Why Funding For Public Education

Education is an integral part of society, School helps children learn social norms as well as teach them to be successful adults. The school systems in United States, however are failing their students. In the world as a whole, the United States is quickly falling behind other countries in important math and reading scores. The United States ranked thirtieth in math on a global scale and twentieth in literacy. This is even more true in more urban, lower socio-economic areas in the United States. In West Trenton Central High School was only 83% proficiency in literacy and only 49% of the students were proficient in math. These school have lower test scores and high dropout rates. Many of these students come from minority backgrounds and are often form low income families. There are many issues surrounding these urban schools. There is a severe lack of proper funding in these districts, and much of the money they do receive is sanctioned for non-crucial things. Schools also need a certain level of individualization with their students, and in many urban classes, this simply does not happen. While there are many factors affecting the low performance of urban schools, the lack of proper funding and distribution of funds, the cultural divide between teachers and students in urban districts, along with the lack of individualization in urban classrooms are crucial factors to explain the poor performance in these districts. Through a process of teacher lead budget committees and

Schools lacking social utilities that are needed to promote the academic status of its students is an issue. Whether these utilities should be kept opened or closed is widely debated in most communities. The condition of such schools is an important issue because it determines the future of its students academically. Some issues facing schools include social, public and economical issues; this essay will consider arguments concerning the social, public and economical causes of this problem through the use of Jonathan Kozol's "TITLE OF ARTICLE", as well as the discussion of the reasons why some schools do not receive sufficient funds to care for public schools.

One of the greatest differences among public schools is the funding they receive. Public schools across the country have incredibly varied amounts of capital dedicated to them which in turn leads to a disparity in the quality of education a student will receive at these schools. The race of a student, the location they live in, and the wealth of their family greatly correlate to the level of education they will receive. As Harvard professor Jennifer L. Hochschild notes, “Districts with a lot of poor students have lower average test scores and higher dropout rates...The highest spending districts report high test scores, and some of the lowest spending districts report the lowest test scores” (“Social Class in Public Schools.”). The students who attend schools that receive less funding typically obtain an education that is lesser in comparison to schools that receive more money. The inequality in funding within a state has a severe impact on the variation of education quality. In the case of Connecticut, “The district that spends the most provides almost twice as much per student as the district that spends the least” (“Social Class in Public Schools.”). As a result, the schools that receive less funding work with more outdated textbooks and equipment, while schools with more funding can afford to buy new equipment and provide a better environment for the

The United States has many conflicts, one of them is funding on public education. Despite the fact that funding on public education will not help students succeed academically with the money provided to the schools, every school deserves to get as much money because students will receive more proper education and will be more successful students in the future.

“Education is a major driver of development and is a strong instrument for reducing poverty, improving health, gender equality, peace, and stability” (The World Bank) - so why is it that students are often deprived from an extensive education? In Illinois, education funding has been an ongoing problem. Funding for schools is based on the property taxes where the schools are located, causing those who live in lower socioeconomic areas to receive less educational funding. This is unfair because children who live in lower socioeconomic areas are not able to receive the same opportunities and benefits that are acquired when a quality education is obtained. This is why educational funding in Illinois should be distributed evenly so that every

The resources available to an urban, lower income school are to be equal to those available to a suburban, higher income school. Two schools in New York, one from a wealthy school district and one from a poor district, were given computers. The State provided the same number of computers to each school, therefore claiming to evenly supporting each school. However, the school with the poorer children had a larger number of students; the nicer school had twice the number of computers in proportion to the number of their students (Kozol 84). It seems that the biggest factor keeping the children of lower income homes behind is the school funding available. The poorer school district does not have the money to spend on the things a wealthier district may, but there is no real evidence that spending money makes much difference in the outcome of a child's education. In many cases, family and background have a greater influence on how well a child does in school (Kozol 176-77). Richard Kahlenberg, a member of the Century Foundation, says, "Research findings and common sense tell us that the people who make up a school—the students, parents, and teachers—matter more (Lewis 648)

Public school funding is unfair and unequal in most states. However, more concerning is out of the 49 million children in public schools, students living in poverty are affected the most. There are wide disparities in the amount spent on public education across the country, from a high of $18,507 per pupil in New York, to a low of $6,369 in Idaho (Baker, Sciarra, & Farrie, 2015). The question that all stakeholders should be asking is school funding fair?

