Disadvantages Of Inequality In Education

When local property taxes were the primary source of school funding, districts were financially stable and were able to allocate funds for appropriate spendings. With the limitations set on property taxes, school budgets became dependent on the state’s fluctuating economy and tax collections. Fortunately, in 1988, Proposition 98 was passed, which set a minimum base funding for public schools. This proposition guaranteed funding that would grow each year with the changing economy along with student enrollment. This funding, though managed by the state was a combination of state General Fund and local property tax revenues.

With landmark Supreme Court decisions in regards to education such as Brown v Board of Education, which made segregation within schools illegal, one would be inclined to believe that modern schools are void of any inequality. However, at a deeper glance, it is apparent that there is a glaring inequality within public school systems at the national, statewide, and even district-wide level. Such an inequality has drastic results as the education one receives has a high correlation to the college they will attend, and the job they will work. It is in society's best interest that public school systems be improved to equally supplement students with the tools necessary to succeed. While the public school system aims to reduce the inequality within it, they have proven ineffective in guaranteeing children of all races and economic classes an equal education.

School funding is a mix of different funding sources like federal, state, and local. About ninety percent of funding for education comes from state and local community. K-12 education has failed to keep up with high enrollment. Schools must spend to counter effects of poverty while many European countries alleviate these conditions through government spending. Currently more than forty percent of low income school get an extremely unfair share of state and local funds. Low income school are receiving inadequate funds for their school, whereas other schools in the United States are unfairly distributing their state and local funds. That is unfair to the low income schools because those schools really need the money for school books, field trips, etc. Funding for public schools has been quite unequal for years, but even though Americans are fully aware of this issue no one does anything to solve it. Researchers are trying to show them both sides of this unequal funding issue in public schools in order to help balance the distribution of educational funding.

If the education system relies most of their funding from taxes, where do they end up getting the rest of the money. The government and administration grant more money to wealthier areas than low -income areas. Wealthier communities are granted more money because they have a higher percentage of funding coming from property taxes. This leaves the low-income students at a disadvantage. People living in low income areas mainly rent and don’t own their own property. As a result of not having a house or owning property, they have little property taxes. If low -income students are not given enough money for funding a school, the students are suffering. With the lack of money causes students to miss out on college prep classes such as AP classes and Honors classes. These classes are pivotal to the students that want to pursue higher education and a road to success. For example students in the low-income areas are given a poor education. They are not given the resources, or quality teachers in order to achieve success. According to George Miller House Education and the Workforce committee, many students are not educationally ready to graduate and attend higher education (Minority 1). This is another reason why low income students should be provided the same classes as a middle class or a wealthier community. In a study, 2 million students in 7,300 schools had no access to all calculus classes, a staple in many high – achieving high schools (Minority 2). Low-income

Property tax is the “most common,” “most dependable and stable income base,” for schools. Property tax can be a complicated process and there are difficulties for taxpayers because assessments can be overvalued or undervalued. A property may be worth less and yet the property tax may be higher than the assessed value of that property. This over and under valuing can be frustrating to a taxpayer that lives in a home that they can’t sell for the million dollars that their home’s property tax is assessed at and yet they are paying property taxes for a million dollar home. I would think that in areas where there is less property to be taxed, there would be less income coming in to those school districts, making it less equitable. It could be vastly different from one area to another.

Read Savage Inequalities by Jonathan Kozol. Kozol examines the inequities in school financing between Urban and suburban schools, Chapter 3 (2 points)

The United States is a country based on equal opportunity; every citizen is to be given the same chance as another to succeed. This includes the government providing the opportunity of equal education to all children. All children are provided schools to attend. However, the quality of one school compared to another is undoubtedly unfair. Former teacher John Kozol, when being transferred to a new school, said, "The shock from going from one of the poorest schools to one of the wealthiest cannot be overstated (Kozol 2)." The education gap between higher and lower-income schools is obvious: therefore, the United States is making the effort to provide an equal education with questionable results.

