home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990
/
1990 Time Magazine Compact Almanac, The (1991)(Time).iso
/
time
/
101689
/
10168900.037
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1990-09-19
|
4KB
|
77 lines
EDUCATION, Page 48The Big Shift in School FinanceA Texas case reignites a national debate over funding inequities
Residents of the Edgewood Independent school district, a poor,
largely Hispanic area in west San Antonio, are willing to pay for
good schools. Property taxes are high -- almost $1 per $100 of
assessed valuation. But because the district encompasses part of
a tax-exempt Air Force base and lacks tony subdivisions, the tax
rate translates into $3,596 per student. In the Santa Gertrude
school district, located on the oil-rich King Ranch in south Texas,
property taxes are low -- only 8 cents per $100 of assessed
valuation -- but the total spent per student is $12,000.
Disparities such as these prompted the Texas Supreme Court last
week to declare the state's method of school finance
unconstitutional. In a 9-to-0 decision, the court said the wide
gaps between the richest and the poorest of Texas' 1,071 districts
violate a provision of the state constitution requiring an
"efficient" education. Funneling resources to poorer districts
would reduce some of these differences. But money alone is not
enough. What Texas schools need, said the court, is an overhaul.
"A Band-Aid will not suffice," said Justice Oscar H. Mauzy. "The
system itself must be changed."
The Texas decision, which affects the nation's second largest
school system after California, is sure to breathe new life into
the struggle for more uniform school financing around the country.
But by calling for a basic shift in the way schools operate, the
court changed the terms of the debate, emphasizing that inequities
in funding are linked to inequities in the quality of education.
The decision came less than a week after President George Bush
and the nation's Governors huddled in Charlottesville, Va., for an
education summit that endorsed several of the same ideas -- radical
restructuring of schools and creation of national performance
goals. "The Texas ruling is consistent with the growing national
expectations we are placing on schools," says Robert Berne, an
associate dean at New York University.
The push for uniform goals is relatively recent, however, while
the movement for uniform financing is more than two decades old.
Since 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that equal access to
education is not a fundamental right under the federal
Constitution, at least ten states have seen their school-financing
systems overturned under state-constitution provisions. In June the
Kentucky Supreme Court struck down that state's financing methods,
ordering the legislature not only to equalize spending but also to
reorganize "the whole gamut of the common-school system."
Such moves indicate that the once sacred principle of local
control is rapidly going the way of McGuffey's Reader. "This nation
was intensely committed to the idea that each district should be
run by school boards unrelated to larger national purposes," says
Ernest Boyer, president of the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching. "Now we are moving toward the issue of how
national interests can be served."
Besides addressing broader goals, smoothing out financial
differences could make "choice" -- a policy permitting parents to
move their children from schools they do not like to ones they do
-- more palatable to critics. Until now, the chief complaint has
been that choice encourages parents to abandon poor inner-city
schools. If every school got roughly the same funding, parents
could make judgments based on nonmonetary concerns, and failing
schools would have the resources to improve.
At week's end Texas Governor Bill Clements and other state
leaders were getting ready to appoint a special study group to
prepare proposals for the legislature, which must come up with a
new school-financing plan by May 1, 1990. Everything from a hike
in state sales and tobacco taxes to a first-ever state income tax
is expected to be on the table. Similar cases are pending in
Alaska, Minnesota, North Dakota, Montana, Oregon, Tennessee and New
Jersey. These efforts to equalize spending within states, however,
may be just warm-ups for a far more radical notion: equalizing
spending between states, a move some educators now consider
inevitable.