Sunday, February 19, 2012

Constructing a Self Funded Program Takes More Than Dollars & Cents


By: Scott Burke; Originally published in Techniques Magazine, February 2012.

Whether you are an educator in Maine, California, or anywhere in between, it is more than likely safe to say that funding, or lack thereof, is a real dilemma in quality educational programming. The cost of teacher resources, engaging projects that inspire students, and spiraling technological upgrades exemplify competing needs in a constant battle for limited financial assets. Furthermore, in recent years, a lack of FTE monies has led to larger class sizes, fewer class offerings, and in some instances complete cuts to non-essential programs and electives. The battle for money is nothing new; however, how we choose to leverage this limited resource allows for an incredible opportunity for innovation, collaboration, and the awakening of a new era of entrepreneurial spirit.

As a follow-up to the October 2011 issue of Techniques, I contributed an article titled Alignment with the Common Core Standards: A 21st century how-to Model for Successful CTE programs. This article explained how I partnered with my mathematics teaching partner, Tom Moore, to create a program called Geometry in Construction at Loveland High School (LHS) in Loveland, Colorado. The article outlined three organizing principles central to the success of the program:

1) Community building
2) Contextualized math instruction and delivery
3) Appropriate, authentic, CTE driven capstone project

After seven years, we know our multi-faceted model works for not only our school but for many other schools around the country.

In October I mentioned strategic ways we have leveraged our limited funding to create a “self-funded” program. Creating such a program takes time, vision, dedication, and an ability to question and evaluate each portion of a program with the intent to continuously strive for ways to improve. We do this not because it is easy, but rather, because it is needed. In this article we offer proven techniques and show how creating a self-funded program is more than just dollars and cents.

Engaging the Community
Eight years ago, while attending a meeting, one of the long time committee members humorously voiced concerns about the practical implications of our construction programs. He went on to poke fun at each individual construction program at each high school for requiring students to make salad tongs, cutting boards, and mantle clocks. These requirements, he complained, had not changed since his own children attended high school a decade earlier. He asked us the following questions:
1) What employable skills will the kids gain by doing these same projects year after year?
2) Where can the students be employed after high school knowing how to make salad tongs, cutting boards, or mantle clocks?
As the teachers sat and listened, you could feel the tension building. I bet if you were a mind reader, you would have probably heard the teachers thinking:

• What does this guy know?
• I would like to see him do better with the equipment and funding I have.
• If he thinks he can do better, then maybe he should come and do my job.

I left the meeting feeling hurt and devalued. Later, I realized that this committee member had a really valuable point of view. Perhaps, the reason I felt hurt was because the committee member was really asking, “What service are you providing to our community?” He asked the very questions I myself needed to ask to move toward a brighter and more secure future for CTE. These same questions were some of the guiding reflections that eventually led to a new era of CTE at LHS with the start of Geometry in Construction. Fast forward to the present and now we have some tips about creative funding.

Tip #1: Community Engagement
Mutually beneficial partnerships: A central factor for generating funding involves engaging the community in meaningful ways. After the inaugural year of the program we began to collaborate with local non-profit organizations such as Habitat for Humanity and Interfaith Hospitality Network. These mutually beneficial partnerships allow for each group to meet their respective goals. Additionally, through these partnerships, Geometry in Construction continues to network with new and different community members who are happy to support us. This support can come in a variety of forms including: positive public relations, where our partners talk about the benefits of Geometry in Construction with other community members; volunteer work with our students; and often times, through donations.

Conduit for Donations: In large part, community members want to give and support the children of their communities. However, they rarely get the opportunity to give back in creative ways. Furthermore, schools are really good about asking for money, but this is the one thing that most community members have in limited quantities. Instead of money, however, there have been many businesses willing and happy to donate to our cause. Geometry in Construction survives on a budget that relies on approximately 25% donations of which the vast majority comes in the form of materials, tools, and services.

