Latest Paper Focuses on School Finance Policy and Civil Rights

By Amanda Nelson 

LEXINGTON, Ky. (July 8, 2022) — A newly published analysis of how dollars are distributed to schools in the U.S. posits that funding allocation models continue to disadvantage those in low-income communities, despite long-standing evidence that equitable funding is critical to students’ capacity to learn and achieve. 

An Opportunity to Learn: Engaging in the Praxis of School Finance Policy and Civil Rights, authored by University of Kentucky College of Education Dean Julian Vasquez Heilig, Ph.D., and Davíd G. Martínez, Ph.D., an assistant professor at the University of South Carolina, appears in the latest issue of the Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality.

Due to the reliance on local property values to fund schools, property poor districts are prevented from increasing or equalizing school revenue to the level of wealthier districts. This poverty is unequally distributed across racial and ethnic backgrounds. Recent peer-reviewed research has shown that in gentrifying urban communities, as the proportional intensity of white students increases in schools, so do the resulting resources and demands for schools, the authors write. 

“Education is a human right and a civil right, but our school finance policies are failing to treat it as such,” Martínez said. “Access to quality education is necessary for communities to thrive. When there are major educational disparities that exist between communities, it impacts everyone. This is demonstrably true if those educational disparities are predicated on community wealth, or race and ethnicity. Policy makers must do more to understand the history of school finance disparity in their community, and take steps to ameliorate its impact.” 

Martínez and Vasquez Heilig say in their analysis that, despite countless attempts to reform school finance policy, the U.S. has historically been unable to improve school funding inequity and injustice. Without creating a more equitable system, resolving challenges for marginalized students will continue to be difficult. 

“We looked at numerous studies showing increases in funding resulted in greater academic success for marginalized students. For instance, when more resources were put into majority LatinX urban schools, reading and math achievements increased,” Vasquez Heilig said. “Quite simply, money does matter and investing in education early and often matters in the everyday life of a student.” 

The authors suggest federal policymakers adopt a framework known as Opportunity to Learn that would put in place a set of minimum standards for equitable learning in U.S. schools. These standards would include well-trained and certified teachers and administrators, timely curriculum and texts, up-to-date facilities and wrap-around services to support neuro-divergent learners and the health, nutrition, housing and family wellness of studentsAs a civil right, the authors argue for complete and differentiated levels of service for every student and funding that allows for the provision of those services. 

After these standards for learning are set, it would enable state policymakers to raise revenue to proper levels of fiscal support for meeting the standards. The authors say this model deviates from past school reform and finance models that have focused on test scores and the need for increased student achievement. They, instead, support a model where success is determined by how policymakers are supporting high-quality educational access and availability in every community, promoting alternatives to the historical resource disparity that has oppressed BIPOC students and families. 

“Ultimately, as a civil right, we need to support students through the P-20 pipeline, which includes high school completion and earnings later in life, with the ultimate goal of reducing adult poverty,” Vasquez Heilig said.  

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Want to know about Cloaking Inequity’s freshly pressed conversations about educational policy? Click the “Follow blog by email” button on the home page.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

Billions are headed to your state and local schools

Billions are about to flow from the Biden administration’s American Rescue Plan to state education agencies and local school districts. Huge increases to Title I are also on the horizon. NOW is the time to be vigilant. Please be sure that communities of color and historically marginalized students in your community benefit. NOW is the time to act. 

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Check out and follow my YouTube channel here.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

Diane Ravitch in conversation with Julian Vasquez Heilig

Last night I had a chance to sit down with Diane Ravitch on Zoom and discuss what should be next for the US public education system.

A ponderous Diane Ravitch

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Check out and follow my YouTube channel here.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

The Real Scandal Over Buying an Education

The recent college admissions scandal reaffirms that in the United States you can buy better education—legally and illegally.

While financial resources and a better education share an obvious connection, for decades a small but powerful cadre of researchers has argued that money doesn’t matter for educational success. This trope has been music to the fiscal conservatives’ ears. The usual suspects pulled in to testify against funding increases for public education include Eric Hanushek from the conservative Hoover Institute at Stanford. Hanushek has served as an expert witness in state school finance lawsuits, for example, arguing that money makes no difference in improving outcomes and opportunities.

But momentum is growing to change the conversation about school finance in American education. A recent report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that protests by teachers and others last year helped lead to substantial increases in school funding, although that funding increases may be short lived, and are still well below 2008 spending levels. In Texas, which leads the nation in the post-recession school finance spending gap, general education funding is a full 20 percent below where it stood in 2008.

Predominantly white school districts receive $23 billion more than predominantly non-white districts—an average of $2,200 per student.