     Will Durant, a businessman and the founder of General Motors, once said, “Education is the transmission of civilization.” Unfortunately, education is still one of the most deliberated and controversial issues in the United States. Thus far, the privilege or right to receive education has not attained the level of equality throughout the nation; poor districts obtain less educational funding while rich districts obtain more, creating an immense gap between the quality of schools in poor and rich areas.

Once again, he finds children that are forced to learn in a facility that isn’t fit to be inhabited, much less a school. He the visits P.S. 79, which is extremely overcrowded, After viewing these two decrepit schools, he visits Riverdale, P.S. 24. Because of the property value of the houses around Riverdale, the school gets a lot more money than either P.S. 261 or P.S. 79. This chapter focuses on how money is divided up to schools. It appears that the value of the homes in the district far a school determines the amount of money that in invested into that school. Kozol emphasized the importance of financial need in the school system therefore giving a positive outlook on many of the schools. He incorporated the fact that values and income does determine the level of a child’s education.

There is an abundance of importance in the public school system. Most successful careers start with elementary, middle and high school education. So it is safe to say it is vital to maintain a major funding for all public school’s systems across the country. Of course funding isn’t the only broken piece of a perfect school system because not every school is in an appropriate environment. There are many factors that follow what type of funding each school gets and also how much. Many schools are placed in low income or areas in poverty, this causes students to have harder learning environments. The question is what would be a strategy to fix the gap in public school funding and where and how do you spend it? This could be solved by smart public school allocation, better pay structure for

In this detailed and shocking book, Jonathan Kozol describes the horrific and unjust conditions in which many children in today’s society are forced to get their education. Kozol discusses three major reasons for the discrepancies in America’s schools today: disparities of property taxes, racism, and the conflict between state and local control. The first of these reasons is that of the differences of available property tax revenues. Kozol discusses the inconsistencies in property tax revenues and the problem that the poorer districts aren’t getting the same opportunities for education as the more affluent neighborhoods. He says the reason for this is that the

Kozol (1991) explained in his book how one would think that because they live in a free nation and they are entitled to a free education, that they would receive the same as everyone else. Unfortunately, our country was set up with a tax-based formula for school funding. It’s a complicated formula and most people never think to scrutinize it. Basically, taxes based on the values of homes are levied. It is an equal tax in all districts so it is equitable. Ironically, because the properties in poor areas are worth far less than in affluent areas, there is always a shortage. The Shortage in funding creates a significant difference in teacher quality, curriculum and resources Former Secretary John King (2016) explained how schools with highly concentrated Blacks and Latinos are less likely to offer advanced

The educational funding problem in Michigan takes root back in 1809, when the first public school was founded. While funding was not an issue at the time, the way schools were funded through local property taxes eventually created a large problem. Fast forward to 1985, Michigan has long moved past the rural cities of the 1800’s and into affluent suburbs and cities. The size and taxation pools of cities have greatly changed from 1809 to 1985, but the way schools were funded remained exactly the same. This lack of change led to a large disparity in school funding from richer districts to poorer districts. Coupled together with local governments’ inability to convince citizens to vote in favor of millages and tax hikes, the disparity ballooned. In 1993, Bloomfield Hills ranked in the 99th percentile of Michigan schools, was spending on average $10,294 per-student, while Standish Sterling ranked in the bottom 1st percentile, spent $3,738 per-student, roughly a $6,500 difference per-student (Roy 2003). This inconsistency greatly disadvantaged students all the way to 95th percentile, where there

want to keep property tax for public education funding. In my point of view, usually the schools

Schools have a number of various sources. The primary sources are federal, state, and local funding. The majority of funding comes from state and local sources; whereas a small percent (usually 9-12%) comes from the federal level. The method by which schools receive funding is through the taxation process. At the state level, taxes are levied from taxpayers, both corporate and citizens via sales and income tax. At the local level, school funding comes from property taxes. Let’s explore the how the various sources of school funding. “According to the National Center for Education Statistics, state and local funding accounts for approximately 93 percent of education expenditures” (Woodruff, 2008, ¶ 2). Let’s examine these various sources of revenue and funding and different formulas for allocation along with their pros and cons.