Financing Education Equitably & Sources of Revenue - Essay Example

The purpose of this paper is to examine the wealth of district schools, and the apparent measurement trends that affect school financial formulas. Additionally, it looks at the problems associated with measurement formulas, the school financial equitability and sources of revenue. There are several steps involved in measuring the school district wealth. The constitution is the leading pillar in ensuring the laws formulated favors the reformation of education. Greater equity calls for funding district schools, or the federal seeks any other appropriate education funding method.

The most commonly used method to ensure equity in disbursement of education funds is measuring the differences in per-pupil revenues among district schools in a state. The most challenging problems that the state faces are ensuring equity and enough education funds allocation among the district schools. Different states have different mechanisms of allocating their funds to district schools. For the states to do away with the problem of considerable variation between the school districts, they had to offer state support based on these different school needs.

The needs ranged from the time requirement or in terms of teachers that a given school requires. The following is some of trends used in measuring district school’s wealth. First, flat grant, which refers to, an equal amount of funds allocated to every school in the district. Wealthier states are capable of maintaining small classes, which mean more, students’ aid per student as compare to poor states provide large classes. Secondly, foundation program, which calls for the states to tax the local property a certain amount and therefore, ensuring that each district will receive minimum per-student revenue.

If the state, is not able to provide a sufficient amount the state contributes the rest. Thirdly, the state may choose to use to reward for effort method as a measure of school wealth in the districts. The method aims at ensuring equal burden among the tax payers in the state. The method of equalizing may be based on the percentage or the yield guaranteed by a state. Another common measure of district school wealth is seeking the effect of a combined approach method employed by some states in the allocation of funds.

Some states combine foundation program which is the basic method to all states, with other methods such as; reward for effort program, flat grant amongst others. This is because at a certain level, foundation program will require funds from the local property taxes and that the districts should be free to make their tax rates flexible. Measuring the wealth in regard to its category is also a way of determining district school wealth. This aims at achieving equal states support as different district has varied financial needs.

Weighing pupils’ weight may also be a way of measuring district school’s wealth, since weighted student count applies in the foundation or reward for effort program in the allocation of funds. The pupil weight method is appropriate since it considers differences in school needs and district school wealth differences. There are several limitations in application of measurement methods which poses problems. Measuring equity in terms of the differences of per-pupil revenue in a state is discriminative, since some states end up with higher funding equity than others.

This is because wealthy states provide small class sizes whereas poor states have got large class sizes. The states also face the problem since they have to meet the expectations of a large number of school districts. The ability of the foundation program to be effective in ensuring equality in fund disbursement depends on how the plan set up into action. In addition, the equality efforts by foundation method may be a hoax in that differences in state wealth requires them to select their tax rates.

At last the per-pupil revenue requirement may not be met thus leading to a disadvantage. Other methods of funds allocation to districts are discriminative since they consider poor states to be allocated more resources and never consider the wealthy states. Other funding programs, only consider funding specific needs, and do not put district wealth into consideration. Definition of terms Equity is a federal law that addresses a wide range of discrimination and unfair dealings that may be based on race or poverty.

Equality is equal distribution of state resources without discrimination. Proportional tax also known as the flat tax is a tax where all income levels undergo taxation at the same rate. Proportional tax is regressive as by charging the same rate the lower income groups are at a disadvantage since a greater portion of their income goes to tax. Change in income does not have effect on tax rate. High income earning people pays a higher tax as compared to low income earners but the ratio is the same.

Regressive tax is tax where tax rate decreases with an increase in income. Low income people pay a large portion of their income as compared to high income taxpayers. Progressive tax is a tax where tax rate increase with an increase in taxpayers income. Tennessee Basic Education Program is a fund disbursement where state funds generates and distributed to Tennessee schools. Average Daily Attendance can be defined as the total number of children who attend in a given district or school every day.

The average may be attained by considering the bimonthly or quarterly attendance in order to evaluate the midyear funds adjustments by the state. Average Daily Membership is a measure of the how many children enroll to attend a given district throughout the year. It may be determined by checking how students enter and leave the district or school midyear. Average Daily Membership and Average Daily Attendance have similar comparisons in terms of their financial plans, since in both, the districts have to plan their budgets and staffing either yearly or at the middle of the year adjustment to enrollment.

This commonly leads to decrease in financial assistance as financial aid may not be easy to access mid stream. This is a serious threat as is complicating their financial planning. In conclusion, to ensure equality in financing education states have to choose the appropriate method of financing. There should be corresponding degree of ranking the district without regarding its wealth or capability. References Bardaglio, P. W., & Putman, A. (2009). Boldly sustainable: hope and opportunity for higher education in the age of climate change.

Washington, D.C.: NACUBO.