high school level. There is also a greater need for social workers to assist students with a variety of difficult and complex issues that routinely befall the American teenager.     
•  A lower ratio of students per administrator (deans, assistant principals, etc.) is required to handle the more difficult and complex discipline issues of high school students.
• Because of the emotional stresses of the high school student, a more intense safety and security program must be provided in the form of school resource officers and school nurses.

Technology Differences

• High school libraries must be more comprehensive (including support     technology) in order to support a broader and more sophisticated curriculum.
• Greater need for computer labs to support math, science, social studies and writing instruction.   
• More advanced Internet connectivity required.        
• Greater accessibility to technology by students for a greater portion of the school day and after school hours.        
• Greater expense for technology equipment to support vocational instruction (CAD drafting, auto mechanics, electronics, accounting, business applications, food services, welding and agriculture)
• High school science labs require more expensive and more sophisticated equipment.

Facility Usage Differences

Co-Curricular and Special Activities Differences

     Two sources can be easily used to verify the reality of additional cost requirements necessary to educate high school students. First, any fair-minded analysis of unit district expenditures will demonstrate that the vast majority, if not all, unit school districts expend more dollars per student at the high school level than at the K-8 levels. Secondly private and parochial schools have long recognized the incremental cost difference for high school programs by charging a higher tuition rate for grades 9-12 programs. It is a grim reality that it costs more to educate a high school student. Our funding program within the State of Illinois should recognize that reality.

Thank you for your kind consideration of these remarks. I appreciate the enormity of your task and I have every confidence that you will push as hard as possible within the realities of the existing political constraints. However, if major changes cannot be made within the current formula, then I implore you that it is imperative that the concept of "hold harmless", or some other form of financial cushion, must remain in place. A reckless attempt to do away with hold harmless without some real consideration for the educational consequences would be devastating. The errors of the general state aid formula cannot be swept away in some blind attempt to simplify a truly diverse and complex set of dynamics that can negatively impact school districts. Some level of reasonable protection must be provided for student who reside with districts that suddenly face dramatic loses in state aid.