Tragic flaws in school funding

School Funding’s Tragic Flaws The reflection essay aims to initially read the article en d School Funding’s Tragic Flaws written by Kevin Carey and Marguerite Roza and to address the following concerns: (1) to present a description of the article’s major points and questions that arise from the material; (2) the main argument or message that the author intends in this article; (3) what one thinks the significance of the argument is for education; and (4) evidence in support of this argument or critique of this argument. School Funding’s Tragic Flaws Description of Major Points and Questions The article written by Carey and Roza (2008) proffered issues that reveal the disparities in the distribution and allocation of funds at the three levels of government agencies: federal, state and local. As averred, the authors indicate that “ policymakers give more resources to students who have more resources, and less to those who have less” (Carey and Rosa, 2008, 1). The authors supported their contentions through a comparative analysis of funding distribution between two apparently similar schools when gauged through external appearances: the Cameron Elementary School in Fairfax County in Virginia and the Ponderosa Elementary School in Cumberland County, North Carolina. Further, a closer examination of policies from the federal, state and local agencies, reveal the culprits for the disparities. The authors finally presented viable recommendations that indicate the need for “ federal and state policies should continue to target poor students and poor schools but use inverse funding formulas” (Casey and Rosa, 2008, 1). Main Argument or Message The main message that the authors aim to reveal is the clear and distinct unequal allocation of funds for schools that are currently skewed towards higher income students rather than the neediest. The effect of the policies emerging from the three levels of government agencies is that educational funds that are supposed to be allocated equally tend to be distributed more to higher income pupils, highlighting disadvantaged educational benefits that are supposed to be equally received by students regardless of income level. Significance of the Argument for Education The significance of the argument is seen in terms of the policies’ effect on teachers preferences for place of work. The current policies have revealed that teachers “ tend to go to lower-poverty schools where working conditions may be better. High-poverty schools typically have less experienced teachers and high turnover rates, so the average teacher salary is much lower in those schools” (Casey and Rosa, 2008, 1). As shown, higher-poverty schools do not attract highly experienced teachers due to poor working conditions and the lower salary rates that come from disparate allocation of educational funding. In this regard, the pupils from high-poverty schools are exposed to teachers with lesser experiences and training and thereby, could compromise the level of instructions accorded to these students, when compared to lower-poverty schools that receive greater funding. Critique One personally agrees with the author’s contention that there is a need to reevaluate and assess the disparities in educational funding accorded to school on a national level to justify allocation on an equal basis. There is even more credence for local districts to request for increased educational budgets for higher-poverty schools over and above the equal budget on a per student basis to take into account the need to upgrade working conditions to attract teachers with longer working experiences. The focus of federal, state and local agencies in terms of allocating funds for schools must include the need to upgrade physical facilities, instructional materials, teachers’ salaries and other educational expenses accorded to students on an equal footing regardless of state and district. Only then can the nation address educational needs of students after all external factors are deemed equal. Reference Carey, K. and Rosa, M. (2008). “ School Funding’s Tragic Flaw.” Education Sector Reports. Retrieved 05 June 2011. < https://blackboard. uncp. edu/bbcswebdav/courses/EPC-2020-800-SA11/sadker9_reading_36. pdf>