School Funding Reform

The public’s perception of public schools across the United State is faltering. Many schools are not reaching the unofficial standards set by parents and community members or the formal standards set by the government in No Child Left Behind. Students attending urban schools are suffering the most, and many people blame this on the lack of funding that these schools must work with. School funding is usually linked to school success and causes much controversy since all parents want their children to get the best education possible. Most professionals argue that school funding reform is necessary for success of our public schools, but how to realize fair reforms is under much debate.

However, it is not all bad news for America’s public schools. Suzanne Weiss (1999) found that after the church, the public shows the most confidence in the public education system. Parents generally have good perceptions about their local schools, but show much less confidence in public schools as a whole. Overall, teachers show more confidence than the rest of the public in public schools. On the other hand, most people think that public schools are not as good as they used to be. Minorities have the lowest confidence in their schools. This is most likely due to high percentage of minorities in urban and inner-city schools that do not receive the same funding as suburban and rural schools. These urban schools must work with less materials and outdated technology to attempt to achieve the same results as other well funded schools. While the public shows interest in increasing the amount of money spent on urban schools, there is no consensus over how to allocate spending and increase performance in schools.

Several groups have examined school funding reform and they have found similar things. The need for funding reform is indisputable. Kevin Carey (2002) outlines the challenges that students in low income areas face. Low income students are behind their peers in almost every academic area and student achievement is linked to school funding levels. In other words, schools that receive adequate funding have students who perform better on standardized tests and other academic benchmarks. Some people argue that spending has been increased in recent years, but that there has not been a consistent increase in academic performance. However, Carey argues that much of the increased spending has gone towards special education programs, where positive results on national standards test are rarely seen.

Almost all the national committees who study school funding reform argue for a system that provides adequate school finance. “An adequate school finance system should provide for and ensure the use of sufficient funds necessary to develop and maintain the needed capacity to provide every student with a reasonable opportunity to accomplish expected education objectives that are clearly articulated and measurable” (National Conference of State Legislation, 1998, p.20). The National Conference of State Legislatures goes on to explain that we must create a knowledge base of educational objectives and funds to meet those objectives. Instead of simply giving schools more or less money, there should be a clear purpose of what the money is going towards and what those programs should accomplish. It proposes a systematic examination of the needs and successes of the educational programs that the state funds. If these programs are not successful or do not meet the agreed upon accountability measures, then they will not receive additional funding. NCSL believes that this will make the funds being used more effective and help increase students success.

The Committee for Economic Development (2004) also argues for funding policies that align with standards-based reform. They agree that the school funding system should be redesigned to coincide with higher performance. The Committee would like resources to be distributed more effectively, teacher pay to reflect the labor market, incentives for improved performance, and a link between funding and meeting educational standards. If these goals are meet, CED believes that schools will perform better. They would like budget committees to focus on the output of funding instead of the input. In other words, the outcome and results of the funds should be focused on instead of the amount of funds going to each school. If some schools need more money to succeed at the same level as other schools that would be considered fair. They believe that school budgets should be calculated based on individual students and their needs, not simply by the tax bracket that most of the population the school serves falls into. They also argue for the use of performance incentives, which may improve student outcomes.

These national committees have spent a lot of time and money conducting studies that tell us that schools need more funds, and that these funds should be based on the outcome of their use. However, none of these groups give concrete ways in which to reach these goals. In order to help all students and teachers continue to meet the high standards that society has set for public schools, funding does need to be examined. Especially in low income areas, the ways in which schools are funded may need to be changed dramatically. However, we cannot simply change the amount of money that goes to each school. The money must be allocated in a fair and effective way. The suggestions set forth by various national committees provide a good framework for basing funding on the success of the programs that it covers. When schools and programs are held accountable for what they claim to do, then parents, teachers, and students will see positive changes within their schools.

References
Carey, K., & Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2002, November 5). Education funding and low-income children: A review of current research. (ERIC) Retrieved October 18, 2008, from ERIC database.
Committee for Economic Development. (2004, January 1). Investing in learning: School funding policies to foster high performance. Executive Summary. (ERIC). Retrieved October 18, 2008 from ERIC database.
National Conference of State Legislatures. (1998, July 1). Educational adequacy: Building an adequate school finance system. (ERIC) Retrieved October 18, 2008 from ERIC database.
Weiss, S., & Education Commission of the States. (1999, January 1). Americans’ perceptions about public education. (ERIC) Retrieved October 18, 2008 from ERIC database.