As a child, I knew that some families had more money than others. I knew that some of my classmate’s parents could afford better clothes for them than mine could. I also knew that some children were not as fortunate as I was. I knew that some children’s parents could not afford to feed them at all, while mine could afford certain foods but not others.
In early college courses, I began to learn that students in my own country did not have the same recourses that I did. Not just at home, but at school. In buildings that were funded by the government. In classrooms that were meant to provide equal opportunities to their students, no matter what color or socioeconomic status the students were. I started learning about the digital divide, and about economic and resource disparities of all sorts in “inner city schools.” I saw images of school buildings that were falling apart, classrooms without books, students angry and violent because they know that the powers that be have already decided they will fail.
Last semester, before one of my classes, my peers and I were having an open discussion about school funding. “I don’t understand why all the schools in the state don’t just get equal funding based on size, or something more fair. It’s not right for impoverished constituents to have to fund their own schools.”
This comment, which I thought was so obvious, so pure, so true, and undeniable, came face to face with a peer who openly disagreed. It was the first time that I had met a representative of this vast majority of our people. A person who was glad that things weren’t equal, and saw good reason for the way that funding works for “public schools.” “NO, because then my school wouldn’t get as much money.”
“You really think that?”
“YES. My school does an awesome job, and if our funding had to go to other schools we would not be able to keep our standards.”
Hmm… class started soon after, but I probably would not have been able to continue the discussion even if my professor had not walked in. I had lived my life in Naivety for so long, never meeting the other side, always thinking that things were so unfair because of some evil giant far far away who rigged the system to make it this way. Now I had to realize that giant live among us, and that maybe I am the minority, but these giants just don’t normally speak out because they don’t have to.
While I don’t know a lot about the difficulties in creating equal school funding, it seems intuitive that it should be done. While I realize that it is easier said than done, and one of my friends who shares the same view has even been called a “radical communist,” I appreciate any attempts I hear of for making school funding more equal. In a January article of the NYT, David M. Herszenhorn writes, “
New York City School Chief Outlines a Financing Plan.”
Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein yesterday laid out the first specifics of his ambitious plan to change the school financing system so that schools of similar sizes and demographics get roughly the same amount of city money per student.“I think it’s important to the city that we can say that we are being equitable, we are being transparent and we are treating kids who are in a similar situation the same,” Mr. Klein said.
Equal funding… based on similar size… don’t know how exactly demographics would play a part, but he says the plan would allow them to say they are being equitable. Sounds good right?
The expert, Noreen Connell, who leads the Educational Priorities Panel, a nonprofit group, said that the changes would initially make the budget system more complicated, and would be harmful long term by making it overly expensive for schools to retain veteran teachers.
This certainly does sound like a good point. After all, what future teacher wants a budget change that will make it hard for schools to “retain veteran teachers?” And aren’t veteran teachers more expensive partially because their experience often makes them better teachers. Where are these veteran teachers which would be so hard to retain teaching anyways? If less funding equals less capacity for “retaining veteran teachers” wouldn’t that mean that advantaged schools are the only ones who can now afford veteran teachers? Maybe these experienced teachers should be spread out a little more fairly themselves? Or perhaps I don’t understand how “permanently devastating” equal funding in public schools might be.
Robert Gordon, the Education Department’s managing director for resource allocation, who is designing the new system, said it would maximize the amount of control that principals have over their budgets, allowing them “to retain their most experienced teachers if that is what they want to do.”
So, there are two sides to every argument as they say, and I guess we’ll have to wait to find out if this budget change will prove to be “equitable” or “irreversibly damaging.” In the meantime, let’s take a look at a more obvious cad when it comes to educational funding legislation. In an article of the NYT by Jennifer Steinhauer, “A School District With Low Taxes and No Schools,” the front picture caption reads,
Patrick Flynn led a successful drive to avoid paying higher property taxes by creating a school district that would have no schools or students.
You really must click on this link and get a load of this guy. I don’t normally openly insult people in my blog, but this gentleman has earned himself an exception to that rule. Apparently, this guy found a loophole in Arizonal law which allowed him to create a school district with no schools, teachers, or students so that he would not have to pay for the children of his town (Troon) to go to a nearby school in
Scottsdale.
“The whole purpose of this was to avoid taxes on their million-dollar homes,” said State Senator Linda Gray, a Republican who has sponsored a bill to prevent the formation of a school district without schools.Even if Ms. Gray’s bill, which the Senate passed last month, becomes law, the taxpayers of Troon will not be affected. The legislation would not be retroactive.
While Mr. Flynn’s action alone is outrageous enough, he takes selfishness to a nauseating level as he glosses over an argument he now faces with the young families in his home town:
“I am happy,” said Mr. Flynn, the president of a homeowners group in the area, which, he emphasized, had nothing to do with his opposition to higher property taxes.The quandary over what to do with the roughly 450 public school children in Troon and adjacent Rio Verde essentially pits older homeowners in a place best known for its excellent golfing against young families who are part of this rapidly expanding area in
North Scottsdale.“By forming our own school district, the children will be educated by the schools they choose, and the residents will keep their tax rate the same,” said Mr. Flynn, a retired salesman whose children are grown.Casey Perkins, a parent with a young child, disagreed. “I am willing to pay for my own child,” Ms. Perkins said. “I am paying Social Security, and I am never going to see it. But both are part of living in our society.”
Well said Ms. Perkins. The frustration continues as Ms. Perkin’s children and the other young children of Troon have to attend schools in districts which tend
to give priority to families living — and paying taxes — in the district. When Ms. Perkins went to enroll her daughter in kindergarten in
Scottsdale and realized that her child would be bused miles from home, Ms. Perkins said she was told by a district administrator, “Let’s face the facts, you are not paying your fair share.”
So how does this all connect to my naive understanding of how public schools should be equal? It is this very philosophy that fuels the disparities. Whether you are Mr. Flynn not wanting to pay for school because he has no small children, or an affluent parent, not wanting to pay for a poor child’s education because your child needs a fencing team, the consequences are the same. A society driven by members with selfish motivations and an “each man for himself” mentality will never stop seeing me as a “radical communist.” But until we are willing to admit that we are not equal, that we are unfair, and that we practice systematic racism in our school systems, we have committed the offence of glossing over our cruelty with rhetoric, just like Mr. Flynn.
New York City School Chief Outlines a Financing Plan By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: January 25, 2007
New York Times
Complete Article
A School District With Low Taxes and No Schools
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER
Published: February 16, 2007
Scottsdale Journal: New York Times
Complete Article