On Our Own Terms: Indigenous Histories of School Funding and Policy

Australia has been an enthusiastic embracer of school choice and has one of the highest levels of public funding for non-government schools. The 1996 election of John Howard’s conservative government is a point of interest as it is often framed as a period of political and ideological attacks on public schooling. A key policy move was the abolishment of the New Schools Policy. The New Schools Policy withheld public funds from helping to establish new non-government schools in areas where there was already adequate supply. Using large-scale data sets on supply (number of schools) and demand (enrolment), time-series analysis demonstrates that while the non-government schools have grown (in real and market share terms), the abolishment of the New Schools Policy did not lead to a shock in enrolment numbers. However, the subtle shift from a needs-based to entitlement logic fundamentally altered the landscape of Australian school-based education ever since.

THE state of American public education has become something of a national obsession. A mournful consensus seems to have formed around two conclusions: (1) American schools have performed poorly in comparison with schools in other countries, and (2) things have gotten worse over time. As my title indicates, this article is more motivated by recent changes in performance than by its average level. It is also motivated by a fact often neglected in discussions of school performance. The overwhelming majority of American elementary and secondary schools are political creatures. They are publicly owned, operated, directed, and funded. I want to see if the political character of the marketplace within which schools operate has something to do with the way they perform. For reasons elaborated subsequently, the data I analyze are incapable of providing a complete explanation of the decline of public school performance. So, even if this decline is entirely a political phenomenon, I could

THE DEFEAT OF A YOUNGSTOWN SCHOOL LEVY: A STUDY IN URBAN-POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY Stanley D. Brunn, Wayne L. Hoffman, and Gerald H. Romsa* INTRODUCTION. One of the major issues facing large urban centers at present is the financing of needed services such as schools, transportation schemes, garbage collection, and welfare. The rising cost of these services coupled with an inflationary economy in recent years has usually meant an increase in the per capita taxes, particularly for property holders. It is the purpose of this study to measure the public demand for one service, the financing of school programs, in a major northern city, Youngstown, Ohio. This demand is measured in terms of the citizens’response toward voting for or against the proposed levy. (1) This city attracted national attention in 1968 when the voters had failed then and on several occasions in 1966 and 1967 to approve the recommended school levies. Finally, after six previous failures, it was approved in May 1968. The financing of education projects such as classroom construction, current programs, and increased salaries is one of the most pressing and often most emotional issues citizens face. Within the past two years there have been various cities such as New York City, Detroit, and Chicago that have brought the issue of public education to the public fore. Numerous local “battles” have been fought where proposed hikes in school levies have been placed on the ballot. Often the failure to approve the necessary levies can and does result in several short term effects such as the halt in building expansion, discontinuation of kindergarten classes, cutback in monies for operating, loss of capable teachers and administrators because of no pay increases, and possibly even the termination of extracurricular activities and transportation of students. The long term effects may lead to a severe cutback in all programs, failure to attract qualified personnel, and even loss of accreditation. The opinions of residents toward the financing of schools and associated programs as expressed in their vote are expected to vary over geographic space as they have for other much-needed city services such as urban renewal, flouridation, library funds, and fire stations. When considering school bond referendums, it is often expected that the support simply comes from parents of school-age children rather than older citizens. However, this notion is far too general. There are many segments of a city that must be considered in an analysis that measures the areal response, such as the *Dr. Brunn is assistant professor of geography at Michigan State University, Mr. Hoffman is instructor of geography at Wisconsin State University, Oshkosh, and Dr. Romsa is assistant professor of geography at Western Kentucky University. The paper was accepted for publication in July 1969. 68 So u th ea st er n G e o g r a ph er role of property tax voters versus renters, occupation classes, income groups, labor unions, political parties, and supporters of parochial education. An investigation into the Youngstown vote attests that an adequate explanation into the areal variations ofpositive and negative responses do not substantiate many a priori notions. The first school bond referendum submitted to the Youngstown voters was on December 13, 1966. This failed miserably, as did the next four referendums. The November 5, 1968 levy was somewhat more successful, as it was only narrowly defeated (Table 1). It is the November 1968 vote that is analyzed in this study. (2) The defeats of all six referendums were attributed to a variety of tangible and intangible factors, such as the tax­ payers’ “revolt,” voter apathy even for parents of school-age children, alienation of community toward school policies such as increased teachers’ salaries, poorly timed and planned elections, lack of strong support from labor unions, certain second-generation foreign-born who favored parochial to public schools, and lack of strong endorsement by leading city officials. A number of school and community leaders were very concerned and embarrassed about these defeats because of the then-existing plus possible additional cutback in programs, the immediate and long term consequences to the students, quality of education, and even the image these continued defeats were giving the city. (3) TABLE 1 YOUNGSTOWN SCHOOL LEVY...

