24 12 2012 12 47 00 Education as a public good No Child Left Behind Who is responsible to take care of poor children Their parents Society Who is society Funnels and pathways The funnel pathways over life course Children start off in relatively similar positions educational achievements lead to consequences for work and stability later in adult life but there are specific mechanisms that lead to poor educational experiences Question if home environment lack resources and this leads to poor outcomes for children how do we change this Intervene inside family homes Intervene outside homes such as schools and neighborhoods Inequality in Funding Apartheid education or savage inequalities Last vestige of de jure discrimination Only major nation in developed world with education inequalities Funding structure US public schools total expenditures for elementary and secondary education Most of the funds are coming from federal funds Inequality in funding Value of a neighborhood school Value of local control over education Value of freedom from state control Are we debating differences in race or class Or both How is this related to isolation inequality exodus from communities like Shaw Brown vs Board of Ed 1954 Courts order change to combat segregation in schools 1954 cities had higher per student expenditure than suburbs 1960 suburbs had slightly higher equal expenditure 2007 suburbs have 24 100 higher expenditure Segregate resegregate Desegregation peaked in the 1980 s American public schools are now 14 years into the process of continuous resegregation during the 1990s the proportion of black students in majority White schools decreased to a level lower than any year since 1968 Avg black student attends school that is just 1 3 white 1 6 black students attend schools that are 100 non white avg white student attends school that is 80 white avg racial enrollment is 40 Change funding structure Path 1 cases in state courts Path 2 policy change at state level Redistribute money from suburbs Increase spending in cities and raise taxes States have limited remedies Federal government has limited remedies Title 1 not intended to equalize funding 2007 Funding Gaps comparing high to low minority districts on average states spend 614 less on minority students in 30 49 states high minority districts receive less funding than low minority districts comparing high to low poverty districts on average states spend 907 less on poor students in 27 49 states high poverty districts receive less funding than low poverty districts changes since 1997 and or minority districts 30 to 47 states have moved toward equal or greater funding for poor large positive changes Massachusetts NJ Minnesota Indiana large negative changes Illinois NY Texas Wyoming No Child Left Behind NCLB 2001 Standards or outcomes based education reform Standards each state would have to develop set of standards learning objectives for each course a fourth grader should know these things in math schools Increase standards of accountability for states school districts and Give parents more flexibility in choosing schools for children to attend Support for NCLB Systematic testing provides data that sheds light on which schools are not teaching basic skills effectively accountability Common expectations Improved test scores More options for students in failing schools Federal funding for schools increased Critiques of NCLB Reduces effective instruction and student learning because it lowers achievement goals and motivate teachers to teacher to the test Provides incentives against low performing students Federal funding for Title 1 is too limited to provide for success of NCLB Shift emphasis from sanctions for failing to raise test scores to being accountable to make systemic changes that improve student achievement 24 12 2012 12 47 00 24 12 2012 12 47 00