{"id":50476,"date":"2019-12-18T12:20:30","date_gmt":"2019-12-18T20:20:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/world.edu\/?p=50476"},"modified":"2019-12-18T12:20:30","modified_gmt":"2019-12-18T20:20:30","slug":"democratic-presidential-hopefuls-are-promising-to-ramp-up-funding-for-public-schools","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/world.edu\/democratic-presidential-hopefuls-are-promising-to-ramp-up-funding-for-public-schools\/","title":{"rendered":"Democratic presidential hopefuls are promising to ramp up funding for public schools"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"
\nDemocratic presidential candidates are proposing bold\u00a0new approaches<\/a>\u00a0to the\u00a0federal government\u2019s role<\/a>\u00a0in public education. Former Vice President\u00a0Joe Biden<\/a>, Sen.\u00a0Bernie Sanders<\/a>\u00a0and Sen.\u00a0Cory Booker<\/a>\u00a0want to triple the\u00a0US$15 billion<\/a>\u00a0spent annually on\u00a0Title I<\/a>, a program that sends federal dollars to high-poverty school districts.<\/p>\n

Sen.\u00a0Elizabeth Warren<\/a>\u00a0wants to go further and\u00a0quadruple funding for that same program<\/a>. She also wants to make quality\u00a0child care and preschool<\/a>\u00a0affordable or free for all American families with kids, along with\u00a0free breakfast and lunch<\/a>\u00a0for all public school students.<\/p>\n

Other candidates have similar proposals to substantially increase funding for public education, including former Housing Secretary\u00a0Julian Castro<\/a>, Sen.\u00a0Amy Klobuchar<\/a>\u00a0and Mayor\u00a0Pete Buttigieg<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Funding increases of this scale would transform the\u00a0federal role in education policy<\/a>, making it easier for school districts to\u00a0pay teachers higher wages<\/a>\u00a0while\u00a0reducing class sizes<\/a>. This focus on funding would mark a departure from previous administrations, which instead emphasized policies intended to increase\u00a0accountability<\/a>\u00a0and strengthen\u00a0teacher evaluation<\/a>.<\/p>\n

As a scholar of\u00a0school finance<\/a>, I study the role of resources in schools. The\u00a0research<\/a>\u00a0is clear that\u00a0spending more<\/a>\u00a0on students<\/a>\u00a0over the long haul would bring about\u00a0long-term benefits<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Only 8%<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The federal government spends a total of about\u00a0$55 billion per year on K-12<\/a>\u00a0education, in addition to outlays for\u00a0early childhood<\/a>\u00a0and post-secondary programs like loans and grants for\u00a0college tuition<\/a>. This amounts to around $1,000 per K-12 student and\u00a0just 8%<\/a>\u00a0of the total $700 billion it costs to run the nation\u2019s public schools, which are mostly funded by state and local tax dollars.<\/p>\n

Federal funding has\u00a0never surpassed 10%<\/a>\u00a0of total public school funding, except from 2010 to 2012 when the federal government sought to reduce the\u00a0school spending cuts<\/a>\u00a0brought about during the Great Recession<\/a>.
\n\"\"<\/p>\n

The federal government has historically exerted influence in nonmonetary ways. For example, under the\u00a0No Child Left Behind Act<\/a>\u00a0of 2001, President George W. Bush\u2019s administration relied on standardized tests to hold schools accountable for student achievement. Schools that failed to make yearly progress on test scores faced\u00a0serious repercussions<\/a>, such as replacing the school staff or reopening the school as a charter school.<\/p>\n

President Barack Obama\u2019s Education Department used\u00a0Race to the Top<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 under which states competed for federal grants through a point system \u2013 and\u00a0other initiatives<\/a>\u00a0to get states to adopt a specific set of policies regarding teacher hiring, promotion and dismissal that the Education Department said would help schools employ better teachers overall.<\/p>\n

Obama also signed the\u00a0Every Student Succeeds Act<\/a>\u00a0into law\u00a0in 2015<\/a>. It scaled back many of these policies and returned authority over accountability back to\u00a0individual states<\/a>.<\/p>\n

These initiatives have two things in common. All of them have been longer on mandates than money, and it\u2019s unclear that any have worked. Some\u00a0major studies<\/a>\u00a0failed to find<\/a>\u00a0substantial impacts and educators have\u00a0largely opposed<\/a>\u00a0using student test scores to drive high-stakes staffing decisions.<\/p>\n

Graphic concerns<\/strong><\/h4>\n

One source of opposition to increasing spending on public schools is a\u00a0now<\/a>–infamous<\/a>\u00a0graph<\/a>\u00a0that traces the rise of this spending on a per-student basis over the past 40 years, while test scores have remained stagnant. The juxtaposition of these two trend lines, opponents of higher spending say, suggests that more funding is not the answer.<\/p>\n

Versions of this chart often appear in\u00a0libertarian<\/a>,\u00a0conservative<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0mainstream<\/a>\u00a0outlets.<\/p>\n

Education Secretary\u00a0Betsy DeVos tweeted<\/a>\u00a0a version of the graph and later\u00a0declared<\/a>\u00a0that the \u201cgap between the highest- and lowest-performing students is widening, despite $1 trillion in federal spending over 40 years.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

The Nation\u2019s Report Card shows that test scores continue to stagnate. This is not something we\u2019re going to spend our way out of and not something we\u2019re going to regulate our way out of. #RISE2018<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/H6GHz8YpYg<\/a><\/p>\n

— Secretary Betsy DeVos (@BetsyDeVosED) April 12, 2018<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n