Although a relatively new idea in the U.S., weighted student funding (WSF) for individual schools has a long history in the Netherlands. This country of about 16.5 million people has been using a version of WSF for all its primary schools (serving children from age 4 to 12) for 25 years. In this article we describe and evaluate the Dutch system and explore what insights there might be for the U.S., taking into account the very different cultural and normative contexts of the two countries. We find that, compared to those with few weighted students, Dutch schools with high proportions of weighted students have almost 60 percent more teachers per pupil as well as more support staff per teacher. Even these large resource advantages, however, are not sufficient by themselves to eliminate all quality shortfalls in the high‐weight schools, where quality is measured by school policies and practices. We conclude that weighted student funding for schools within districts in the U.S. is not likely to deliver the same highly progressive funding patterns as in the Netherlands because of the complex, multilayered U.S. education system and the absence of a political consensus in favor of generous weights. © 2011 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

James P. Shaver Professor and Associate Dean for Research College of Education Utah State University Logan, Utah The role of the courts in our democratic society is a topic that should be of interest to every teacher and administrator. Perhaps the most obvious reason for concern is the substantial potential of the courts for influencing school policy and practices. The exertion of judicial power became particularly salient for many professional educators, as well as the lay public, with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the now famous Brown case' that racial segregation in public schools denies the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution and is, therefore, unconstitutional. The Court's follow-up decision2 on the implementation of Brown gave the U.S. District Courts broad discretion in evaluating and approving remedies for the school segregation complaints brought before them. And an extensive series of cases dealing with desegregation plans has followed, involving remedies such as modifying attendance zones, busing students, and merging school districts, all considered with an eye to the educational risks or benefits for children.3 Litigation about other educational matters for example, school finance,4 the need for bilingual instruction,5 and the obligation of school districts to provide education for handicapped children6 has also had widespread implications for schooling. Nevertheless, there is some evidence (e.g., Zirkel, 1978) that school leaders often lack knowledge of school-relevant court decisions. It might appear from the selected cases mentioned above that matters involving school policy have been before the courts only in recent years. But the adjudication of school-related policy issues is not a recent phenomenon. The Massachusetts courts decided in 18507 that it was not, on the face of it, unreasonable for the Boston School Committee to segregate schools by the race. The famous Tennessee Monkey (Scopes) Trial was held in 1925. The concern of the U.S. Supreme Court with the denial of students' civil rights was evidenced some 35 years ago in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. 8 In that decision, the Court held that an attempt to force a student to participate in saluting the American flag was a denial of First Amendment

Purpose: The explicit goal of education funding policy is to raise educational standards by addressing historical financial disparities. This study, explored the funding models in three no-fees public primary schools within the Western Cape Education Department in Cape Town. The specific objective of this study was to explore and discuss the funding models’ initiatives of schools in resources scarce communities in Cape Town.
 Methodology: A qualitative research model was adopted for the investigation. Semi-structured guided questions were used to obtain the data. Using intentional sampling, which selects individuals based on their backgrounds and expertise, a total of nine people was recruited. Three school principals, three chairs of the governing body, and three administrators of the school's finances made up the group of participants. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, data were recorded using telephone conversations. The researcher used a thematic data analysis approach to analyse the data after recording and meticulously transcribing the talks. Individual interviews, participant data, and document analysis were all merged by the researcher in order to make the research conclusions credible.
 Findings: As a result, it was determined whether the information from the case study and the interviews headed in the same direction. Additionally, the researcher gave each participant a chance to confirm that the facts were what they had provided as data. The study indicated that despite receiving 75% of their income from the government, certain no-fee public primary schools still had a high level of resource reliance. A sizeable part of school funding—25%—comes from voluntary donations. The funding attempts, however, have not succeeded in bringing in the money the schools sorely need. Due to government rules, schools feel they have too little money left over and are unable to make significant improvements. The study also showed that fundraising campaigns have an impact on education since they interfere with class time. Additionally, the study demonstrates that learner’s social competition has increased as a result of selling products on campus to raise extra money since learners whose parents cannot afford it do not want to feel afraid or humiliated.
 Recommendations: Selected schools should raise funds using stronger and more innovative funding initiatives rather than traditional, hands-on approaches. The government should rethink amending schooling policies to legally accord schools to collect fees, since studies show that parents in low-resource communities are removing their children from low-resource schools to well-resource schools. Governments also need to rethink school policy changes to give schools the flexibility to make significant budget changes.

