ALLEGEDLY, Americans have a hard time talking about race. Perhaps we do. What we have an even harder time talking about, however, is money - who has it, who doesn't, and why that matters. Our unwillingness to talk about money may be even more damaging to our children than any reluctance to discuss race.
Though we cannot ignore the tendency of schools with high minority populations also to be schools with high poverty populations, racial segregation doesn't matter in education as much as inequity does. To worry that a school is disproportionately of one race or another dodges thinking about the real problem: The United States is a nation of gross educational inequality. Schools with poor resources are producing black, white, Hispanic, Asian and Native American adults unprepared for college or the workplace. While we talk about other countries' envying our freedoms and opportunities, we do not serve our children in a way commensurate with our rhetoric.
Inequality has existed in our schools for a long time, but many politicians prefer to ignore it. They state their support of education in vague terms, talking about "higher standards" without addressing the fact that some schools are not reaching even minimal standards. One shining exception was the Virginia state senator for the 25th district.
Emily Couric, who died last Thursday, focused on the issue of public education throughout her career. She began her service to the Charlottesville community as a member of the Venable Elementary School Parent Teacher Association, was its elected president, then worked on the Charlottesville school board for two terms, including a year as chairwoman.
The issue of public education dominated Couric's 1995 state Senate campaign. She continued to champion public schools, even as conservative trends in Virginia politics led others to advocate a market system that would give public monies to private institutions. While running in 1999, she said, "I believe the public school system will always be the best way to provide people the means to earn a decent wage. We must fund public education first" ("Candidates debate area's social issues," The Cavalier Daily, Sept. 22, 1999).
|
Even when statistics show increases in education spending, not all students are being better served. In a 1999 speech to Education School honorees, Couric noted that Virginia spent $300 million for computers in the 1990s, which averages to a computer for every four students. However, this did not mean that schools benefited equally. She said, "Virginia is ranked No. 11 in spending on technology per pupil, but more must be done due to glaring inequalities between schools." As long as one student has to learn in what Couric called the "dilapidated, run-down, overcrowded conditions" plaguing some schools ("Couric speaks on education," The Cavalier Daily, April 10, 1998), we cannot say that his opportunities are equal to those of a student with good faculty, new computers and books, and well-maintained buildings.
Part of the problem is our attachment to the traditional division of responsibilities among localities, states and the federal government. Because education is primarily a state and local responsibility in the United States, 91 percent of the money spent on it comes from non-federal sources. Each state and school district decides how much to spend on education, so where a student lives determines how much will be spent on her education. Both within and among states, there are large disparities in per-student funding between wealthy districts and poor ones.
Federal involvement may help to close these gaps. What if, instead of local property-owners' having to support the schools, money for public education came from federal taxes? Certainly, federal taxes would have to be raised on corporations and individuals. But people who own homes, farms and factories are not the only ones to benefit from a well-educated labor force - everyone does. Like police and fire departments, public education is a public good. Moreover, it has become a national good, similar to military defense, as fewer people stay in the same place for their entire lives. By having the federal government disperse money to schools equally, we also might begin to prioritize the education of all children, instead of only the ones who live in our neighborhood.
More money will not cure everything that's wrong with public education, but it will help. Even a few dollars spent on something as basic as climate control makes a difference. Right now, schools without air-conditioning have to shut down on hot days; increased funding for maintenance will enable education to continue, regardless of the temperature.
Many politicians have been afraid to talk about the issue of inequality in public education because some parents see it as a threat. They consider a redistribution to help less privileged children an injustice to their own offspring, and thus the inequalities continue. Couric helped public schools by being involved as a parent and as a politician. A practical legislator, she could not correct inequality overnight, but she made small steps toward it with measures that the General Assembly found acceptable, such as allowing state agencies to donate computers to public schools. We can extend Couric's legacy by pursuing the goal of better and more equal education for all children.
(Pallavi Guniganti's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at pguniganti@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 3 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
