The tool UMTSD built provided users with 11 pos- sible options for using its $2.3 million in ESSER funding, ranging from improving classroom furniture ($315,000) to hiring three teachers for two years ($600,000) and providing intensive inclusion training for staff ($450,000).
When users logged onto the tool, they saw a selec- tion of 11 tiles with images, dollar allocation amounts, and descriptions providing context for how the money would be used. Users made their selections until all dol- lars were allocated and then ranked their choices. A final page requested additional information (optional), including age range, zip code, email address, and physical address, as well as an opportunity to reprioritize selections before submitting. The compiled information provided the district with the community’s prioritized funding allocation preferences. See Figure 1 for an archived view of UMTSD’s page.
The Two-Way Street for Public Engagement
School districts have long used traditional back-to- school nights or parent–teacher conferences as com- munication engagement strategies. For many districts, parent–teacher organizations are the main channel for parent input. These parent-led organizations facilitate outside participation and often are responsible for repre- senting the views of parents or guardians at the school. Because school budget decisions increasingly seek out structured input from community stakeholders, many districts turned to online meetings, community forums, and online surveys to allow virtual participation during the pandemic.
UMTSD previously used Google Forms as an online survey method; however, it offered no way to track response demographics, as the Google link was passed around. Traditional survey design also rarely shows the impacts of financial trade-offs and often lacks enough specificity to provide useful feedback. One national survey, for example, asked parents to mark more than a dozen options for federal spending as a high or low pri- ority. Almost every item was selected as a high priority. In contrast, interactive tools emphasize and educate about trade-offs; selecting one item will often result in forfeiting another. Spending selections are also narrowly focused. In the UMTSD example, parents could not mark “school improvements” as a priority; rather, they needed to decide between specific elements within the category, such as investing in personal protective equip- ment or new classroom furniture. Consequently, the dis- trict received fine-tuned feedback that pinpointed those areas for which parents most wanted to use funds, and
10 MAY 2022 | SCHOOL BUSINESS AFFAIRS
the district knew its decisions accounted for both the monetary and opportunity costs of a particular item. The feedback from UMTSD stakeholders also helped refine the district’s communication efforts by identify- ing any disconnects in the community (UMTSD 2021). Because community members who used the online engagement tool provided a residential zip code, the dis- trict could pinpoint parts of the community that needed more targeted communications or time. The demograph- ics also provided a way to tie in diversity, equity, and inclusion, an important district goal, as well as the docu- mentation required for ESSER funds—and then some.
The district wanted the community to have a broad vision, but emotions can often get in the way of facts.
It was also important for UMTSD to promote dia-
logue. Meetings became more focused because the result- ing data could easily be pulled up as a reference. The district wanted the community to have a broad vision, but emotions can often get in the way of facts. With the online engagement tool, UMTSD could set parameters without handcuffing people.
The data also revealed to educators the low-ranking items that needed more explanation. For example, UMTSD was surprised when its summer school pro- gram, which doubles as childcare, ranked as a low priority for funding, revealing a need in the community for more education and increased awareness of this program’s advantages. In response to the feedback, the district considered options for the following summer, including offering a virtual summer program that is more flexible. More broadly, the online engagement tool provided a new perspective for school district leaders. Although other school districts will likely find value in the tool for different reasons, in UMTSD’s case, it highlighted dis- connects in communication and demonstrated the need for more education about the tough funding allocation decisions faced by school district leaders. With many changes to the landscape of K–12 education precipitated by the pandemic, the district continues to consider the role of an online prioritization portal as part of ongoing budget discussions and other changes to reach the widest range of stakeholders.
asbointl.org
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48