Research is catching up to what is not exactly a well-kept secret: the nicer house an American family can buy, the better public school that family will have access to. While conservative politicians and a group of influential researchers were claiming that money didn’t matter for educational success, in practice, states spent less on the education of poor and minority students on purpose, while the wealthy enjoyed better-funded schools.

recent study by the nonprofit EdBuild found that predominantly white school districts receive $23 billion more than predominantly non-white districts—that’s an average of $2,200 per student. Wealthy districts have even grabbed 20 percent of the Title I funds that were meant for low-income districts.

The implications of these cuts are lifelong for the students. A groundbreaking 2016 Northwestern study on school spending and student outcomes found that low-income children whose schools received a 10 percent increase in per pupil spending each year for all twelve years of public school had a higher school completion rate, and that students earned 7 percent higher wages once they’d joined the workforce, and experienced a reduction in the incidence of adult poverty. They also determined that funding increases have a more pronounced positive impact for children from low-income families. The increased funding, according to the study, was associated with reduced student-to-teacher ratios, increased teacher salaries, and more extended academic semesters.

The education policy discourse in the Trump era has been focused on empowering school choice while remaining silent about the intentional inequality of financial resources that plagues low-income schools in the United States. Now, at least, the latest research reveals the inequality and the positive impacts of properly funding schools.

The wealthy have had too much influence and have stacked the deck against low-income districts, schools, and students. We must substantially change the political conversation about education policy away from school choice to resource inequality if we are to offer a quality education to every student in the United States.

This article appeared here in The Progressive magazine. For all of my articles in the The Progressive, click here.

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Check out and follow my YouTube channel here.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

 

A New Approach to Remedy Education Inequity?: Opportunity to Learn (OTL) “State Minimums” for School Finance

In my recent School Law and Policy course at California State University Sacramento, I challenged my EDD students to work with me to detail a new input orientation, empirically-based idea for school finance based on Opportunity to Learn (OTL) “state minimums.” I believe that we have come up with a jumping off point for a promising approach to thinking about the ingredients necessary to improve student success and address longstanding inequality in US schools.

Revisiting Opportunity to Learn (OTL) is potentially a vehicle to remake the US educational system. OTL is a way of measuring and reporting whether students from all economic backgrounds have access to the different ingredients that make quality schools. Derek W. Black, Law Professor at the University of South Carolina, related in his book Education Law: Equality, Fairness, and Reform that core opportunities to learn include high quality Early Childhood Education, highly effective teachers, and a broad college bound curriculum designed to prepare all students to participate effectively in the US democracy.

OTL matters because learning is essential to the economy and the nation as a whole. However, some districts and schools provide students with greater opportunities to learn while others offer less opportunities. In essence, OTL is not equally distributed throughout the US. Many districts and schools have trouble meeting basic OTL standards. For example, decades of research has demonstrated that schools with the highest numbers of Latino/a and African American students enrolled often have textbook shortages and the lowest levels of qualified teachers. Because there are persisting learning opportunity disparities at the state, district and school-level, it is imperative that national OTL standards be implemented.

The 1994 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) included OTL standards, but they were voluntary and vague. The states could reject the national standards and implement their own. While OTL standards were voluntary, the 1990s saw a the rise of academic standards linked to codified high-stakes testing and accountability formulas. 

During the NCLB-era, high-stakes testing and accountability proponents posited that the US could test its way to closing achievement gaps. What the testing regimes underscored was the vast difference in students success relative to students race/ethnicity and socio-economic status. Research has long shown the impact of poverty on children’s readiness for learning is profound. The poverty rate among children is not random but is unequally distributed across racial/ethnic backgrounds. To improve learning opportunities for disadvantaged children and substantially improve their educational outcomes, a proactive national policy agenda must focus on ensuring the coordinated provision of opportunities in a broad range of equity areas, including not only qualified teachers, up-to-date textbooks, adequate facilities, and other aspects of K-12 education, but also in regard to areas like health, nutrition, housing, and family supportBy developing and implementing OTL national standards, the policymaking community will help students, parents, communities, and school officials discover and correct disparities—especially as it relates to poverty—in schools. Having national OTL minimum standards would ensure that all school officials across the country are accountable for the educational inputs.

In most states, insurance (car, home, etc.) is governed by state minimums for each policyholder. The core of this approach from insurance laws undergirds the OTL state minimums approach—essentially, based on the OTL literature, we seek to develop state minimums for inputs across a variety of priorities. School funding should be input oriented, working forward from the ingredients necessary for student success instead of backwards from legislative whims. Once these minimums categories are established, it can then be determined what minimum level is allowable for every school. Then, districts and the state would be held accountable for providing the minimum OTL state minimum standards in each school. Districts and schools could of course go above the guaranteed minimums, but they must provide at least the minimums. As a result, this proposal is a first take to detail potential OTL state minimum standards which would then underpin school finance conversations.

