Policyandequity Pprte822

The Disparity of Equitable Funding between Michigans Schools and its Effects on the Freedom and Liberty of Students
The Disparity of Equitable Funding between Michigans Schools and its
Effects on the Freedom and Liberty of Students
Christopher Zech
Michigan State University
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to define liberty and freedom as they relate to the existing state of disparate public school funding and how it contributes to the cycle of poverty. Currently, there is a disparity in the distribution of school funding and this gap leads to and continually feeds the cycle of poverty. This funding disparity also inhibits students in poorer rural and urban schools from obtaining true freedom and liberty. This failure prevents students from poorer schools from having true freedom of choice regarding quality schools, teachers, and other educational opportunities. This loss of freedom impinges their ability to benefit from the liberties that are enjoyed by their wealthier peers; especially, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which are guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Being denied these rights, liberties, and freedoms, prevents students from not only acquiring equal educational opportunities, but also from developing their maximum potential. This inability feeds the cycle of poverty that begins at birth to a low socio-economic status, which generally leads to a lower quality education, which prepares them for low paying jobs. This creates a widely pervasive and enduring legacy that is quite difficult to escape.
Education disparities between socioeconomic classes are increasingly apparent in the United States in which underfunded public schools in poor urban and rural areas feature poorly trained and paid teachers and rote curriculum, and extravagant boarding and private schools serve the wealthy. In this essay I will define multiple dimensions of liberty and justice and show how common education funding practices fail to develop students' liberty and perpetuate social injustice. In particular, I will detail how the lack of equitable distribution and the disparity in school funding inhibits the freedom of education from poorer districts and also how it contributes to the cycle of poverty and I will propose a few alternative solutions that might end this crisis.
In the United States, there is no specific Constitutional guarantee of education. The federal government inferred this power to the states with the passage 10th Amendment (1791). It simply says that the states have every power not specifically given to the federal government in the Constitution. It was implied under the 14th Amendment (1868), which provides a definition of what a citizen of this country is and what their rights include. It is under this amendment that education is considered to be a civic privilege and is thus, ensured. Under the Michigan State Constitution, Article VIII Sections 1 and 2, education for all is guaranteed. It states that not only will, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged, but also that, The legislature shall maintain and support a system of free public elementary and secondary schools as defined by law. Every school district shall provide for the education of its pupils without discrimination as to religion, creed, race, color or national origin. Unfortunately there is no mention of funding equality, equal access to the same curriculum or material, guarantees of quality teachers, up to date texts, however the 14th Amendment requires equal protection under state policies. It is against federal law for state policies to unequally affect citizens. With the end of the Civil War and the passage of the 13th Amendment (1865) abolishing slavery, many
Southern states passed so-called Black Codes. These were laws that severely limited the rights of blacks including, land ownership, voting rights and education. They also included harsher penalties for criminal acts. With the passage of the 14th Amendment (1866) it carried with it the Equal Protection clause, which stated that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction, the equal protection of the laws. Many attempts were made to challenge these laws. The Supreme Court ruled in Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896) that segregation was Constitutional as long as facilities were, separate but equal. Unequal educational opportunities were not enforced by federal law until 1954. Justice Earl Warren said with Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) that separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Still, it many more years and took the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 for the policies enacted to have some teeth. Unfortunately, over the years this has lead to current disparities in funding and equality of education and opportunity for all students of color and those from poorer families. This inequality continues the cycle of poverty by limiting the freedoms and liberties that students from poor rural and urban schools have access to which, ultimately prevents them from closing the achievement and education gaps.
With the ratification of the Constitution in 1787, citizens of this country were granted rights that guaranteed them liberty and justice. After years of tyrannical rule, the citizens of the newly formed country wanted a more democratic and people centered type of government. The Bill of Rights was included to restrict Congress ability to abuse its power and limit the rights of citizens. These first ten amendments provide the basic rights and liberties of citizenship and guarantees that they cannot be taken away. The second goal of the Constitution was to establish justice. It means that every law is to be exactly the same to every American. To create an equal,
