School Funding as a Distraction

Supporters and critics of the public school system have one thing in common, a heavy emphasis on money.

         Of course their approaches differ. 

         For the supporters there is no such thing as enough money. As has been pointed out before, those arguing for more money for the schools never say how much is enough or note that the nearly 15,000 school districts in the United States range in annual per student spending from less than $10,000 per year to more than $45,000 (that's not a misprint). Several districts spend more than $30,000 per year per student.

         To paraphrase President John F. Kennedy, The public school establishment is prepared to have the general public "pay any price and bear any burden" rather than change the way schools function. Or, like Peggy Lee, they might sing, "All I want is all there is and then some."

         Yet, as Joel I. Klein, Chancellor of the public schools in New York City, the nation's largest district by far, has said three years ago, "Public education in large urban areas in the United States has failed...New York City is actually one of the best urban school systems in the United States, but by any measure, I guarantee you that at least half, probably more than half, of our students are not remotely getting the education they deserve."
 
         This writer first entered a classroom as a teacher nearly 50 years ago, and even at that time the need for more money was a common theme.  Even adjusted for inflation spending in those days was very low.  Starting salaries for teachers, for example, were often in the $3,000 range, give or take a few hundred dollars.  Today they are closer to  ten times as much.  Those are current dollars.  In constant dollars, allowing for inflation, gains have been made but the more money arguments go on.

         More than thirty years ago, in 1972, Robert J. Braun, in his book Teachers and Power, The Story of the American Federation of Teachers, suggested that, "The idea that the public schools ever will be granted the funds they need is at once a self-contradiction–the schools always could use more money–and a flight of unreality which, sadly, reflects on the ability of the beholder to reason properly."  P. 229, NY:  Simon & Schuster, 1972

         True then.  True now.

         However, the critics of the public schools have done no better.  In fact, they have not done as well.  At least the school advocates have seen increased funding over the years.

         The taxpayers, or taxpayer groups, on the other hand, have fought a losing battle.  It is possible that spending might be even higher if they had remained silent.  We'll never know.  But it's clear they have not succeeded in reducing the spending, whether measured in current or constant dollars.  So, as Braun might say, they, too, seem to lack the ability "to reason properly."

         So where's the distraction?

         It's that the constant stress on money draws attention away from educational issues and places first the issue that arguably should be last.

         In simplistic terms for reasons of space, a rational approach would be:

         First consider what education is to do. This involves many details such as what is appropriate at what age. 

         Next, consider how to do it, which doesn't necessarily involve conventional schools, and certainly doesn't equate a school with a building, or vice versa, as some districts have come to realize.  One four story building that was a school in New York City, for example, not only was transformed into four schools, one for each floor, but each school is different. 

         Such advance planning will provide a rationale for what the system might cost. 

         Only then should the decisions be made as to how the necessary money will be raised.

         It's true that there are scholars, researchers, and think tanks actively considering these questions.  But there has been little involvement with, or impact on, the general public, the three million public school teachers and the millions of other school staff.

         It's easier to develop alternatives, such as charter schools.  Which is why other options are growing.