+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Education Law Center Standing Up for Public School Children NEITHER THOROUGH NOR EFFICIENT: SCHOOL...

Education Law Center Standing Up for Public School Children NEITHER THOROUGH NOR EFFICIENT: SCHOOL...

Date post: 30-Dec-2015
Category:
Upload: amy-sherman
View: 217 times
Download: 1 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
18
Education Law Center Standing Up for Public School Children NEITHER THOROUGH NOR EFFICIENT: SCHOOL FUNDING INEQUITY IN PENNSYLVANIA David Sciarra Education Law Center Pa. State Conference of NAACP Conference on Education, May 25, 2012
Transcript

Education Law CenterStanding Up for Public School Children

NEITHER THOROUGH NOR EFFICIENT: SCHOOL FUNDING INEQUITY IN

PENNSYLVANIADavid Sciarra

Education Law Center

Pa. State Conference of NAACPConference on Education, May 25, 2012

The Right to Education

• The General Assembly shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of public education to serve the needs of the Commonwealth.” Pa. Const. art. 3, § 14.

What is “Fair” School Funding?

“Fair” school funding is defined as a state finance system that provides a sufficient level of funding to ensure equality of educational opportunity, with funding distributed to districts within the state to account for additional needs generated by student poverty.

Fair School Funding: Core Principles

• States should provide varying levels of funding to ensure equal educational opportunities to children with different needs.

• A “progressive” finance system allocates more funding to districts with high levels of student poverty; a “regressive” system allocates less to those districts; and a “flat” system allocates roughly the same across districts with varying needs.

Sta

te &

Lo

cal R

even

ue

per

Pu

pil

Low Poverty High Poverty

State A (Low revenue, poverty “flat”)

State B (Avg. implicit base rev., highly regressive)

State C (Avg. implicit base rev., progressive)

0% Poverty 10% Poverty 20% Poverty 30% Poverty$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Indiana

Michigan

Ohio

Pennsylvania

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Lo

ca

l Re

ve

nu

e p

er

Pu

pil

Midwest

0% Poverty 10% Poverty 20% Poverty 30% Poverty$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Delaware

Maryland

New Jersey

New York

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Lo

ca

l Re

ve

nu

e p

er

Pu

pil

Mid-Atlantic

North Central

0% Poverty 10% Poverty 20% Poverty 30% Poverty$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Illinois

Iowa

Minnesota

Wisconsin

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Lo

ca

l Re

ve

nu

e p

er

Pu

pil

0% Poverty 10% Poverty 20% Poverty 30% Poverty$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Alabama

Louisiana

Mississippi

Texas

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Lo

ca

l Re

ve

nu

e p

er

Pu

pil

Gulf Coast

State Funding Distribution: Top 10

StateAt 0%

PovertyAt 30% Poverty High/Low Grade

Utah $5,772 $9,157 159% A

New Jersey $13,961 $19,805 142% A

Ohio $8,993 $12,301 137% A

Minnesota $10,026 $13,043 130% B

Massachusetts $12,598 $15,550 123% B

South Dakota $7,794 $9,326 120% B

Indiana $10,137 $11,951 118% C

Connecticut $14,468 $16,855 117% C

Montana $8,577 $9,986 116% C

Delaware $12,125 $13,884 115% C

State Funding Distribution: Bottom 10

StateAt 0%

PovertyAt 30% Poverty High/Low Grade

Pennsylvania $13,788 $12,302 89% D

Maine $12,914 $11,472 89% D

Alabama $9,702 $8,551 88% D

New York $18,702 $16,286 87% D

Missouri $9,886 $8,571 87% D

North Dakota $10,774 $8,577 80% F

North Carolina $11,111 $8,699 78% F

New Hampshire $13,958 $10,849 78% F

Illinois $11,312 $8,707 77% F

Nevada $10,561 $7,974 76% F

Does Federal Funding Matter?

• Less than 10% of school funding is federal funds

• Too small to have any effect on Fairness• Title 1, RTT, etc.: “Subsidizing Inequity”• New direction: drive states to make

underlying finance systems fair

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

A B C D F

Fairness Index Grade

NA

EP

Pro

ficie

ncy 2

007

Does Fair Funding Mean Better Student Outcomes?

Gov. Corbett’s Cuts

Inequity Philly Style

Takeaways

• Fair School Funding: Essential precondition to reform efforts to close achievement gaps

• Key to Effective Teaching, Closing Gaps• Urgent need for state school finance reform • “Resistance is Deep” • New Federal Policies: Title I and Federal Grants

to leverage states to improve funding fairness

And While We’re At It....

• Access to high quality Pre-K for every low income child, and every child in a low income community

• State Pre-K Systems: unify Head Start, Child Care and Public School Pre-K

• Right to attend school in safe and educationally adequate facilities

• State capital program – assess need, ensure financing

David Sciarra, Esq.

Executive Director

[email protected]

For More Information:

60 Park Place, Suite 300

Newark, NJ 07102

Phone: 973.624.1815 Fax: 973.624.7339

Education Law CenterStanding Up for Public School Children

www.edlawcenter.org


Recommended