Change in California Education Funding to Focus on Achievement Gap
By Michael Higham | 01/05/2013 | Budget, California, Education, Issues | 8 CommentsCalifornia Governor Jerry Brown is proposing a shift in how the state funds K-12 education. In hopes of closing the achievement gap, a larger portion of California education funding would be allocated to schools with low-income and English learning students. The plan also includes increased autonomy for local school districts to decide how their state funding is spent. These changes are expected to appear in Governor Brown’s budget that is to be released on Jan. 10 and take effect on Jul. 1.
The achievement gap is the disparity in student performance among different demographics. Governor Brown intends to focus the budget reallocation on low-income school districts, which may positively affect their performance. Education Week describes the achievement gap regarding low-income students as follows:
Often means having fewer educational resources at home, in addition to poor health care and nutrition. At the same time, studies have also found that children in poverty whose parents provide engaging learning environments at home do not start school with the same academic readiness gaps seen among poor children generally.
There is a stark contrast between support and skepticism for the budget change. Assemblywoman Norma Torres (D-Chino) says, “More money for those districts is a good option to look at.” Yet, some are weary of the idea that the state can differentiate funds from well-off communities and allocate them to fund disadvantaged communities. This is an issue of equity, impartiality or fairness of California education funding.
Local school board member Steve Garcia from the Ontario-Montclair School District stated:
“There’s a two-edged sword, because if you do well, and work with your staff, and place close monitoring on benchmarks and student achievement, you are essentially penalized for doing better.”
Michael Kirst, president of the State Education Board, points out that the state will not be extracting funds from wealthy communities. He says, “All schools are to increase in their amounts. They’ll just increase differentially.”
Assemblyman Curt Hagman (R-Chino Hills) opposes the idea of essentially providing more funding to schools that under-perform. However, Hagman favors the plan to provide local schools with more autonomy over how their state money is spent.
Given less mandates from the state, school districts will be able to decide how much it will allocate to adult education and class sizes, for example. Education finance advisor for California, Kevin Gordon, told a Northern California ABC news channel the plan is built on trusting local school boards to spend money according to their needs, without negatively affecting students. California Federation of Teachers secretary-treasurer Jeff Freitas opposes the idea. Without state requirements with funds, inequitable funding within local school districts can leave certain programs under-funded.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office shows that student achievement for the disadvantaged has been on the rise since the 2002-2003 school year. The percentages are based on students that score at or above basic proficiency on the California Standardized Test (CST). However, low-income and English learning students are still below benchmark standards for state and federal measurements.
In the 2011-2012 school year, low-income students scored 737 in the Academic Performance Index (API), the California measurement. English learning students were at 716 API. The benchmark score is 800 API. The Adequate Yearly Performance (AYP) federal measurement shows both demographics are below 50 percent proficiency in Mathematics and English Arts.
Governor Brown attempted to change California education funding with the 2011-2012 budget, but economic uncertainty at the time led the plan to be scrapped. The Los Angeles Times noted the effect the previous budget would have had on local school districts had the plan proceeded: increased funds for Compton Unified by $4,700 per pupil while only increasing funds for Manhattan Beach Unified by $681 per pupil.
Proposition 30 passed during the 2012 election cycle and will be providing the much needed budget predictability this time around. Prop 30 tax increases for education funding took effect on the first of January.
Providing an equal education to the socio-economically disadvantaged may require more funds. Proponents of equal funding across the board may not agree with Governor Brown’s proposal but if the focus of the state is to close the achievement gap, providing the tools for a better education for under-performing schools may help push positive results.








Leave Your Comment →
8 Comments
Danny Wedworth
01.05.2013
I’m confused why funding would be shifted from a group that has the best chance of success, to a group that is likely to underachieve? Why are we gimping children and school districts from English speaking homes, and areas that do most of the funding? I do not think parents of the areas that fund the majority of the school systems will be pleased to find out that kids in schools from other areas are going to have better equipment, computers and curriculum.. there is a difference in all the schools being adequately and equally funded for fairness of the students, and blatant favoritism to appeal to a voting base.. and using the children’s futures as leverage is dispicable. No wonder so many people have moved out of Cali
Michael Higham
01.07.2013
@michaelhigham
I understand why the problem of equity stirs so much controversy. It’s a problem that even pops up within local school districts, especially here in San Diego.
