Census data in order to give added weight to students living in poverty or acute poverty. Pennsylvania, though, decided to use U.S. Most of those states use student eligibility for Free and Reduced Price Lunch as the primary poverty identifier. Like more than 25 states that provide increased funding for economically disadvantaged students, Pennsylvania’s formula recognizes that low-income students require additional support and services. In New Hope-Solebury in Bucks County - a wealthy suburban district which gets about 15 percent of its funding from the state - enrollment is 1,509. In Reading - a poor, urban district which receives about 72 percent of its funding from the state - the three-year average enrollment is 18,096. To illustrate how the metric works, we’ll compare two vastly different districts. Starting from this enrollment figure, the formula then applies weights based on student factors that, in effect, add to that number.Īfter accounting for these student-based factors, the formula then considers district-based factors to come up with an “adjusted weighted student headcount.”Īfter considering district wealth and local school tax burden, this final number can actually come out to be smaller than actual enrollment. In order to make funding more stable and less susceptible to sudden swings in enrollment, the formula uses a three-year average. The formula begins with the premise that districts with more students should receive more funding than districts with fewer students. (Graphic Courtesy of Research for Action) On both sides of the aisle, lawmakers and state officials were running different permutations of the weights to gauge how their preferred districts would fare. Politicians carefully decided which factors to measure and how much weight to give each before settling on a final plan. It’s important to note that formulas are not made in a vacuum. How these weights affect school districts will change every year, based on local demographic and economic shifts. The new formula is designed to ease inequities by recognizing that districts face different challenges depending on student demographics and other geographic and economic factors.īased on an April 2015 survey completed by 80 school districts and 14 charter schools, the commission came up with “weights” for eight of these factors. By 2000, that share dropped to about 35 percent, which is about where it sits today.Īs a result, schools have grown increasingly reliant on local property taxes - a system that’s created wide disparities between the state’s wealthiest and poorest districts. In 1971, state government provided about 54 percent of public school revenue. Some “fiscally distressed” school districts garnered additional supplements, but, by some estimates, 53 percent of 2013-14 basic education funding can be traced back to 1990-91 enrollment data.įor many districts, this dynamic exacerbated inequities that grew through the 1970s and 1980s. Under that rule, the state did not acknowledge actual enrollment changes or demographic shifts, and typically provided all districts with 2 percent funding increases.ĭistricts that shrunk in enrollment saw per pupil funding rise, while those that grew saw per pupil funding diminish. With the exception of a three year period from 2008-2010, Pennsylvania has not used a student-weighted formula to distribute its main pot of education cash since 1991, when a rule called “hold harmless” became king. That “adequacy” question is one the creators of the formula specifically avoided. The formula also does not calculate how much money it takes to ensure that all students can meet state academic standards. This year, of a $5.6 billion budget, the general assembly sent about $152 million through the formula - less than 3 percent. Most advocates call this a major step forward - as the state had been one of only three in the nation lacking a student-weighted formula.īy counting actual enrollment shifts and acknowledging that some districts must spend more to educate their children, the formula adds predictability to a system that’s often been swayed by the political powers of the moment.īut lawmakers plan to use the formula to disperse only new increases in aid - locking in the disparities that were created through decades of non-formula-based distributions. The tenets of this newly enacted formula were agreed to by a bipartisan commission in June 2015 and passed by both houses of the General Assembly with overwhelming majorities recently. In effect, it’s the state’s way of acknowledging which districts need the most help. WHYY thanks our sponsors - become a WHYY sponsorĪ state formula is the tool used to decide how the pie of money should be sliced.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |