Consultants describe evidence‑based school finance model; highlight class size, staffing, CTE and technology as key elements

Consultants from Pikes and Associates on June 17 described the evidence‑based approach they will use in Wyoming’s school finance recalibration and highlighted the model’s major components: staffing for core programs, dollar‑per‑pupil resources, supports for struggling students, central office operations and Wyoming‑specific factors such as small‑school adjustments and geographic cost differences.

Larry Pikes, principal of Pikes and Associates and a professor at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education, told the committee the evidence‑based model combines a literature review of what works in schools with professional judgment panels of Wyoming educators. Mike Griffith, a long‑time school‑finance consultant, joined on questions about how other states approach elements of the model.

Key model elements explained to the committee

- Class sizes and staffing: Wyoming’s current model in the presentation uses class‑size divisors of 16 students per teacher in elementary grades K–3 and 21 students per teacher in grades 4–12. The model assumes additional elective or specialist teachers (20% of core elementary teacher counts; 33% in middle and high school in Wyoming) to provide planning time and electives. Consultants also discussed small‑school minimums and fractional‑teacher prorating.

- Prototypical schools and divisors: The presenters described prototypical school units used to generate staff counts. For elementary schools the committee referenced prototypical sizes of 96 (one unit), 192 (two units) and 288 (three units) students (16‑pupil divisor times six grades). Middle‑school prototypes referenced were 105, 210 and 315; a typical high‑school prototype cited was 630.

- Coaches, tutors and professional development: The evidence‑based model funds instructional coaches and core tutors (the consultants described one instructional coach per ~200 students as a model input). The model also includes an explicit professional development allocation (presenters used $100 per student as an example in discussion) and discussed moving toward 200‑day teacher contracts in some scenarios to allow extended professional development time.

- Supports for struggling students: The model uses proxies such as low income (free/reduced price meal eligibility), English learners and mobility to generate additional resources for tutoring, extended‑day or summer programs. Consultants emphasized unduplicated counting (a student counted once across multiple risk measures).

- Career and technical education (CTE): Wyoming’s current weight for students enrolled in a full‑time CTE program was cited as 0.29 (a CTE student generates 1.29 weighted pupils for staffing in the model). The presenters said equipment allocations for full‑time CTE courses were approximately $14,000 per course in prior model versions and would be revisited.

- Technology, assessment and library support: Consultants said school districts now generally spend about 80% of funds on personnel and roughly 20% on non‑personnel items; technology has risen in importance since 2005. The presentation noted one‑to‑one device programs are common and that districts are managing large device inventories (a business manager cited about 4,000 devices in a roughly 1,900‑student district). The consultants also described assessment and formative testing costs (about $25 per pupil in the model) plus the state summative WYTOPs assessment.

- Special education and other Wyoming specifics: The consultants did not include special education in the adequacy estimate because Wyoming uses 100% reimbursement for special‑education costs (after federal funds), but they noted past reviews of special education and said a separate, focused analysis could be commissioned if the committee desired. Consultants also discussed additional resources for alternative schools and activities funding, noting small‑school travel and athletic costs are key issues in Wyoming.

Peer review and process steps

Pikes said the team is incorporating peer review of technical components (salary and regional cost adjustments, labor economists and external reviewers) and will circulate white papers in September, hold additional professional judgment panels after that and present a draft comprehensive report in October. He told the committee that the consultants hosted about 200 educators across eight preliminary panels and planned additional panels after September to vet specific component recommendations.

Why it matters: these elements — class size/divisors, specialist staffing, tutoring and CTE weights — directly determine how state funds would be allocated to districts under any revised adequacy estimate. The consultants emphasized the model is an evidence‑based framework that will be reconciled with professional judgment from Wyoming educators and reviewed by external experts.