Discuss the perspectives of Coleman and Jencks and Eric Hanushek v. Hedges, Laine and Greenwald. Also, make reference to other cited studies and other researcher contributions to this debate. When considering these perspectives, select one of these two positions MONEY MATTERS (in education and in student performance gains) vs. MONEY DOES NOT MATTER (in education and in student performance gains). In other words, does money have or not have a direct positive effect on schools and student performance? Once you have selected this position, please justify and explain your choice in some detail. (Note that this question shall be the basis of the course’s first evaluative discussion).
The debate on the impact of school funding on student achievement is yet to be exhaustively concluded. The researchers still have to approve that there is linear relationship between school funding and improved student outcomes. Additionally, there have been flaws in the research process including poor research design, data entry errors etc.
Studies by Coleman showed that school funding and quality indicators had little positive effect in overcoming the negative impact of the home environment. In his study he examined factors pertaining racial inequality, quality indicators like qualifications of the teachers, curriculum and test scores all within the context of socio-economic status. Hanushek, argues in his research that increased funding has little impact of school achievement. According to him when schools have increased funding, much of that money goes to things such as increased personnel spending and this would not be expected to improve student outcomes. Hanushek further argues that the evidence supporting smaller class size and qualified teachers is weak. Research conducted by Summers and Wolf, attempted to refute the Coleman report. Summers and Wolf studied 627, 6th grade students in Philadelphia and found that variables such as class size; teacher preparation and other factors positively impact student achievement. In contrast, the research conducted by Hedges, Laine and Greenwald revealed a positive impact of resources on student achievement such as amount spent per pupil, smaller schools and variables such as class-size. Raymond and Hanushek state that researcher bias related to student outcomes is a problem and that new data supports that reforms such as strong accountability systems has proven positively impacting student achievement. Grissmer’s analysis reveals that targeted expenditures can raise achievement scores especially among disadvantaged students.
Money does have an impact on student achievement if it is used wisely. I hold the view that specific expenditures such as improving access to technology; enhancing teacher preparation and emphasizing on professional development activities, smaller classes and smaller schools do have a positive impact on student achievement. Additionally, there should be stricter accountability systems established to monitor rate of progress as well as overall achievement of students. Effective monitoring systems in place schools will be more crucial in monitoring their programs and can make changes and adaptations to enhance student learning.
2Identify and explain the inevitable outcomes when schools received more (or less) money. Defend your explanations.
How much money is enough? No one knows the answer to this question as no district has ever had enough money (Childs and Shakeshaft). Typically when schools have an increase in funding, the result is increased personnel expenditures in the form of more teachers or salary increases and we cannot promise that more teachers or better-paid teachers will lead to improved student outcomes. Yet some of the money would go to other school needs. These needs including improved technology, building repair and maintenance, updated curriculum and other teacher supports. It is not possible to state that these non-personnel expenditures have no positive impact on student achievement. Physical environment is important to staff and student morale and high quality teaching materials enhance student interest in learning.
Some argue that less money should be given to schools because no direct evidence linking spending to student achievement. I think the greater good would be to look at how we are spending our money. There is evidence extravagant spending (at least in my district). Where and how we spend our money matters, simply throwing tax dollars around and asking for more is not good practice. Many people are calling for alternatives to public education because of the belief that money is not spent wisely and their children are not learning. It is incumbent on us as educators and stewards of public monies to use the funds in a thoughtful way that is results driven and targets student learning in meaningful ways.
3.Describe in some detail the structural contributions of public school funding from federal, state, and local governments
The bulk of the school funding come from federal, state and local government, most of the Federal funding comes through discretionary spending set by congress through appropriations. The two biggest programs are NCLB (Title 1 grants) and IDEA (special education grants). The Dept. of Agriculture funds school nutrition programs: the Dept. of Health funds Head Start and the Dept of Labor funds Youth Employment and training programs.
State funding is primarily generated from income and state taxes and distributes it through distribution and level funding procedures they set forth. Most funding formulas are based on the number of students in a district. Some funding formulas are weighted according to such factors as the number of students with disabilities, number of ESL students or the number of students living in poverty. Every state has its own funding formula.
Local funding is generated primarily through property taxes. This can be challenging as areas with wealthier residents and more businesses generate more revenue. Poorer areas may have higher taxes but often generate less revenue.
4.Define the concepts of fundamental right, equal protection, and education articles of state constitutions
Fundamental rights are those rights that belong to all humans-based on set of basic, fundamental or inalienable rights.
Equal Protection- is a clause, part of the 14th amendment to the US constitution. In 1868 the constitution was amended to read that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. All citizens must be treated in the same manner as others in similar situations. Section I clause VII of this amendment prohibits the states from denying equal protection of the law. The law must protect individuals in similar manner under homogeneous conditions and circumstances. ……………………………….. …………………………………(What-else can you write about the concept of equal protection? What clause in the 14th amendment summarizes the concept of ‘equal protection’?)
Education Articles of State Constitutions are the legal guidelines for the provision of education in the state. It addresses all, areas pertaining to education, funding, service provision, in some instances class size, teacher qualification, transportation etc.
5.Explain the legal issues and judicial arguments emphasizing the concepts of FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT and EQUAL PROTECTION behind the rulings of state and federal court cases prior to and including 1973. In particular, explain the significance of the US Supreme Court decision in San Antonio v. Rodriquez.
In the case San Antonio Vs Rodriguez, the plaintiffs charged that the Texas method of school funding violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment by discriminating against the class of poor and therein violated their right to an equal education. The Supreme Court ruled that individual income did not mean that the district was poor. They further ruled that since no child was denied an education, Texas had not created a suspect class related to poverty. They rejected education as a fundamental right as they saw no link between education and other rights in the US Constitution.
6.Starting with the Robinson v. Cahill (1973) case, explain the outcomes of state-based litigation when these cases relied on the legal strategy of using the EDUCATION ARTICLES OF STATE CONSTITUTIONS.
Plaintiffs began to experience success in the area of funding reform beginning with Robinson v Cahill. The NJ Supreme Court overturned the school funding system by using the education articles of the state constitution, which demanded a thorough and efficient system of schools. It ruled that this violate the states equal protection clause because of the lack of equalization in revenues. In the Wyoming case of Washakie, the court agreed with the plaintiff’s argument that equality of education is related to money. This was based on the fact that the state constitution was more demanding than federal equal protection laws. In 1988, the Texas Supreme Court rule in Edgewood that education was a fundamental right. There were challenges Edgewood I, II, and III and the state tried to improve equity and adequacy in school funding by tapping resources from the wealthier states and redistributing it to the poorer districts. The wealthier schools districts sued under West Orange-Cove arguing that the state imposed property tax cap designed to limit funding disparities was unconstitutional. . A trial ruled rule that both the funding system and the property tax cap were unconstitutional. The supreme court ruling on San Antonio vs. Rodriquez that education is not fundamental right was informed by the fact the education was not mention in the federal constitution and education was mention in constitution as part of national culture. The judges informed by this condition declared that during the reinstitution of the 14th amendment education was not declared part of national culture. Texas Supreme Court ruled that education in a fundamental right because Texas State had instituted education reforms on public school system finance. This public spending system sought to provide each child basic minimum education.……………………………………………………………….{ Why did the Texas Supreme Court rule that education was a fundamental right in Edgewood I – III when in fact the Supreme Court rule in San Antonio v. Rodriquez that education did not constitute a fundamental right? This is an important question to establish clarity.}