With the many diverse characteristics of the Unites States, perhaps the most troubling is the rising gap in the distribution of wealth. As the wealth gap in the United States rises exponentially, the gap in the quality of public schooling rises with it. For a country that prides itself in prestigious outlets of education, the system of public schooling seems to be miserably failing. Public education, a system that some fight to destroy while others fight to preserve, is perhaps the only source of academic opportunity for many individuals living in this country. The fact that someone can live in a certain area and receive a higher quality of public education than someone else living in a different area in the same country—even in the same state—is a problem that should not trouble a ‘progressive’ democratic society. Unfortunately, areas of lower socioeconomic status receive much less funding than areas of higher socioeconomic status, where property taxes account for 45% of funding in public school districts. Naturally, the impoverished residents of poor neighborhoods pay a harsh price in this situation, sending their children to an underfunded school with little to no resources, where sometimes teachers must supply the classroom from their own pocket. As Rogerson and Fernandez note, “a system that allows the accidents of geography and birth to determine the quality of education received by an individual is inimical to the idea of equal opportunity in the marketplace”

In 1998, for example, the state with the highest average level of public school funding was New Jersey, with an annual funding rate of $8,801 per student, whereas the state with the lowest average level was Utah, with a yearly rate of $3,804 per student. This means that the typical student attending a public school in New Jersey was provided more than twice the fiscal resources allocated to his or her counterpart in Utah. Disparities in per-student funding levels are actually greater within some states than among states as a group. To illustrate, in 1998, public school districts in Alaska that were ranked at the 95th percentile for per-student

Education is the foundation of a person’s success and way of life. Graduating from school is important not only for an individual, but it helps the local and national economy. A study by the Alliance for Excellent Education shows that with higher graduation rates among high school students, the economies of cities, states, and of the country would increase (Rollins). Compared to the rest of the world, the United States spends a large amount of money on education (U.S. Education). While many may think this sufficient, Professor Bruce Baker discusses the correlation between supporting schools with federal funding and the success of students, “When schools have more money, they have greater opportunity to spend productively. When they don’t, they can’t” (ii, Baker). If students are to graduate and contribute to the boost of economies, education must be the forefront of federal funding.

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.

Public education is under funded, especially in the state of Alabama. I attended public school in the state of Alabama and I experienced this first hand in my elementary and high school classrooms. Low funds for the arts department and many basic school necessities are just some of the areas that are affected by the low funding. In the 2012-2013 school years, Alabama had over 744,637 students enrolled in a total of 1,637 schools. Alabama’s school funding has gone down 14% since 2008. Many school systems have to spend additional money from local revenue on top of what the state provides because it is not enough. Alabama public schools are under funded and it is a problem that is affecting classrooms across the

Mike Stenhouse’s article on educational choice for students and their families, brings up many marks about providing the choice of education for all families, not solely based on the zip code they reside in or the family's income. Generally speaking, providing choice education for all families no matter their income, zip code, family size, or any other attributes, sounds great. However, doing so would simply not work. The reason providing the same level of education for students wouldn’t work is simply because of money. Money may not seem major while discussing the topic on education for everyone, however it is. The reason some schools have exceptional education above others is because of the teachers, professors, and other staff members. The

But what fundamental necessities do rich schools posses that money could provide for poor schools? Besides the obvious needs of the extremely needy schools: repairs to the building (proper plumbing, roofing and walls to name a few) and basic supplies (such as books, paper, computers and laboratory tools), the school also needs money in less obvious areas. With more money at its disposal a school can purchase more space and teachers. It has been proven that students learn better (and teachers can teach better) when the class size is limited to under twenty-four. This is not possible without financing for a larger school and more teachers to accommodate all the students. A school with larger funds also has the capability to choose better administrators and faculty from a greater selection (they are not limited to those applicants in lower pay brackets). In the case of a Canton Middle School in Baltimore an excellent principle made all the difference. He even made the news, for TIME magazine wrote that "One man gets the credit for Canton's current condition: school principle Craig Spilman ... Last month, for example, Canton reported that its students had tripled the rate at which they passed a battery of state school-performance tests" (TIME 1997).

We have seen the economy suffer due to financial problems over the last couple of years. The financial struggles are affecting more than just the citizens of the United States but also the Public School system. “Americans have seen the economy slow significantly. Over the past 10 years, the unemployment rate has more than doubled” (Sherk). “Many states reported limited and diminishing funds for public schools as a result” (Hungerford and Wassmer). The lack of funding for public schools are requiring schools to redo there education systems, and causing them to change curriculum. The schools are trying to keep a well-rounded educations but are having a hard time keeping everything that they have had before. They are playing the which class should we cut game and they all are deciding to keep the usual English, Math, Science and of course History. But, they are cutting the music education program that has huge impacts on the students. Some schools are offering a small amount of music class but most of them ended up cutting all of them as a whole. Music is not a cheap program for students to get involved in they have to purchase their own instruments and supplies such as books, music and other supplies. When schools had budgets for their music education they supplied most of the tools needed for the students needed to succeed. Now that there is no money in schools are relying on private donors. If a school still does not have enough money they are making students either pay a