Why Do Schools In America Have Money Problems

Should a child's wealth determine whether or not he or she can get a quality education? Funding for public schools is an enormous issue that affects many people. A major issue is unequal funding throughout the country. There are various reasons for these differences, from the governmental level to the lack of public support. There is a need to re-work the current formula used by states to determine how school funds are disbursed and also to increase public support for education funding. After all, whether a child is wealthy or poor, it is in everyone's interests to ensure that America's future generations are both skilled and educated. Limited funds for public schools have primarily affected the poor and

In Underfunding for Public School by Marcial Macias, he specifically addresses how are schools going to provide the proper education to students if schools don’t have the proper funding? This question prompts a wide variety of answers and opinions due to the fact that everyone has their own opinion on this query. This question seems to interest the majority of people in the American society. Therefore, I can see many people such as parents reading Macias’s essay.

The school finance reform is focused on the distribution of funds across rich and poor district schools. The reform was based on the thought that rich neighborhoods and households were better in spending on education. These scholars would access better programs and their family backgrounds could put them in the most precious and advanced institutions. Poorer neighborhoods on the other hand struggled to raise fees and sometimes students were forced to drop-out due to financial challenges. The historical development of the school finance reform has always sought to fund schools differently based on students’ family backgrounds (White, 2014). Poorer schools are given priority, low income districts also enjoy more federal aid that high-income district schools. The significance of school finance reforms was poised on previous researches. Studies indicate that a student educated in a school that received 20% higher funding than that of his peer, the scholar was likely to perform 20% better and his chances for adult poverty were 20% lower (White, 2014). Low-income government schools, either at district or state level, will perform better if given adequate financial assistance.

Everyone has heard the saying “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer” but few people think of schools when they here this phrase. The way our educational system is set up today benefits students in high income areas more than it helps students in low income schools. People in the United States like to think that anyone can achieve greatness if they try hard enough but getting an education is important and being in a well-funded school never hurts. In this country there is a profound lack of funding to our schools and there is an inequality when it comes distributing the funds and it only serves to help some and disadvantage others.

State funding is funding provided by the State or a state, especially for a particular project or service. Some 46 percent of K-12 spending nationally comes from state funds. Cuts at the state level force local school districts to scale back educational services, raise more local revenue to cover the gap or both.Most states provide less support per student for elementary and secondary schools in some cases, much less than before the Great Depression, our survey of state budget documents over the last three months finds. Worse, some states are still cutting eight years after the recession took hold. At least 31 states provided less state funding per student in the 2014 school year than in the 2008 school year, before the recession took hold. In at least 15 states, the cuts exceeded 10 percent. A few of the reasons why states have cut funding so deeply is because they have been getting weak revenues so they have been increasing the cost. State policy choices have also differed. As well as the reliance on spending cuts to close budget shortfalls and enactment of recent tax cuts. State revenues have improved lately but not enough to keep pace

These numbers show clearly how unfair Pennsylvania’s school funding is. School income shapes the students’ success, and without enough resources this goal cannot be met.

American’s public school system have struggled to assist the proper funding acquiesces for providing amenities that are required by the administration, faculty, staff and students. The success rate of the school systems budget has overturned the phrase President Lyndon Johnson initiated regarding standardize poverty levels. “Poverty must not be a bar to learning, and learning must offer an escape from poverty,” President Lyndon Johnson. Dilapidated buildings, equipment, and materials are the results of the mishandling of misappropriated funding. Equitable funding and the better lack of funding gaps have led to court challenges that ironically why American’s public school is not able to meet or exceed higher standards as justified.

In the United States, education funding is exceptionally unbalanced. Currently within the United States, primary and secondary schooling is funded predominantly by local property and personal tax. While the majority of citizens believe that education funding needs to be reformed, some individuals believe that public schools are funded fairly based on property and personal tax, that education should be based on the status and personal tax that a person and community pays. Every year, approximately 1.15 trillion dollars was used for kindergarten through college education funding within the United States. The Federal Government provides on average 10.8 percent of the 1.15 trillion dollars spent on education

We found that fewer than 10 percent of non-poor students were enrolled in low-spending districts in every year since 1994-95, a rate 1 to 3 percentage points lower than the comparable rate for non-poor students in every year. The share of low-income students attending (relatively) poorly funded districts has not changed much over the past 20 years. State funding levels are about 10 percentage points higher for poor students than non-poor students, and local funding is about 15 percent

The gap between rich and poor communities have only grown over the years. This is more noticeable now than ever before and can be seen very clearly in The United States education system. A closer look at it will show an immense difference in terms of resources between wealthy and financially disabled schools. In 2001, President George W. Bush, signed the No Child Left Behind Act to assure “every child receive a first-class education in America” (Porter). Although he had good intention, The United States remains to be one of the few developing nations that gives more resources to school with privilege students (Porter). In particular, the New York State education system is biased and in favored of rich communities and often harms the underserved,

If money were the solution, the problem would already be solved. Total expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools in the United States in 2013-14 amounted to $634 billion, or $12,509 per public school student enrolled (NCES, 2017); however, according to the Nation’s Report Card, there isn't a link between spending and student achievement.

It is just as important for students who are ready to take on additional academic challenges should have the opportunity to excel, while those who are historically underserved to deserve the extra time and attention that they needed for untroubled problems. “No teacher should have to worry about not being able to provide the most basic resources for their students”(NY Times). This shows that teacher who are having less resources will not be given the proper education to their students like other children who are capable of having enough resources. “However, I do believe that increased funding for high-quality resources, mental health services for at-risk students, and continued teacher development would absolutely improve urban education”(NY Times). Having to work together as a school, community to get better resources will better the students and be able to have a metabolism to love learning and to keep doing on what they do. Being able to have funding for schools are giving the chance for students to have more resources and for not having the risk of them dropping out of school. “A classroom of 35-plus students without books is hardly a learning environment, especially when compared to suburban and private schools where the average class size is 20 students and resources are plentiful”(NY Times). Seeing how many school environments do not have the resources they need they are mostly compared with those who have enough money to pay for supplies such as books, notebooks, technology, etc. students should have the ability to be provided with the same level of education and supplies to get a understanding of the

There has been much debate on whether funding and school resources contribute to high levels of academic achievement in schools. “Unfortunately, it has proven difficult to determine the relation between school expenditures (the things money may buy) and student achievement” (Greenwald, Hedges, & Laine, 1996). As a result, it can be argued that this has led to many viewpoints on the topic.

The sad reality of it all is that gross funding inequities continue to persist in the U.S and no one seems to be working steadily to rid this problem. When putting funding into education equity should be focused on rather than equality. According to the National Report card there are core fairness principles that must be followed to maintain equal opportunity. The 3rd principle states that the level of funding in a district should increase relative to the level of concentrated student poverty rate. Therefore state finance systems should provide more funding to districts serving larger share of students in poverty (Is School Funding Fair? 7). Examining the school district of Philadelphia one could see that this principle is not being followed. The No Child Left Behind Act was created in 2001 to ensure that no later than 12 years after 2001 (2013) all students will meet the states standards. The act

In today’s economic environment even the wealthiest states and districts are having to cut funding for education, while districts which were already teetering on the edge are now in an even worse position. In some schools children have to face not having enough books, paper for copies, severe overcrowding,