That formula takes into account a district's low - income population, but gaps remain in how much districts spend statewide, with
wealthier districts able to spend more on schoolchildren.
Not exact matches
The union is seeking to level the playing field for
districts they believe will never be
able to keep up with
wealthier schools.
Gov. Edward T. Schafer of North Dakota last week signed into law a school - finance measure that shifts some state funding from property -
wealthy school
districts to those less
able to raise money through property taxes.
In fact, in a study of a project - based approach to teaching social studies and content literacy to 2nd graders, my colleagues and I were
able to close the gap, statistically speaking, between students in high - poverty school
districts — who experienced project - based units — and students in
wealthy school
districts — who did not.
But because this money is awarded on a first - come, first - served basis to
districts with approved projects and matching funds, critics say, it provides an unfair advantage to LEAs in
wealthier communities or with dedicated facilities staff who are
able to navigate the system.
Reliance upon supplemental funding through bonds and overrides disadvantages schools; while
wealthy districts may be
able to generate additional resources, they don't always have community support and underprivileged communities — serving Latino students in particular — often don't take the risk due to the little reward.
Variability in local resources occurs as
wealthier districts are
able to collect higher per pupil revenues with lower revenue effort — essentially property tax rates — due to higher taxable property values.
Wealthy districts» ability to raise more revenue at comparable or even lower tax rates has two impacts — wealthy districts are able to outspend poorer districts with comparable or lower tax rates, and homes of similar values are taxed at a higher rate in poorer school dis
Wealthy districts» ability to raise more revenue at comparable or even lower tax rates has two impacts —
wealthy districts are able to outspend poorer districts with comparable or lower tax rates, and homes of similar values are taxed at a higher rate in poorer school dis
wealthy districts are
able to outspend poorer
districts with comparable or lower tax rates, and homes of similar values are taxed at a higher rate in poorer school
districts.
Further, the Court found that inadequate funding from the state is leading to inequalities and disparities between
wealthy and poor school
districts, because some
districts are only
able to raise a fraction of the money through local levies as other
districts, despite having a higher local levy tax rate.
Wealthier districts will be
able to provide resources to help those not passing without undermining the rest of education; poorer
districts will not.
Wealthy districts were
able to spend more, thanks to surging property tax receipts.
[4]
Wealthy communities are
able to invest much more into their schools through private donations and fundraising, while some elected officials are
able to advocate more effectively for additional resources for well - heeled
districts.