Table. 1 Overview of Opportunity to Learn (OTL) “State Minimums” Targets

Targets
A. School Climate 

  • Yearly measurement of climate and safety (students, teachers, administrators, and parents)
  • Yearly measurement of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (students, teachers, administrators, and parents)
  • Strategic school climate plan
B. Parent and Community Involvement 

  • Parent liaison
  • Communication system
  • Parent advisory committee
  • Parent development opportunities
C. Assessment and Evaluation 

  • Accreditation
  • Parent and community reporting
  • Strategic plan (i.e. LCAP)
D. Teacher Quality 

  • Professional development, induction and mentoring
  • Staffing strategies (recruitment and retention)
  • Qualifications (credentials, knowledge, and experience)
E. Administrative Quality

  • Credentialed
  • Yearly measurement of quality (students, teachers, and parents)
  • Cross-site mentorship
F. Curriculum and Instruction

  • Articulated career and college pathways
  • STEAM opportunities
  • Visual and Performing Arts Electives
  • Ethnic studies
  • Foreign language
  • Secondary dual enrollment
G. Transportation, Facilities and Maintenance

  • Well-maintained
  • Yearly measurement of good repair (students, teachers, administrators and parents)
  • Integrated technology
  • Transportation
H. Wrap Around Services 

  • Counselors
  • Academic Coaches
  • Health and Wellness Services (i.e. nurses, mental health)
I. Extra and Co-Curricular Opportunities 

  • Athletics
  • Community volunteerism
  • Student government, clubs and other activities

School Climate

School climate includes safety as one of the dimensions for creating a sheltered environment. Maslow (1943) indicated that feeling safe—socially, emotionally, intellectually and physically—is a fundamental human need. Additionally, feeling safe in school promotes student learning and healthy development (Devine & Cohen, 2007). There are multiple conducts of safety, one being rules and norms. School with set discipline guidelines and enforcement have a lower rate of violence (Payne, & Gottfredson, 2005). This fact leads to an increase in the positive climate of a school. Another form of safety is school space. The quality of school facilities has been found to positively affect student achievement (Uline & Tschannen-Moran, 2008). Moreover, variables such as classroom layout, activity schedules and student-teacher interactions can influence student behaviors and the feelings of safety. In sum, a positive school climate promotes cooperative learning, group cohesion, respect and mutual trust, which directly improves the learning environment.

Parent and Community Involvement

Family and community engagement has a positive influence on student achievement and behavior. Research has found that schools with family and community partnerships are more successful in improving students’ academic achievement and their college and career readiness compared to schools that do not engage families and community. The positive influence of school practices to engage families is greatest for low-income children; in fact, the disparity between middle- and low-income families’ readiness to work effectively with schools contributes to the achievement gap.

Assessment and Evaluation

Accreditation serves to establish trust in the quality of public schools. Accreditation criteria often include defining clear educational missions and goals, systems and resources to achieve objectives, and processes  to ensure continuous improvement. These criteria empower educators to reflect upon their current practices and engage in innovation. Consequently, it is vital that all schools undergo accreditation and develop a plan for meeting accreditation standards. In the process of preparing for accreditation, schools should engage their local community members. Inviting the community to visit and observe the school will promote transparency and establish a network through which information can be developed and shared. Studies have suggested that increasing community involvement improves educational outcomes for students. The data gathered through accreditation and the information shared by the community will prepare schools to develop relevant and applied strategic plans. Schools should be allowed freedom to allocate resources to address identified areas for improvement while maintaining existing services. A system of local control will promote ownership of the accreditation process.

Teacher Quality 

Students’ opportunity to learn depends on many factors one of which is teachers’ quality. As for college degrees and subject-matter knowledge, research has shown that teachers’ subject-matter knowledge association with student achievement varied by grade level. Furthermore, not only teachers’ experience with years affect student’s learning positively, but also teachers’ ability to motivate their students and to manage their classrooms improves with time resulting in better students’ attendance and in a decrease in the number of students’ violations to school rulesAfter the passage of NCLB, districts have hired of hundreds of thousands more teachers on emergency permits without quality preparation (or no preparation at all) in high- minority and high poverty schools which has negatively impacted students’ opportunity to learn and increased the achievement gap between them and their more affluent peers.

Administrative Quality

Today, school administrators are expected to do more than just leading the school. An administrator is expected to not only be a school leader but also a student advocate, a social worker, a community activist, a conflict manager, while simultaneously fostering student achievement. As a result, in order to improve educational outcomes, it is vital that school administrators be trained and provided mentorship to become skilled in their job duties. An administrative credential should be a requirement for all school administrators.  A credential ensures that the person in charge of a school site has met certain requirements in order to lead. The ability to gain a credential is not just completing a check-list. A credential is one tool to build the capacity of leaders. For example, administrators should be able to expertly demonstrate the skills outlined in the California Administrator Performance Expectations will improve teaching and learning for all students.