fair nation, all of the rights to the people must be the same. No matter the person's race, religion, gender, country or origin, political views, or financial situation. Schools matter with regards to developing liberty in our students because they provide for not only for the development of knowledge and understanding, but also provide models for social interaction and civic responsibility. They provide children with more options to improve their status and standing through educational opportunity. The more opportunities a school provides a student, the better chances they have at succeeding in life. Schools in wealthier districts offer their students greater academic and social opportunities, including technology and a wider array of course offerings, which will, in turn, improve their ability to develop the concept of liberty to its fullest. Students in poorer rural and urban districts are severely limited in all options provided them. Compared to their wealthier peers, everything about their educational experience limits the development of the ideals of liberty and freedom. This limits their growth and undermines their ability to develop a true sense of liberty or even justice, for that matter. I then expand my definitions of liberty and justice and compare them those of Rawls and Mill. I define liberty as the capacity of an individual to benefit from a diverse variety of social, political, or economic rights and privileges in order to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, regardless of class, race or wealth. I define justice as the fair and equitable distribution of rights and responsibilities, rewards and consequences to all, regardless of class, race or wealth. Rawls definition of justice proposed that, all social values are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any or all of these values is to everyones advantage. (Rawls, 1971) His theory of justice has two principles: the first principle guarantees the right of each person to have the most extensive basic liberty compatible with the liberty of others. While the second principle
states that social and economic positions are to be to everyone's advantage and open to all. With regard to liberty, Rawls says, persons are at liberty to do something when they are free from certain constraints either to do it or not to do it and when their doing it or not doing it is protected from interference by other persons. (Banham, 2011) Mill says that the idea of justice is actually based on utility, and that rights exist only because they are necessary for human happiness. With regards to liberty, Mill says there are three types. One is the liberty of thought and opinion. The second is the liberty of tastes and pursuits, or the freedom to plan our own lives, and the third one being the liberty to join other like-minded individuals for a common purpose that does not hurt anyone. Mill argues that each of these freedoms negates societys tendency to compel conformity. In order to understand the disparities in funding and distribution, it is also important to distinguish between equality and equity. Equality means everyone has the same or is at the same level whereas equity means ensuring that everyone has access to the resources, opportunities, power and responsibility they need to reach their full potential. It also includes making changes so that unfair differences may be understood and addressed. Equity is not the same as equality; it does not mean that every school district gets the same amount of funding. Some schools need additional funding to serve students with disabilities, to provide bilingual education, and to provide free and reduced-price lunches. Now, armed with a better understanding of liberty, justice equity and equality, we can begin to investigate how current school funding practices are putting not only our childrens education at risk, but their futures as well. School funding in Michigan underwent a huge change in 1994 with
the passage of Proposal A. Prior to 1994, 80 % of Michigan school operating funds came from local property taxes. According to Latika Chaudhary in the Economics of Education Review: Prior to Proposal A, Michigan school districts were funded through a District Power Equalization system that combined local
property taxes with state aid payments. If district tax revenues were less than the state guaranteed level, the district was compensated the difference in state aid and if tax revenues exceeded the state guaranteed level, the district lost its state aid through taxation. (Chaudhary, 2009)
Because both property values and voter-approved millage rates varied widely between districts, the system produced large funding disparities. Under Proposal A, schools are provided with a per-student foundation allowance that is supplemented by an 18-mill property tax on each district's non-homestead property. The foundation allowance for the 2013-14 school year is $8,049. The amount this raises in each district varies and is also included in the foundation grant formula. The total revenue from this tax and the state school aid grant represents the total amount the school will have to spend for operations under Proposal A. An important thing to consider here is that the basic foundation allowance is actually a cap on the maximum amount of state school aid grant money a district will receive once all the other factors from the Proposal A formula are calculated. Most districts get less than the "basic" and this is where the disparity continues. Its distribution formula is based in part on districts' pre-Proposal A funding levels, so that the most richly funded schools were not forced to come down. According to Cassandra Ulbrich, the vice president of the State Board of Education:
