Tennessee School Finance System
Introduction
One of the most important factors that make a school organisation to continue serving the people in quality manner is through its financial system. In the United States of America, the federal government spends a huge amount of money for running the educational system. Accordingly, the Department of Education revealed that the total public expenditures just for K-12 education alone were close to 3 billion in 2000. Over the past decades, the government of each state in the US have increased their expenditures for public schools, and generates major investments during the 70s and 80s. Part of these is the increases in education staff and development of the roles of schools. In the 1990s, authorities have seen a slight increase in school funding, principally because the shares of the states of total education expenditures increases while the federal spending stayed relatively stable proportionately and the funding for local education turned down slightly (Watts-Hull, 2004).
In this regard, the federal Government of the United States of America are trying to provide policies which aims on enhancing the finance system of each school, most especially those public schools. Primarily, the main goal of this report is to provide insightful details about the Finance System implemented in Tennessee School. In addition, the paper will also discuss some legal problems and issues that has been encountered by Tennessee School Finance System as well as the programs and plans made to resolve the issues.
Overview of Tennessee School Finance System
The Tennessee school finance system prior to the 1990s were financed or funded through the use of minimum foundation program scheme. This system was based on the weighted average or mean of the daily attendance. This system has been used throughout the years, until such time that the government have found that the level of equalization of this system was small. According to some authorities, the result of using the formula of the minimum foundation program was unequal and creates unbalanced distribution of learning resources to satisfy the needs of the students of Tennessee. With this, the authorities have recommended to reform Tennessee School Finance System.
In line with this, the school authorities adopted the system of Basic Education program. This funding formula is a weighted regression formula which identifies the full amount of funds required by Tennessee’s K-12 Schools. The Basic Education program was a part of the state-wide Education Improvement Act in 1992. The aim of this program is to adhere to inequalities and inadequacies in the financial system of Tennessee.
Legal Backdrop of Tennessee School Finance System
Prior to the implementation of the Basic Education Program, the government has found many legal backdrops. In 1988, the Tennessee Small School Systems which represents 77 out of 139 districts in the state have filed a case in chancery courts against the local government of the State. The case was filed because they have found that the school finance system (minimum foundation program) have violated the constitution and the education clause. Because of the frustrations of these groups from the slow pace of reforming the school finance system, they prompted the lawsuit. Upon investigation of the case of Tennessee Small School Systems v. Charter (1993), the result of the investigation of the Supreme Court discovered that the Tennessee school finance system is inadequate, unequal and unconstitutional. Herein, the court have noted that students have the right to access free public education in accordance with the plain meaning of education from the constitution and the facts that the finance system fail to meet the needs of the students as well as their failure of having legitimate report to justify that they provide granting to some Tennessee citizens. In addition, there are also substantial evidences that show the denial of educational opportunities to other citizens within the State. In Tennessee the spending per-student differs considerably among 139 districts, such variation ranges from ,823 to ,669.
The Supreme Court has discovered a direct correlation between the quality of education received by the students and the dollars expended. The record showed that students in poorer districts often attended unaccredited schools, had lower test scores, and had “a higher need for remedial courses at college, resulting in poorer chances for higher education.” Lack of funds prevented schools from offering advanced courses, more than one foreign language, state-mandated art and music classes, drama instruction, extracurricular activities, and athletic teams.
The state’s high reliance on local governments to fund education and the varying ability of local governments to raise funds discriminated against poor children and districts “by denying them local control of education” and “equal access to quality educational resources.” The court addressed the issue of local control directly, stating, “There has been no showing that a discriminatory funding scheme is necessary to local control.” Moreover, the court pointed out, local control is a “cruel illusion” for counties with relatively low total assessed property values and very little business activity circumstances that erect a “brick wall beyond which they cannot go in attempting to fund the education system regardless of their needs.”
As the Tennessee supreme court explained, in the interpretation of a state constitution, the state court is always free to expand the minimum level of protection mandated by the federal constitution that is, to provide an independent analysis from federal courts and past rulings.
Revenue Distribution Chart & Expenditure Distribution Chart for Tennessee
The following tables and charts show a devised distribution of revenue and expenditure in Tennessee. For this devised distributions, it has been assumed that this can be reached from FY2007 to FY 2017.
FISCAL INFORMATION
FY2007
FY2017
Federal aid to education under selected programs
(in thousands of current dollars)
4,509
3,107
National school lunch
,885
,647
National school breakfast
3,517
1,505
Title I
,030
3,852
Education for the handicapped
,034
,234
Vocational and adult education
,183
,001
School improvement
,579
,660
School assistance (federally affected areas)
36
19
Bilingual education
—
Indian education
Figure 1
Revenues by source
Figure2
Current expenditures by function
FY2007
FY2017
Revenues and expenditures (in current dollars)
,433,442
,611,971
Revenues (in thousands of dollars)
,711
,875
Revenue per pupil in membership
,552,183
,345,380
Current expenditures (in thousands of dollars)
,855
,580
Current expenditure per pupil in membership
Tennessee’s Equalization Program and Special Education Funding
Because of the urgency to shift the policy and formula used in Tennessee school finance system, the government has decided to change minimum foundation program system to Basic Education Program (BEEP). As discussed above, this new system is imposed to address the insufficiency and disparities in public education that has been the cause behind the remarkable 1988 lawsuit of Tennessee Small Schools. The 1992 Education Improvement Act (EIE) gave the following reforms; the creation of the BEEP, BEEP account and the Education Trust Fund. This equalization program is based on a student calculation of Average daily membership (ADM). Basic Education Program components includes unconditional expense like substitute teachers, superintendents, regular instruction, textbooks, capital outlay, school nurse and others factors which represent range of expenditures among school districts. To ensure equality, each element has either a ration per Average daily membership (ADM) connected with it. Like for instance, regular education provides 1 unit/20 students in Average daily membership in grades K-3 and 1 unit/20 students in Average daily membership in grades 7-9; for each student in Average daily membership, districts are given .00 for classroom supplies and materials and .00 for textbooks (unit cost). Some aspects of the BEEP apportion units by the determination of population that has been served including special education students and/or English language students. The summation of the dollar amount connected with each component reflects the BEEP cost of the district.
