swiped from a footnote of "Dividing the Public" is this quote from Fletcher Swift skewering Massachusetts |
Summer is generally when I try to catch up on the rest of the year's "oh I should read that!" pile, particularly as it pertains to education. Among my reads that I want to recommend to anyone else for whom school finance equity is either a vocation or an avocation is Matthew Gardner Kelly's Dividing the Public: School Finance and the Creation of Structural Inequality.
Gardner Kelly, who now teaches at University of Washington College of Education (he'd been at Penn State), takes as his topic K-12 public education funding in California, but really it is a way of examining what we may think of as foundational to education in this country: the tie between local funding and local enrollment. California starts from a completely different direction than, say, Massachusetts on this, and at various points in its history had advocates who argued that it wasn't really a state public education system if it depended on local funding.
I could quote at length from passages of his book, which also includes midnight property raids, racial violence, and footnotes well worth examining (the above has already been added to my standard presentation on Chapter 70!). I really appreciated, though, a book that drove me to question why it is that we think the taxation of local property ought to determine the revenue available to local schools at all, and how it is that a state can require a statewide education system--check the quote at the bottom of the page here, Massachusetts!--without state revenue paying for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note that comments on this blog are moderated.