How would you approach improving education for disadvantaged students/families, though? They might not come home to the same environment as others. I know that money isn’t always the solution, but what would be your approach to the achievement gap?
Thanks for reading, Danny!
Danny Wedworth
01.07.2013
I’m sure there are many factors that could change and improve this, but my approach would be partly getting parents more involved in their childrens lives/school business. If the parent’s do not even know the kids have homework, or that they are failing math, how are they going to make them do the work, or help them where they do not understand? If the parents are not there, no amount of extra support in a classroom will catch them up to other students because they are missing critical variables in the growing up, and educational process… Parents that love them and care for their future. This whole problem stems from children who have parents that do not care. This is especially true for families who live here, use our school system, our support systems, and yet will not even learn the language, nor teach their children the language. This to me is a literal damnation from a parent, who is so uninvolved and negligent they wish to leave their child uneducated, unable to support themselves(legally), or even properly communicate in a country they were likely born in.
It is not the fault of the rest of the children in the system when a child without loving parents is falling behind, so why should they pushed aside when statistically they have a much better chance of success? Sometimes the truth hurts, and it is hard to tell someone that they are the ones that need to toughen up, but I feel this is true of this situation.. As someone who came from a household with a single parent, working 50-60 hours a week, and still barely making ends meet, growing up in the age of technology without the ipods and cell phones that your friends have, I can 100% confirm it is possible to come from almost nothing and achieve at least average, if not better. The difference between myself and someone in my position who fell behind in school is that my parent, usually found working until I was asleep every single night, was that despite working nonstop, my parent never me allowed to slack. My parent always pushed me, trusted me, believed in me and wanted the best for me, so they strove to do whatever possible to make that happen, lack of money or not.
In the end, it isn’t about the money at all Michael, it is about the environment, and support a child recieves, and unfortunately, I do not have a great answer of how to help those who have no parental or home support, but it most certainly is not in the form of bringing down the support of others. Thanks for the article.
Pete
01.05.2013
Let’s face it the upbringing and education is the responsibility of the parents NOT the taxpayers. This strategy of throwing more money at low income students has worked with very limited success in the past. Why does JB think it’ll work this time?? The state should have a fair/equal allocation for all kids.
I have a relative that worked as a teacher and she said many of the ESL kids had parents that had no desire to learn english; which makes it more difficult for their kids.. Many families come to this country so their kids can get a free education, but then the parents fail to acclimate themselves[?].
It seems JB is more about helping the minorities then working for the tax paying majority..!
Michael Higham
01.07.2013
@michaelhigham
Parents having no desire to get involved in their kids’ education is a huge problem, I agree. Local school boards have to try and improve parent involvement, certainly easier said than done. It’s apparent at my local school district in San Diego. Newly elected board members have great ideas on this, but I’ll be watching to see if things work out.
How would you approach this problem? Thanks for reading, by the way!
Danny Wedworth
01.07.2013
Michael, I wrote my comment above before I scrolled down and noticed you acknowledged this issue here as well, but I thought of something after I noticed your ATA. What is your opinion of perhaps getting universities involved in tutoring and preparing high school students who are having troubles at home/academically? Perhaps “charities” run on the campus that can be donated to or something of this sort, or university systems could set aside money for a special program to help those in the area who need it?
We all know universities are notorious for raising tuition rates no matter what, coupled with 4 year professors and college educators as well as administrators being some of the highest paid jobs in the nation, and higher education constantly boasting of how they “strive” to raise the disadvantaged up. I would think this would be a perfect “outreach” program for a university to do.. to tutor and help struggling pre college students, offering them school websites, (library access perhaps?), degree and career planning, a hotline maybe?
I will be the first to admit, I’m not a university or county board of education finance professional, but I can almost guarentee using funds for this would be a better investment in the future of the area/people than higher salaries for overpaid admins and profs, or the university (which is already semi publicly funded, so they really should have no choice in the matter, should the people decide this is a good idea), using funds that were to be spent on landscape or something. My point basically I guess, is that there are many avenues to address helping people, and the best ones imo do not involve unbalanced funding or underfunding in primary schools, when there is so much money wasted by the education system in our country.
Maria
01.05.2013
Nice articlee
Michael Higham
01.07.2013
@michaelhigham
Thanks for reading, Maria! Do you think that Gov. Brown is effective in his approach to help underachieving students and schools?