Education

Of Tax-Based Edu-Damnation and Anti-School School Boards

Published January 07, 2009 @ 10:53PM PT

greed by muffet on flickrIn yesterday's "Why Schoolwork Doesn't Have to Suck: Learning 2.0" post, Lu P. left a comment that serves as a great segué into another issue I've been planning to highlight. I'll let Lu say it since, as commenters here often do, Lu says it perfectly enough*:

I think it would also be beneficial to consider class inequality in this discussion. Often times it is real life inequality is reproduced in the web/virtual world.

Who has access to these technologies?

If it becomes a standard, who will be left behind?

This is especially relevant in U.S. public schools where funds come through property taxes, some schools are financially ready for this, others are not.

Bam: The issue: School funding via property taxes.

First, a question I sorely hope as many of you across the States can take a few seconds to answer: Since state and local funding of education differs from place to place, there's no way I can know offhand about places that serve as models of school funding that are more just, and less inequitable, than the property tax-based system so common across the country. So - do any of you live in districts or states, or know of them, that do serve as such models?

If you could share your knowledge here, that's a step towards change in itself. You've given an "If there, why not here?" argument to others whose districts might need it.

And second, school funding is another reason I'm going to re-bang the "get involved with your local and state school board politics" drum first banged here - because this blogger's post is an example of the non- (and perhaps anti-) educational motives that drive savvy private interests to run for school boards.

Sorry I have been so busy lately. Now is the time to think about running for your local school board. Monday is the deadline for getting in your petition signatures. For most school baords [sic] it will only take 100 voter signatures to get you listed on the ballot. . . .

Running for local school board is the best way to try and slow the increase in your property taxes. School districts usually get 65-75% of the property taxes you pay each year.

I hope I'm getting this writer wrong, that s/he has a vision for providing for schools, if elected, in order to improve them via alternative funding, but on the face of it, it seems like a "Vote for me for school board. I'll weaken schools to save you money, and social justice be damned" platform.

(And I encourage some healthy debate on how I framed the above in comments as well.)

~     ~     ~

I'm still dashing to and fro here in Bangkok, so thumpity-thump-thump until next time. Off I go.

---

*By the way, Lu's comment also serves as the perfect example of that "negotiation of authorial authority" I praised in that post - it challenges, questions, extends my words precisely how it can in classrooms, enriching the discourse as it does so.

Photo: Greed, by muffet on Flickr

Share this Post

Comments (2)

  1. Posted by Maria Malzone on 01/09/2009 @ 05:10PM PT

  2. Morgante Pell

    In Vermont, we tried to equalize with Act 60. However, there is widespread distrust of the reforms–especially since they didn't work too effectively.

    Honestly, I like the current system. Maybe it's because I'm selfish and like being able to go to a good school since local (wealthy) towns finance it. But I also think there is a lot to be said for local control and investment.

    On a state level, there is a lot of animosity towards education. If our Governor had control of it, I have no doubt he'd be slashing our budgets like a serial killer.

    The fact is that it is far easier to chant "lower taxes" when the issue is far-removed. When you never have to see or know the people affected, it's easy to decide in favor of low taxes while also lowering education quality. By maintaining local control, at least voters have to actually _see_ the students affected. When you vote to take away resources, you're taking them away from your son/daughter, or that boy you saw in the store, etc.

    Naturally, inequitably arises. Wealthy districts are willing to spend far more than the poorer ones. The solution is in a mixed system.

    Allow local school boards to set their own tax rate, based upon their ability to pay and foresight to invest in education. But for everything over the median state rate, some has to go into a general fund, out of which poorer districts are given additional grants and support. Sounds good–in theory.

    Posted by Morgante Pell on 01/10/2009 @ 12:11PM PT

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author

Twitter Feed

Clay Burell

Clay is an American high school Humanities teacher, technology coach, and Apple Distinguished Educator who has taught for the last eight years in Asian international schools. According to law, he's married to his wife. According to his wife, he's married to his Mac.

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.