Farming for new contributors? Host an Event: On an annual basis, approximately 200 students go through Geometry in Construction. These students and their families provide a new opportunity to gain support and future donations. One of the ways we do this is to host community/parent build days. The annual Barn Raising is one example where we erect all of the walls on the subfloor of the house. This event always takes place on a Saturday in the fall and is attended by 80-100 participants and their families. We coordinate the event to include music, food, and fun. On multiple occasions, local reporters have attended these events and given us free advertisement because Geometry in Construction becomes a feature on the local television broadcast and in newspapers. Often times, following these news blitzes, we receive an outpouring of support from the community asking for how they can help support Geometry in Construction. In sum, the first idea for creative funding stems from building relationships within the community, finding avenues to get the word out about your program, and creating opportunities for community members to donate.

Idea #2: Do More with Less
Doing more with less seems to be the mantra as of late. In order to create change, educators must begin to critically analyze each and every component of what we have traditionally done. To do this, we suggest using traditional funding streams, like Carl Perkins, and making time to do additional grant writing.

Through the development of Geometry in Construction, for example, we were compelled to find creative ways to incorporate and blend both the curriculums of math and construction. We walked in the other person’s shoes to learn the nuances of each discipline. This exploration allowed us to discover that Tom with his math degree and experience was able to apply for an applied vocational math credential through Perkins Funding. Once the state approved his credential, the school district regained a portion of Tom’s salary for every section of Geometry in Construction he taught. This is similar to how my construction credential brings a portion of my salary back to the district, and very similar to how a portion of other CTE teachers’ credentials bring salaries back to the school district. Although this structure may vary from state to state, it has proven to be a valuable source of funding resources for the Geometry in Construction program. In short, it would be financially smart for the math teacher of contextualized curriculum to get an applied vocational math credential.

Additionally, we write and collaborate on a number of grants. We initially applied for a Tech Prep grant to get the program started. Upon receiving the grant we placed a request to the district for a one-time gift of $30,000.00 to be used for the purchase of building materials. The district approved this request with the understanding that we were never allowed to ask for additional funding to keep the program alive. Since then, we have turned this initial investment into 6 houses and over 1,000 student participants. Furthermore, the public relations blitz that transpired allowed for the district to be painted in a very positive light in the community and build allies and more resources from which to pull.

Idea #3: Saving FTE
Full-Time Teacher Equivalency (FTE) is a valuable component in education that many teachers may feel they have no control or influence over. Through our model of contextualization, we have discovered that we actually do have some control over FTE. When you break it down, it is a relatively simple process.

In most high schools, including LHS, high failure rates in math classes are common and major problems. We have collaborated with some schools that have reported math failure rates as high as 50%. These high failure rates translate to high repeater rates. This has resulted in some school districts doing some of the following:

• Water down the math content so students pass enough classes to graduate
• Double kids up on math classes where electives are removed so students enroll in multiple periods of math
• Offer math credit for a number of different classes including physical education, art, and CTE

The issue with all three of these alleged solutions is that none enable students to continue on into higher levels of math. Unfortunately, this may handicap students for life and possible career options.

As we developed our model, one unique component is the team taught approach we utilize. This team approach, coupled with all of the previously mentioned characteristics of the program, creates a new level of student engagement where students are excited about what they are doing. When students are highly engaged and excited about class, we have found that they are more likely to work and study harder. The unexpected byproduct of this is a drastic decrease in the failure and repeater situation some schools are facing. When students do not repeat the same classes over and over again, this ultimately translates to a larger pool of FTE to be spread out through all academic disciplines as opposed to only core academic classes.

Conclusion
Creating a self-funded program takes so much more than just focusing on the financial aspects of dollars and cents. Engaging the community, doing more with less, and saving FTE are all components we utilize to create a free standing program that withstands the ups and downs of school funding. Although three tips have been outlined here, we hope this article encourages you to consider new and innovative ideas to fund your programs! For more information about other opportunities for funding, or if you would like to know more about the Geometry in Construction program, please visit our website at www.geometryinconstruction.org and feel free to contact us by email or phone.