When an Increase Leads to Cuts
Once again, a federal law has been drafted in such a fashion that unintended consequences flow. Because of how dispersal of funds is calculated, some school districts will receive less from the Title I this year than they did last year, even though overall funding has increased.
The New York Times explains that districts with poor children have to have the numbers (based on 2002 census figures) to justify their share of the pot in the No Child Left Behind program. Since poor families frequently move out of districts to find housing in other districts, the 'pool' of poor children shifts around a lot. As a result, the numbers from year to year vary, especially in smaller districts, and so does the funding. Unfortunately, those districts cannot budget accurately for the special programs needed to improve the scores (a significant part of the No Child Left Behind Act) and the education of the very students the Act purports to assist.
A new analysis of federal money that public schools receive for low-income students shows that a record number of the nation's school districts will receive less in the coming academic year than they did for the one just ended.
But because of population shifts, growing numbers of poor children, newer census data and complex formulas that determine how the money is divided, more than two-thirds of the districts, or 8,843, will not receive as much financing as before.
... Mr. Fagan said the increasing number of districts that are losing money is making it harder for the schools to meet the goals of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, the Bush administration's signature education program, which measures progress through annual tests in math, reading and science. That is giving critics of the program more ammunition to accuse the administration of underfinancing the program while demanding greater results.
As a result, the district is eliminating some of the programs intended to help achieve the goals of No Child Left Behind, including remedial reading classes, summer school, the purchase of new software and family resource counselors, who serve in outreach programs to parents of children who do not speak English.
These unintended consequences undercut the principles upon which the act is based, and in fact leave those districts facing more cuts if their students do not perform well on the standardized tests. Congress and the Administration need to revisit the Act and make the appropriate modifications so that this kind of thing doesn't happen to the most vulnerable of students.
The New York Times explains that districts with poor children have to have the numbers (based on 2002 census figures) to justify their share of the pot in the No Child Left Behind program. Since poor families frequently move out of districts to find housing in other districts, the 'pool' of poor children shifts around a lot. As a result, the numbers from year to year vary, especially in smaller districts, and so does the funding. Unfortunately, those districts cannot budget accurately for the special programs needed to improve the scores (a significant part of the No Child Left Behind Act) and the education of the very students the Act purports to assist.
A new analysis of federal money that public schools receive for low-income students shows that a record number of the nation's school districts will receive less in the coming academic year than they did for the one just ended.
But because of population shifts, growing numbers of poor children, newer census data and complex formulas that determine how the money is divided, more than two-thirds of the districts, or 8,843, will not receive as much financing as before.
... Mr. Fagan said the increasing number of districts that are losing money is making it harder for the schools to meet the goals of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, the Bush administration's signature education program, which measures progress through annual tests in math, reading and science. That is giving critics of the program more ammunition to accuse the administration of underfinancing the program while demanding greater results.
As a result, the district is eliminating some of the programs intended to help achieve the goals of No Child Left Behind, including remedial reading classes, summer school, the purchase of new software and family resource counselors, who serve in outreach programs to parents of children who do not speak English.
These unintended consequences undercut the principles upon which the act is based, and in fact leave those districts facing more cuts if their students do not perform well on the standardized tests. Congress and the Administration need to revisit the Act and make the appropriate modifications so that this kind of thing doesn't happen to the most vulnerable of students.
posted by Diane at 4:33 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home