Curriculum and Instruction

Curriculum and Instruction  defines the content and pedagogical practices that each school will include to ensure equity in the quality of education that every student will experience. All students will be provided with seven primary components in addition to core content instruction. This will require the inclusion of ethnic studies, foreign language, visual and performing arts, Science Technology Engineering Arts and MATH (STEAM), Career Technical Education (CTE), articulated career and college ready pathways, and secondary dual enrollment. Just as the currently adopted Common Core State Standards (CCSS) add to the linguistic and academic development from year to year, the C & I state minimums will include progressing stages across the grade-levels.

Transportation, Facilities and Maintenance

There is little doubt that school transportation improves the school attendance rate and academic performance. A recent research by UC Santa Barbara professor Michael Gottfried shows the effect of school bus transportation on chronic absenteeism, in some cases a 20 percent increase in attendance. The state should provide free of charge transportation to all students.  Good facilities maintenance cost money in the short-run and save money in the long-run. Facilities maintenance produces savings by:  (1) Decreasing equipment replacement costs over time, (2) Decreasing renovation costs because fewer large-scale repair jobs are needed, and (3) Decreasing overhead costs (such as utility bills) because of increased system efficiency. The state should guarantee all public schools well-maintained facilities and increase spending for school facilities as highlighted in the research report that 80% of students attend districts that are failing to meet minimum industry standards due to lack of spending.

Career Ready and College Pathways

Guarantee all students will have access to well articulated pathways that will prepare them to succeed in  the job market, college or university. Strive to develop internship opportunities with industry and dual-enrollment opportunities with local colleges and universities.

Wrap-Around Services

Critical to student success is the school’s provision of  Socio-emotional Learning services beyond the classroom. It is important that specialized support is given as students face barriers to learning in achieving their educational goals.  Counseling, academic coaching, as well as health and wellness services are wrap-around support that contribute to students’ academic, health and well-being. One-on-one interaction of student with academic coach to focus on strengths, goals, study skills, and school engagement would encourage the student to stay on the path of learning. Counselors on the other hand can guide the students choose relevant courses that affect their life options after graduation. Additionally, health and wellness services staff, which consist of nurses and mental health professionals, ensures that students have access to the physical, emotional and psychological care to function effectively in and out of the classroom.  These wrap-around services iwork hand-in-hand with instructional services to ensure students achieve academic success.

Extra and Co-Curricular Opportunities

Extracurricular activities offer extensive benefits for students. Studies show that participation in extracurricular activities is associated with positive youth outcomes, including higher education attainment and greater future earnings. These opportunities are especially vital for youth from immigrant backgrounds, as they help to build peer relationships and academic motivation.  Maintaining diverse extracurricular offerings within schools will increase accessibility and inclusion for students. Schools should offer a range of athletic, social, and academic extracurricular options. Inviting community members to participate in the leadership and implementation of these offerings will also help to establish a community which prioritizes civic engagement.

Conclusion

High-stakes testing, accountability and the academic standards linked to them have been the primary focus of education reform for the past two decades. Such reforms have done little to address inequities within our educational system— in fact, it can be argued that they have purposefully ignored resource disparities. It is time to move away from reforms that are uni-directional accountability, primarily placing the burden of achievement upon students and educators. We need to focus our attention on creating OTL that will promote student growth and success an create bi-directional accountability that will also extend the press of accountability to policymakers to provision the resources necessary to provide OTL minimum standards.

In summary, Opportunity to Learn standards will establish equitable conditions for all students by outlining key elements and core values that every neighborhood public school should possess to promote student learning and success such as School Climate, Parent and Community Involvement, Assessment and Evaluation, Teacher Quality, Administrative Quality, Curriculum and Instruction, Facilities and Maintenance, Wrap Around Services, and Extra and Co-Curricular Opportunities. The OTL minimum standards reflect education research and proven practices; they evidence a commitment to equity and inclusion as integrative components in advancing student success.

So now, just as I did with the community-based accountability idea five years ago, I am handing off the OTL “state minimums” idea to the policy community to ponder, revise and potentially implement to create more equity in our nation’s schools.

I was honored to work on this project with my California State University Sacramento EDD student co-authors. Here they are in alphabetical order:

 

Sandra Ayón

Zeeshan Ayub

Pete Benitti

Karen Bridges

Suzie Dollesin

Fred Evangelisti

Thomas Herman

Matt Kronzer

Ikbal Nourddine

Rochelle A. Perez

Theresa G. Reed

Irit Winston