The system can work as long as there are an adequate and stable number of students to maintain it. Michigan has seen a decline in student enrollment of more than 183,000 students, while at the same time; we have seen a net gain of more than 110 charter schools. This is unsustainable. Rather than creating more schools to support fewer students, lets place a moratorium on new school creation and focus on increasing the quality of the schools that already exist while identifying a funding system that makes sense. We can either have our current structure, or we can have our current funding system; we cant have both. (Ulbrich, 2013)
Why is this a problem? For starters, beginning with the 1994-95 school year to the present, the number of charter schools in Michigan has risen from 12 to 298, with an enrollment that has
risen from 1,200 to 131,000 students. At the start of the 2013-14 school year, this creates a loss of $1,054,419,000 for the public school system of the State of Michigan. Charter public schools in the city of Detroit alone enroll 47,000 students, the third highest charter enrollment in the country behind Los Angeles and New York. Charter schools also present many other problems. For instance, data for the 2011-12 school year from the states Center for Educational Performance and Information show that 31 percent of teachers in charter schools have taught for less than one year and only three percent of traditional public school teachers have taught for less than one year. Another frightening aspect regarding teacher qualifications and charter schools is that states, including Connecticut and North Carolina are trying to pass legislation that would waive teacher certification requirements for these schools. Charter schools also do not have to admit either special ed. Students or ELL students. Charter schools students have never out performed regular public school students on federal standardized tests and overall, they are getting results no different than regular public schools. Even with a new funding system in place, we still have disparities. These disparities will affect the freedom and liberty of students from poorer districts to truly be happy. This loss of freedom is not often noticed right away as young children arent aware that the differences they notice might just be unobtainable, that certain things will always be out of reach. Students in these poorer schools or what Anyon refers to as working class schools are not prepared for a life that includes leadership roles, success or wealth. While students in poorer schools do often dream of becoming rich and famous, the majority of them feel that they will do so because of talents they have outside of the classroom, like becoming a professional sports star or singer. They are instead taught histories that are not their own and a curriculum that is focused on mastering basic
skills, skills that will only help them to get by and not be successful. Anyon (1981) goes on to say:
These aspects of school knowledge in the working-class schools contribute to the reproduction of a group in society who may be without marketable knowledge; a reserve group of workers whose very existence serves to keep wages down and the work force disciplined. (p.32)
What they do notice, however, is the dilapidated buildings where they spend most of their youth dreaming of better days. How does the disparity in school funding affect the liberty, justice and freedom of students in poorer districts? First of all, schools in poorer districts have a much more difficult time attracting quality teachers. By quality, I mean teachers with higher levels of education, more experience, and higher scores on competency tests. These teachers also seem to be able to get the most out of each student in their charge. Wealthier schools generally have no problem attracting or paying the salaries of quality teachers. Schools in poorer districts also have larger than average class sizes, which lends to a larger student to teacher ratio, which makes it much more difficult to allow for much if any, one on one time. The affects of this disparity are much greater during the elementary school years. Schools in wealthier districts generally have smaller class sizes, which allow for much more personal attention. Poorer school districts are also less able to provide a greater variety of educational opportunities with regards to availability or variety within the curriculum. Schools in wealthier districts are able to provide a much more varied curriculum, including languages like Chinese and French at the elementary level and other similar options at the high school level. Another way the disparity of educational funding effects students is in the quality of books, equipment, technology and other materials. Some poorer schools are using books 20 years out of date or have cracked blackboards in their rooms. Richer schools not only have up to date books but also have computers in the room to find any recent updates to
information. Students from poorer schools may never gain the requisite skills using technology because their school cannot afford it, something students from wealthier districts take for granted. The effect of this disparity on a childs liberty, freedom and sense of justice is tremendous. According to Rawls Second Principle, First: each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a
similar scheme of liberties for others. Second: social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all."(Rawls, 1971)
