When it comes to education, investing in student success is a shared goal across our community. But effective investments require sound planning and clear outcomes-not proposals that seem designed more for political advancement than educational improvement.
School Board Member Tony Alfano, who is currently running for Town Council, has introduced his tutoring proposal during the critical school budget planning season. His stated goal is ambitious: ensuring every student passes the state standardized tests. While this goal sounds admirable, the actual plan reveals a concerning disregard for fiscal responsibility and educational best practices.
💰 The Actual Numbers
Let’s examine the math based on the details Alfano has publicly provided:
- 600+ students in the district
- $35/hour for tutoring services
- 1 hour of tutoring per student, per week
$35 x 600 = $21,000 per week
This translates to $84,000 per month, or approximately $756,000 for the school year-assuming the minimum one hour per student. Educational research indicates effective tutoring often requires 2-3 hours weekly for meaningful impact, potentially pushing costs over $1.5 million annually.
Most concerning is that Alfano has presented no funding mechanism for this expenditure. The proposal lacks:
- Budget allocation details
- Explanation of what existing programs would be cut
- Evidence of any consultation with education experts
🎯 Political Theater vs. Educational Strategy
Despite Alfano’s public commitment to fiscal responsibility, this proposal contradicts those claims. Consider:
- Political Context: This proposal comes from a Board Member currently seeking Town Council office, raising questions about motivations
- Unrealistic Goal Setting: The stated objective of having “every student pass state tests” lacks nuance and understanding of diverse learning needs
- No Needs Assessment: Universal tutoring ignores the reality that not all students require the same interventions
- Missing Implementation Details: No defined plan for how tutoring would specifically address standardized test performance
- Absence of Educational Research: No evidence presented that this approach is superior to targeted interventions
The proposal appears designed for political soundbites rather than educational outcomes.
📊 What Research Actually Shows
Educational research consistently demonstrates that:
- Targeted interventions for struggling students yield better results than universal programs
- School-based tutoring programs with trained staff show stronger outcomes than privatized home tutoring
- The most effective interventions combine teacher support, curriculum alignment, and regular assessment
- Cost-effective programs focus resources where data shows the greatest need
None of these evidence-based approaches appear in Alfano’s proposal.
💡 A Responsible Alternative
If Alfano were truly concerned with student achievement rather than political positioning, a more responsible proposal might include:
- Targeted assistance for students identified through assessment as needing additional support
- School-based tutoring programs that eliminate travel costs and improve oversight
- Teacher-led intervention programs that align with classroom curriculum
- Clear metrics for measuring progress and adjusting resources
- A sustainable budget that doesn’t risk other essential programs
This approach would deliver better results at roughly one-quarter the cost.
Related Posts
- Hardyston BOE Budget Talks: Controversial Cuts & Proposals
- BOE Budget Workshop: What’s the Real Story?
🧾 Conclusion: Budget Season Requires Responsible Leadership
Hardyston taxpayers deserve proposals based on educational research and sound financial planning-especially during the critical budget season when resources are being allocated for the coming year. Students deserve interventions proven to work, not blanket solutions with catchy goals like “everyone passes state tests” that sound impressive but lack implementation details.
When evaluating board members’ proposals, particularly those simultaneously seeking higher office, we must distinguish between genuine educational solutions and politically advantageous positions.
In the case of Alfano’s tutoring plan, the timing during budget season, coupled with his Town Council candidacy and the overly simplistic goal of universal test passing, suggests this proposal may be designed more to benefit a political career than to provide a fiscally responsible path to improved student achievement.