The Australian Senate Employment, Workplace Relations and Education References Committee has been asked to examine the principles of Commonwealth Funding for schools, with particular emphasis on how these principles apply in meeting the current future needs of government and non‐government schools and whether they ensure efficiency in the allocation of school funding. The Committee will also investigate accountability arrangements including and through the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. This paper provides a critical discourse analysis of recent developments, tracking two themes: the construction of ‘efficiency and effectiveness’ in the allocation of school funding in Australia, and the impact of such a construction on a discourse of inclusive education for all schools in Australia. Through this analysis, it is argued that the current enquiry creates an opportunity for a substantial shift in focus — from funding government and non‐government schools in relation to government schools, to both government and non‐government schools — within a framework of presumptive equality and inclusion. It is also argued that extant policy, removing the substantial Catholic sector from its hitherto hybridized and separate funding position and bringing government and non‐government schools into sector‐specific funding competition with each other, realigns and rearticulates federal involvement in school funding policy areas that have been the traditional preserve of state governments and territories. In the process, responsibility for instilling and supporting inclusive educational practices is currently solely that of the states and territories where, in many cases, funding as well as inclusive education policies and programmes have been determined at local levels. The endorsement by the federal government of new principles in funding, as proposed here, linked with renewed requirements in relation to school access and participation, creates a space that potentially enables new strategies for inclusive education to be conjoined with funding allocation policy in Australian schools, to the economic and social benefits of all schools as well as the polity.

This paper analyzes cases made for local and centralized school finance and policies such as vouchers, categorical aid, and equalization aid. An ideal system of school finance would achieve efficiency and equity by ensuring every person invests in the amount of schooling that is socially optimal for him. The author evaluates the empirical evidence for, and the merit and importance of, arguments for each policy. She concludes that the theoretical arguments for centralized finance not only exaggerate the efficiency-equity tradeoff but actually make better arguments for a system combining local school finance with categorical aid and means-tested vouchers.

This article suggests an explanation for the complex history of the relationship between the government high school and the Australian middle class. The main elements in the constructing of a framework necessarily include the following inter‐related effects: the historic alienation of the Roman Catholic population from the Australian public school system, federal government interventions into school policy and funding, demographic pressures, the rise of neoliberalism, and the development of distinctive and multiple ethnic populations in the cities. The final section of the article takes as its case study, the history of middle class schooling in the city of Sydney, especially from the mid 1970s to the end of the century. Sydney is an atypical Australian city in many respects, and the study of its middle class and schooling does not stand as representative of the Australian experience. Nevertheless, its great population and significance in the national economy makes its story a crucial story in the national context. Because much of the evidence for this last section derives from the Australian census, it is introduced by a brief discussion of census‐making. Preceding that section of the article is a summary discussion of the significance of social classes in the history of Australian schooling.

Health impact assessment (HIA) provides a structured process for examining the potential health impacts of proposed policies, plans, programs, and projects. This study systematically reviewed HIAs conducted in the United States on prekindergarten, primary, and secondary education-focused decisions. Relevant HIA reports were identified from web sources in late 2015. Key data elements were abstracted from each report. Four case studies were selected to highlight diversity of topics, methods, and impacts of the assessment process. Twenty HIAs completed in 2003-2015 from 8 states on issues related to prekindergarten through secondary education were identified. The types of decisions examined included school structure and funding, transportation to and from school, physical modifications to school facilities, in-school physical activity and nutrition, and school discipline and climate. Assessments employed a range of methods to characterize the nature, magnitude, and severity of potential health impacts. Assessments fostered stakeholder engagement and provided health-promoting recommendations, some of which were subsequently incorporated into school policies. Health impact assessment is a promising tool that education, health, and other stakeholders can use to maximize the health and well-being of students, families, and communities.

