Inequitable school funding holding back school districts: Delaware Voices

Once upon a time we had equity in education in this state. 

Did schools have everything they wanted or needed? Absolutely not, but money was parsed out roughly equitably to districts based on numbers of children, with extra funding for special needs children.

State funds contributed about 70 percent of funding for schools, with federal money adding to that percentage and with an extra bucket of money for districts with low tax bases ("Division III" or "Equilibrium" money). The individual districts contributed little enough of discretionary funds that we didn’t have identifiable poor and rich districts.

Another view:To improve schools, think more like businesses

As a matter of fact, until Dr. Lillian Lowery of Christina attempted to turn Palmer School in Southbridge into a charter school, Delaware was one of only two states — the other being Hawaii — which had never had an equity lawsuit. That lawsuit prevailed and Palmer remains a district school.

Then came the advent of charter schools.

Charters totally changed the economic picture for Delaware students. Charters changed the power structure.

Albright:To help at-risk schools, look outside the classroom

The founders of the first, most “successful" charter school — the least diverse in terms of both poverty AND minorities — had enough private money to change the structure of school funding in their favor. They sent powerful lobbyists to Dover every day of session to woo legislators to manipulate the laws and regulations all schools used to live by.

A few examples: When new charters want to open a school, they live by very different building and staffing restrictions than districts.

Over the years, legislators have added a multitude of new regulations. The way Title I funds are used has changed, allocating more money to charters with much lower numbers of children in poverty; charters can compete more ably for grants by utilizing grant writers, making them also able to take advantage of state grants disproportionately more often. 

These are just a few examples that put district schools at a financial disadvantage. 

What does it mean in real terms to be financially outspent? It means kids don’t get new supplies as often, extra teachers for reading, math remediation and specials aren’t funded, sports and music are delayed.

It means that buildings don’t get necessary repairs or updates so children are in buildings that have broken auditorium seats or cracked desks, old bathrooms, faulty AC systems, moldy basements.

It means that poorer children don’t get special programs like visiting artists or authors. It means that teachers don’t get start-up money in the fall to prep their classrooms. It means that every employee must be on site every day, leaving no one to go to Dover to lobby.

When political leaders say that “money isn’t everything,” I think one of two things — either they just haven’t a clue what they’re talking about, or they’re just mean.

To anyone who says either that we already spend a lot on education or that we should be able to well educate children on the money in our schools, I say go visit schools on Long Island or in Massachusetts. There’s a reason these areas have the top scores in the country. It’s called money.

My hometown just built a high school which cost $160 million. How do you think those kids feel when they walk in each day? Their town is saying to them “you are worth it.”

What message are we sending our students in their old dilapidated buildings?

Until we change the power balance and exclusivity which the charters enjoy, our schools will never again be equitable. Consolidating districts will only hurt poor children, the Wilmington Education Improvement Commission won’t matter, new funding methods will never be accomplished.

Because charters will always be able to manipulate district money to favor themselves. Charters’ power in Dover is strong. Legislators see them every day. District representation does not exist in Dover.

Charters’ ability to exclude will continue, making it increasingly difficult for district schools to raise the only thing that seems to count in this state — test scores — as their percentage of higher risk students increases.

Yes, of course there will always be the odd, individual school that is able to excel, but thus far we have not seen a school in poverty sustain excellence. It is too difficult to maintain without continued imports of money.

When schools rely on grants from private enterprises or even the state in order to maintain programs, the money goes away and schools must beg to replace it or do away with the programs that the grants enabled. This has happened again and again in public education, yet we continue to give away prize money in the form of competitive grants. 

Legislators, since you make the rules, student success is at least as much your responsibility as it is the districts you accuse of failing. District voices and needs must have the same strength as charter ones.

Instead of punishing or co-opting our district schools, put time and effort into learning what high needs children must have in order to succeed and concentrate your efforts — and money — towards accomplishing those goals.

Connie Merlet is director of the Willa Road Children's Center. She is a former Christina School Board member and a former director of Christina's gifted and talented program.