Students in poorer schools benefit from neither condition of his Second Principle, so there can be no justice. With regards to their freedom(s), students from poorer schools are definitely limited in their so-called pursuit of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They are lacking in the freedom to become the individual they want to become, rather they are forced to accept whatever role the dominant monoculture allows them to have. How does the loss of liberty and freedom affect children in poorer districts in their desire for justice? The allocation of goods should be for, the greatest net balance of satisfaction for society.(Mill, 1971) Justice is in fact another type of morality in which happiness for the largest number of people is the fundamental goal. Critics like Reamer, say, Processes and decision making grounded on the logic of utilitarianism may result in the unfair treatment of vulnerable populations. (Reamer, 2011) With many children being left behind because of a lack of funding, I believe that Mill would agree that there is no justice here. The greater good of society is not made better off or happier when large numbers of its population is being greatly underserved educationally while the privileged or wealthy classes continue to prosper. Here, again, Rawls would agree that there is no justice in the disparity in which school funds are distributed. He
10
argued that, all social valuesare to be distributed equally, unless an unequal distribution of any or all these values is to everyones advantage. (Rawls, 1971) The unequal distribution of school funding leads to inequality and inequity between wealthy and poor districts. The only benefit here is for the rich and wealthy districts and schools who continue to provide excellent advantages in educational opportunity. The children in poorer districts cannot possibly benefit from the current system. According to Carey (2002), the most recent, comprehensive studies indicate that school funding and student performance are strongly related. In particular, they find that low-income children can substantially benefit from policies designed to provide additional resources to high poverty school districts.Because of the disparity of inequitable and unequal funding, Sen would also agree that poorer students do not receive the benefits of knowing and understanding justice. He believes that social justice should focus on assuring individuals capacity to gain optimal well being in their circumstances. The effectiveness of government action to improve social justice is judged according to an individuals capability to do things he or she values and the freedom of individuals to choose between different ways of leading their lives. (Sen, 2008) Students in poorer districts are continually having their rights of freedom, liberty and justice being slowly stripped away from them. As explained by expert Myron Orfield, Concentrated poverty, resulting in a large proportion of the students in a school being poor, exacerbates and compounds the effects of these poverty related problems in such a way that they become systemic. At this point the loss of freedom and liberty ultimately crush the spirit of the students in these situations. As they get older, these kids begin to realize that the futures they dreamed of never had a chance of coming to fruition. They look around their school and see drooping ceilings, standing water, classrooms overflowing with kids, a scarcity of available and working technology, and worst of all, teachers who checked out
11
long ago. They see and hear about all the wonderful advantages other, much richer, districts have to offer their kids-perhaps not firsthand, but surely on television. They know that if television cameras show up at their school, usually its something negative. They no longer see a good education as a way to escape the current world in which they live. Children in poorer schools never have the chance to develop a true sense of liberty or freedom. The schools in which they are placed are set up to maintain the status quo because of the disparity of school funding. How can a student truly develop a sense of liberty or even freedom of choice in an environment that is designed to hold them back? When their school cannot provide qualified teachers, up to date text, current technology or a curriculum that cannot provide anything other than mastery of basic skills; their ability to achieve success is greatly diminished. Without equal opportunities of education, opportunities afforded those in wealthier schools, students in poor rural and urban schools never get a chance to develop a true sense of liberty and enjoy the benefits of freedoms afforded their more affluent peers. Once stripped of liberty and freedom in the classroom, they drop out and either wander from one meaningless and low-paying job to the next or they begin a life of crime until they are either jailed or killed. This endless cycle of poverty must come to an end. Not all the blame should be focused on the school systems, however, according to Bessette (2006):
Cities have a lot to lose with the decline in the schools. It is a catch-22 situation between urban sprawl and the decline of the public schools reputations. Not only are there less workers to attract companies and for companies to pull from, but the augmented concentration of poverty is evident and not only hampers the students learning, but weakens the available workforce for the communitys economy.
What steps can be taken to help stem the tide? In her paper, Evaluating Public School Funding in Michigan and the Impact of Proposal A, Bessette recommends several real policy steps that
12
should be implemented as soon as possible, including:

Cost analysis for educating students in the state of Michigan be updated from the 1968 report as soon as possible, so that the State can be accountable for proper funding of education programs; that monies from the state should not depend on what district the child lives in, but that there be equity for everyone; that urban city schools be looked at for their importance to the community and that the additional attributes they share for special education, at-risk, and second-language students be taken into account; that the state fulfill its funding obligations to special education mandates; and that the loopholes and exemptions to Proposal A be fixed and monies lost, repaid. (Bessette, 2006)
These steps will be more help from an equity perspective but will also help underfunded schools evolve into learning centers that will help students develop and shape their understanding of liberty, justice and freedom. We also need to first re-think where State aid goes. Currently, funding that the schools receive comes directly from the district. This funding comes from the states and federal government. A solution to this would be to have funding from both state and federal governments go directly to the school. This system is known as Site Based Management (SBM). It is considered a promising strategy because it involves those educators who know better to where school funding should be spent. Sight based management is a way to increase school autonomy and to share decision-making with teachers and sometimes parents, students, and community members. It typically involves the formation of a school-based committee or council that, through legislative or board action, is empowered to make decisions. These decisions usually fall within three areas: budget, personnel and staffing, and curriculum/programs. (NCREL, 1995). These small groups are considered to be more effective because not only are they comprised of teachers, parents, administrators and even, students but, they have a better idea of where funding is best off being used. Proponents of Site Base Management (SBM) cite the benefits as boosted employee morale and motivation; strengthened school-wide planning processes; improved instruction; student academic achievement improvement; effective schools characteristics will develop and finally; stake holders, particularly parents and teachers will be able to influence school policy decisions. Opponents say
13
that flaws of SBM include demands of change at every level for successful implementation; that the time required for successful implementation of SBM is at least 5-10 years; administrators, board members and principals may feel threatened by loss of power and authority; highly skilled teachers do not always make great or even, effective leaders and lastly, it may create an inherent lack of trust between all levels of personnel. Despite its flaws, SBM appears to create more freedom and liberty for teachers because it provides them with more voice in the development of curriculum that is more need based. They see what is lacking in the classrooms and now, equipped with power to change, have the freedom to design curriculum that is more focused on student need. Other things that can be done to improve school financing strategies include improving efficiency, rewarding teacher performance based on student improvement; ensure extra funding for students with any additional needs and increase public support for education. Establishing a system of school funding that provides equally to all students and provides access to all facets of education that prepares all students, regardless of gender, race or wealth is of paramount importance if we are to ever narrow or even close the income gap in this country and the access to liberty and the pursuit of happiness in this country. With regards to school funding, In order to reduce significantly the academic achievement gap, school districts need funding for poor students equal to two to two-and-a-half times of the cost of educating non-poor students. These amounts are much greater than the supplemental amount provided by any state prior to 2002. (Carey, 2002, p. 2) Protecting the rights and liberties of all students, especially the poorer ones, and guaranteeing everyone the same opportunities for education and success is the only just way to invigorate and ultimately sustain the wonderfully diverse nature of our society.
14
References 1. Anyon, J. (1981). Social Class and School knowledge, Curriculum Inquiry, Vol. 11, No. 1. (Spring, 1981), pp 3-42. 2. Banham, G. http://kantinternational.blogspot.com/2011/07/rawls-on-liberty-andconstitutions.html 3. Bessette, A.M. Evaluating Public School Funding in Michigan and the Impact of Proposal A, SPNA Review, Volume 2:1, Article 3, 2006. 4. Carey, Kevin. (2002). Education Funding and Low Income Children: A Review of Current Research.Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 5. Chaudhary, L., Education inputs, student performance and school finance reform in Michigan, Economics of Education Review, Economics of Education Review 28 (2009) 9098, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/econedurev 6. Heilman, Elizabeth, TE 822 Liberty and Justice power point, 2013 7. MI Const. art. VIII, 1 & 2 8. Mill, J. S. Utilitarianism, 1971 9. http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/go/93-1site.htm (NCREL) 10. Orfield, Myron. 1997. Metropolitics: A regional Agenda for Community and Stability. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution 11. Rawls, J. A Theory of Justice, 1971 12. Reamer, F. G. Social Work Values and Ethics (2006) in Simon P. Funge, Promoting the social justice value orientation of students: the role of the educator (2011); 47(1) Journal of Social Work Education 73-90. 13. Ulbrich, C: The way Michigan funds its public schools is broken, Detroit Free Press, July 29, 2013 14. Wilson, Roger Ph.D. (2007) "Poverty, Race and Educational Attainment: Time For An Ideological and Structural Rethink?, "Colleagues: Vol. 2: Iss. 2, Article 15.Available at: http://scholarworks.gvs.edu/colleagues/vol2/iss2/15 15. http://charterschools.org/press-room/1365
15
16

Policyandequity Pprte822

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Policyandequity Pprte822

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Disparity of Equitable Funding between Michigans Schools and its Effects on the Freedom and Liberty of Students

The Disparity of Equitable Funding between Michigans Schools and its

Effects on the Freedom and Liberty of Students

Michigan State University

should be implemented as soon as possible, including:

You might also like