Federal school finance policy over the past 30 years has focused on resource allocation within school districts. Regulations require equal staffing across schools, particularly Title I schools, which are designated based on the percent of low-income students enrolled. The requirement to equalize staffing levels creates a loophole where, even with equal staffing levels, differences in staff experience and salary levels across schools lead to differences in actual spending across schools. In response, recent regulatory reforms have shifted from an emphasis on equal staffing to an emphasis on equal spending. Under the federal comprehensive support and improvement (CSI) system, states are required to periodically review within-district spending gaps for any district with a significant number of identified schools. We analyze spending gaps within districts in California and assess the extent to which the CSI system targets districts with inequitable spending patterns. We find that racial and income-based spending gaps across-schools are not substantially different for districts with CSI schools and districts with no CSI schools. Importantly, many districts with large spending gaps are not included in the policy and thus do not face federal regulations to measure and address resource disparities across schools. We discuss implications for school finance research and policy moving forward, particularly as schools respond to the global pandemic and reopening process.

ABSTRACTThe government has made great strides in redressing past imbalances in education through the National Norms and Standards for School Funding (NNSSF) policy that focuses on equity in school funding. This NNSSF model compels the state to fund public schools according to a poverty quintile system, where poor schools are allocated much more funding for resources than affluent schools. Using qualitative research, school management teams, school governing bodies and principals of six public schools located within the Gauteng West District were interviewed to determine their views of how the NNSSF policy had been implemented. One of the findings revealed that equity in public schools has not been fully achieved since funding provided by the state is insufficient to address the backlog in educational resources. It is recommended that the state abandons the policy of funding schools according to quintile rankings but instead, fund schools based on resource needs.

The disparity in the socio-economic status of South Africa has forced the government to adopt a funding policy for public secondary schools. The policy is based on funding schools considered to be poor because they are in poverty-stricken communities. Most of these schools lack infrastructure, and physical and financial resources to be run successfully, while the former Model C schools have adequate resources. In this article I advocate for equitable funding for all learners, and the role played by the school governing body (SGB) in the management of funds is also identified. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 6 members of the SGB from 2 secondary schools in the Vhembe district of the Limpopo province, South Africa. The participants who were purposefully sampled were 2 SGB chairpersons, 2 treasurers and 2 secretaries. The findings suggest that the SGBs were aware of their financial management roles but did not execute their roles effectively. They lacked the knowledge and skills to perform their roles. The SGBs require mandatory training from the Department of Education. It is also suggested that a qualified financial management expert is included in the membership of every SGB.

This chapter takes a critical review of the issues at stake in accepting government funding for the provision of Catholic schools in England. It is divided into four parts. The first part explores the relationship between the state and the Catholic Church when it comes to the funding of Catholic schools within the maintained sector. The second part pays closer attention to the history of this relationship. The third part considers some of the negative implications for accepting government funding, particularly in relation to the compromises that have to be made over admission policies for Catholic schools. The fourth part explores the notion of different models of the Church and how this might be used to inform the relationship between the state and Catholic education. A guiding theme in this chapter is the use of the metaphor of an ambiguous embrace to characterise the ongoing relationship between the Church and the state over the matter of funding for Catholic schools in England.

School segregation is an international problem undermining the performance and equity of education systems. Australia's secondary schooling system offers international insights into the causes of segregation owing to it being one of the most segregated in the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development, its long history of school competition and privatisation, and a lack of government regulation of the fees, enrolment and exclusion policies of private schools. This study examines the role of institutional differentiation and school fees in the uneven enrolment of low socioeconomic status (SES) and Indigenous students within geographical areas over which school choice is a viable option. We found that no secondary school sector was representative of the Australian secondary student population and that there was substantial variation in segregation between states and territories. States and territories with lower rates of Catholic, independent and selective schools have lower levels of segregation. Indigenous students were doubly segregated into schools with high concentrations of low SES students. School segregation varied between geographical areas with the degree of institutional differentiation, and this was partially accounted for by school fees. Independent, Catholic and selective schools contributed to the segregation of low SES students while independent and Catholic schools contributed to the segregation of Indigenous students. Policy reform options include improving the funding and political support for government schools and raising the accountability of government‐funded schools for the enrolment of low SES and Indigenous students. This study has relevance in the international comparison of causes and potential reforms of school segregation.