How the Public School Funding System Leads to Educational Disparities
Education teaches children to analyze situations, think critically and conceptually, and take on the world. Despite its importance, there is a substantial difference in the quality of education that low-income and high-income students receive. A lack of proper education is linked to higher crime rates and welfare dependency, and now the economy is unable to absorb large amounts of unskilled workers at a decent wage. Providing children equal opportunities to reach their potential will improve quality of life, pave the path for problem-solving and innovation, and open doors to the goals they want to achieve.
Differences in Public School Funding and Why its Like This
The concentration of students in high poverty schools results in an unequal education and a significant disadvantage to many impoverished families. There is a large achievement gap between the wealthy and the poor, and it is only increasing. The poorest 25% of school districts received 15.6% less funding per student from state and local governments compared to the richest 25% of school districts in 2011-2012. This equates to an average funding gap of about $1,500 per student, which is a jump of 44% from 2001-2002. Additionally, data from 2016 shows that more minority students usually attend high poverty schools, with the highest number being 45% for Hispanic students, followed by 44% for African American students, 38% for Native American American students, and only 8% for White students.
An example of the drastic funding differences between schools can be seen in areas of Pennsylvania. Lower Merion School District spent $23,676 per student in 2015 while Philadelphia City School District spent $10,874 per student. This is less than half the amount Lower Merion spent on its students. When comparing the two areas, Lower Merion is a wealthy suburban township while Philadelphia is one of the poorest cities in the U.S., with a poverty rate of 24.9% compared to the nation’s rate of 11.8%. In general, Pennsylvania faces one of the greatest inequities because there is a 33% difference in spending between the highest poverty districts and the lowest poverty districts.
The question that remains to be answered is: what is the cause of this inequality? According to the most updated data, federal sources provide only 8% of the funding for public schools, while 47% comes from the state and 45% comes from local sources. Property taxes from local sources are critical for providing funding and this is why we see such significant differences in education in wealthier versus impoverished communities. Almost half of the property taxes collected go towards financing public elementary and secondary schools.
Property value is higher in wealthy neighborhoods and therefore tax revenue is also higher despite the same tax rate as other neighborhoods. Furthermore, suburbanization, the migration of the middle class to suburban areas, adds to this problem because urban areas become concentrated with poor individuals and consequently high-poverty schools. As a result, property value decreases in the urban areas and increases in the suburban areas where local governments can passively collect taxes and fund schools for a higher quality education.
Consequences of Funding on Low-Income Schools and Students
Schools receiving low funding are plagued with issues such as poor building conditions, lack of resources and teachers, and low test scores and graduation rates. The United States Commision on Civil Rights published a briefing report outlining what public schools undergo due to insufficient financing. In 2016, appalling conditions such as overcrowded classes, mold, vermin, heating issues, and lack of school supplies drove teachers from Detroit public schools to organize a “sickout.” Problems with facilities and resources not only affects teachers and their ability to teach, but it also impacts the students’ health and their ability to learn. In other schools, teachers have had to use textbooks up to 20 years old, duct tape windows to keep out rain and snow, and use trash cans to collect rain drops seeping through the ceiling.
When it comes to education, students in high-poverty schools are less likely to have advanced classes due to lack of proper teachers or resources. Data shows that while most schools provide algebra and biology, less high-poverty schools offer calculus, physics, and Advanced Placement (AP) courses. Moreover, 21% of high schools, which accounts for about 850,000 students in the U.S., lack access to a counselor who is essential for providing help in both academic and personal areas. The effects of these disparities can be seen in the reading and mathematics test scores of students in elementary and secondary schools. In the most recent reports issued by the U.S. Department of Education, there was an achievement gap of 40 points in mathematics and 31 points in reading between 8th graders in high-poverty and low-poverty schools in 2017. Similar trends were seen in 4th graders and 12th graders with differences in scores ranging from 32 to 36 points. In addition to performing low on standardized tests, these students are more likely to be absent throughout the year, be held back, and graduate late. Less opportunities and a low quality education leads to social reproduction, which means children from impoverished families are trapped in a cycle of poverty as inequality is replicated across generations.
Milwaukee School Teachers and Supporters Protesting Outside of Administration Building
.jpg){kind=link}
Interventions Aimed at Reducing Educational Disparities
Interventions at the state, local, and individual levels are all occurring to improve the condition of students and schools in poor neighborhoods. Litigations have been challenging the current funding system by making claims that extend off of Brown v. Board of Education. In this 1954 court case, the Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional to separate children in public schools due to race and guaranteed children an equal opportunity to education. A group of students and their families in 1971 argued against the California school funding system that relied heavily on property taxes in a case called Serrano v. Priest. Because low-income students were seeing a large disparity in school financing and facing a significant disadvantage, the California Supreme Court found the system to be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Many states are using this basis to fight against the current situation public schools are in. In 1997, Vermont was able to pass a law that authorizes each town to spend the same amount of money per student by pooling revenue and redistributing money to low-income areas.
Various organizations and parents are also taking matters into their own hands. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit organization, advocated for four mothers in Mississippi who observed conditions in their childrens’ schools such as lack of textbooks and teachers, jail-like, dark classrooms with peeling paint and water spots, and lunches with spoiled milk or rotten fruit. Furthermore, there are leaders who go above and beyond to help their school district. Tiffany Anderson is a superintendent of a school district in St. Louis, Missouri who meets with every principal in her district to discuss what they spent money on that month. She takes on the role of crossing guard every morning at one of the schools to save money and has also put donated washing machines in her schools so parents can use them in return for volunteering in a classroom. Universities also step up to help their communities by partnering with local schools. For example, Drexel University in Pennsylvania has a program called the Lindy Scholars Program which allows students to volunteer at local elementary schools to help kids with their homework and strengthen their math and literacy skills. Big Brothers Big Sisters is a program in many communities across the country that matches youth from low-income families with adults and college students who mentor the children and help them with education and avoiding risky behaviors.
Conclusion
High-poverty school districts receive less funding and are able to spend less money per student compared to low-poverty school districts
Local sources provide 45% of the school funding while federal sources contribute only 8%
Low property taxes (local source) in poor neighborhoods result in low funding for schools while high property taxes in wealthier neighborhoods result in higher funding for schools
High-poverty schools have poor facilities and a lack of resources, teachers, and supplies
Students at high-poverty schools have lower math and reading test scores with a difference ranging up to 40 points
Law-suits in some states have succeeded in deeming this system of funding as unconstitutional
Advocacy groups, school district staff, parents, and individuals in the community are all working to fight this disparity
What actions can you take to help?
Learn more about the school district around your area and the quality of education that students receive
Join organizations in your community and volunteer to help kids whether its tutoring or mentoring
Donate supplies to local schools
If you live in a low-income neighborhood and need support, reach out to advocacy groups
If you are student attending an urban school or university, join a program at your school aimed at helping low-income students
For more about COVID-19 and its impact around the world, sign up for our newsletter here