For each school system, the Basic Education Program Allocation is based on the number of each kind of position produced by the current average salary for licensed state based from the state salary and the cost components. In order to ensure equality, adjustments are being made on a country-by-country basis to check salaries up or down for disparity from the state-wide average by the discrepancy between the statewide average and local non-governmental wages. Furthermore, transportation is an element in Basic education program which is regarded as a non-classroom factor. In this regard, funds are given to districts in line with the formula that use the number of transported students, the distances of transportation and the density of the students per route mile. Furthermore, capital outlay is also given emphasis to ensure that each element are given equal funding. The cost is being calculated as a number of allocated square feet per student in elementary, middle and secondary schools by a determined-state cost per square foot. These budgets may be utilized to pay for the purchase or access of large capital items like buildings, equipment or to retire debt.
In line with special education, the funding level based on the Basic Education Program is 1 per 60 sped students in specific categories of service. For the total classroom expenditures, BEEP have provided special education with 75% and for non-classroom expenditures the program allocated 50%. To ensure Equality, all 138 school districts in Tennessee are given special education funds.
Political Trends in Tennessee: Role of Governor
The overall characteristic of the Tennessee politics has been regarded as a bellwether of previous trends in terms of governmental and political policies. Tennessee has been exposed to different reforms in economic development, health care and education, in particular its School finance system. Various political changes have happened in Tennessee. For example, part of these changes is about the emergence of the NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT 2001.
The Public Law 107-110, more commonly known as the NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT of 2001 (CLUB) is the America’s federal law which reauthorizes different federal programs with objectives of improving performance of USA’s primary and secondary school through increasing standards of accountability for states, school districts and schools. It also gives parent the opportunity to be more flexible in selecting which schools their children will enrol. Furthermore, the provision also allows an increased attention on reading and re-authorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (SEA) (Starcher, Hamilton & Gonzales, 2003).
CLUB can be considered as the latest of a number of federal provisions implementing educational reforms which affects different states specifically Tennessee. Tennessee adopts this policy with the purpose of improving the quality of education given to all children. CLUB requires Tennessee to establish an accountability system of assessments, graduation rates and other important indicators. Herein, the Schools have to build adequate yearly progress (YAP), as described by the state. This can be achieve by razing the achievement levels of subgroups of students which include minorities like Latinos, African Americans, low-income students and students with special education needs to a state-determined level of proficiency. The vision is to make all students be more proficient by the 2013-2014 school years. Further, an increasing set of assistance will also be provided to those students who are in schools that repeatedly do not improve.
The law does not prescribe how schools in Tennessee are supposed to attain YAP, but it gives local educators responsibility for finding ways to do it. Since the local government and legislature of Tennessee are aware of the purpose of this reform, the government has been able to adopt this policy in the School system of the state. Through this, Tennessee has been able to establish minimum standards for teacher quality (and for the qualifications of instructional aides) and mandates that schools use scientifically based practices to promote student achievement.
Through CLUB, Tennessee local government and educational system has been able to provide a grant program which enables school districts provide high-quality language instruction programs for the students (Sloan-Flores & Trumbull, 2003). Such grant program expects the districts to provide professional development to instructors, teachers, principals, administrators, and community based staff so as to enhance the instruction and assessment of the school curriculum.
Tennessee State Budget Process
In Tennessee, the State budget process that is being used is the separate capital budget or capital improvement program. The budget given to each municipality depends on the size of the population and the capital expenditures of the region. The authorities of Tennessee see to it that they provide adequate budget for each municipality, specifically in educational budget allocation. In this regard, the role of the governor is to provide a balanced budget among his or her constituents. The governor must be able to identify the correct budget to make sure that all students are able to have free public quality education. In addition, the role of the governor is to find some other means and ways on sourcing the financial needs of Tennessee, especially for educational purposes. With regards to educational committee, the two legislating bodies that are functioning for Tennessee Education budget negotiates through a discussion and meeting with school districts members to determine how much will be given to each school. The budgetary planning are being done by these legislative bodies to ensure equal distribution of budgets among school districts.
Conclusion
Perhaps school improvement is hard work. However, if schools are not constantly improving and growing in their capacity to meet the needs of the students, then they are losing ground and failing in their mission of service to young people. School Financial system is considered to be complex and extremely difficult to handle. In order to make sure that the finance system adheres to the needs of equal distribution among states, the federal and local government must be able to shift the policies that would address these needs. In Tennessee, the problems regarding the unequal distribution and inefficient finance system has been solved by adopting the Basic Education program. This program is in line with the recommendations and suggestions o some legislative bodies through the help of the local government of Tennessee.
Indeed, through the constant influence and support of the federal government, educational transformation toward school finance system improvement is achieved by various states. The federal, state, and local emphasis on accountability essentialisms the need for school finance system that adheres to quality education and equal distribution of finances.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment