Referring to Restore Ottawa in a recent Facebook post, Grand Haven Area Public School (GHAPS) Executive Director of Instructional Services left this comment.
“The authors purposefully publish inaccurate information…They are not interested in truth.”
The problem with this statement is that this is just another example of how some people within GHAPS and Mrs. Evink, specifically, have a strong tendency to dismiss any non-conforming data provided by individuals who lack a degree in education. In their eyes, credentialed experts are still the only sources of truth.
During the recent election, there were two GHAPS bond proposals on ballot. In an effort to bolster support for the proposals, Mrs. Evink and GHAPS Superintendent Scott Grimes published an article in the Grand Haven Tribune on November 2, 2023 titled “GHAPS: New facilities improve achievement”. (GHAPS: New facilities improve achievement | Opinion | grandhaventribune.com) To validate the several claims listed in their article, they referenced the work of Barbara Biasi at the Yale School of Management, Julien Lafortune at the Public Policy Institute of California, and David Schönholzer at Stockholm University’s Institute for International Economic Studies. Biasi et al. did a recent study in which they analyzed capital funds data in correlation to real estate prices from several school districts in different communities throughout the United States from 2018 to present. Their objective was to see where particular communities spent their funding and to determine its effect on education and property values. (Effectiveness and Efficiency of School Capital Investments Across the U.S., July 12, 2023 - bilaschon_2023.pdf (barbarabiasi.com))
The dataset used in their study was made up of house prices and standardized test scores from 28 states which accounts for approximately 70% of the public school students in the United States. Also included were 17,000 bonds. The focus was on the following areas:
Classroom space
School infrastructure
IT & STEM labs
Athletic facilities
Buses
Improvements to meet health & safety standards
First, Biasi et al. estimated the impact the average bond or project has on test scores and home prices. From there they looked at the impact on test scores and home prices, specifically in relation to each of the above-listed areas. Then they studied what were the differences in similar school districts with similar bond proposals for when proposals passed versus when they failed.
This statement was taken directly from Mrs. Evink and Mr. Grimes article:
“Better school facilities translate to better academic outcomes, including student grades, attendance, and graduation rates. Longitudinal studies also show growth in achievement scores, attendance, property values, and a healthier school budget when a new school facility is constructed and maintained. Leading researchers of this topic include Barbara Biasi at the Yale School of Management; Julien Lafortune, at the Public Policy Institute of California; and David Schönholzer, at Stockholm University’s Institute for International Economic Studies.”
Contrary to the statement above, the Biasi et al. study did not analyze student grades, attendance, graduation rates, or school budgets. There was no evidence presented in the study’s 69 pages that Biasi et al. concluded better school facilities translates to better student grades, attendance, graduation rates or school budgets.
This is what Biasi et al. concluded. Some capital improvement projects did improve standardized test scores while others boosted property values, but it wasn’t as straight forward as it seemed. Not every capital improvement project studied led to better education in every school district or higher property values. For example, new buildings and athletic facilities did have a positive impact on student test scores but that was mostly found in school districts with more disadvantaged students. HVAC systems and other infrastructure changes helped increase test scores but have little effect on property value. Expanding classroom sizes or new buildings and athletic facilities only affected property values. And the biggest take away was that the school districts with the most disadvantaged students were the ones most likely to be impacted overall.
Mrs. Evink and Mr. Grimes article continues on with claims that aged facilities negatively impact student performances such as loud noises from old heating and electrical systems, poor air quality, less exposure to natural light, fluctuating temperature, and inflexible classroom space. Since no additional expert(s) were cited to validate these claims, we are to assume their intent was to use the Biasi et al. study as their source. Unfortunately, the Biasi et al. study didn’t mention anything of the sort.
At a time when the district needs to regain the community’s trust, we continue to see the GHAPS administration push a narrative that does not bring us any closer. For now, and always, we’ll keep publishing the facts even if they don’t align with the credentialed experts.