Maryland received a $6.7 million grant from the U.S. Department of Education to continue to improve underperforming schools within the state. Baltimore City Schools, along with Prince George’s County Schools, are typically allotted funds from federal school improvement grants. In the Baltimore Sun article, Arne Duncan, the U.S. Secretary, states that’s the money helps with “the very difficult work of turning around some of our hardest to serve schools.” More federal funding increases the likelihood that students will have access to basic school supplies, technology, and instructional resources; however money should not be viewed as the sole solution for failing schools.
As seen in Detroit, the issue is not whether money is available; it is more so how will schools access money and whether they can allocate money to the most essential areas. The Detroit Free Press reports that Detroit Public Schools only spent 42% of their $6.3 million grant. WestEd’s research, a San Francisco-based education and development agency, indicates that “bureaucratic hurdles and impediments” stop schools from spending federal funding. An exhaustive, time consuming approval process delays the delivery of necessary resources, which leaves many school personnel feeling disgruntled and uninterested in utilizing funds. Furthermore, money may be disproportionately allocated to programs or student subgroups that do not need additional funding. Stringent federal guidelines may prohibit schools from spending money in areas simply because they do not align with federal regulations.
Uninhibited funding programs, such as DonorsChoose.org, should indicate to policy makers that teachers need more than money. Teachers need thoughtful, research-based initiatives coupled with flexible funding to impact their students. Teachers, students, and families should have a more direct means of deciding how school money is allocated, especially considering that they are the individuals directly impacted by the lack of funds or resources. Money isn’t the saving grace for schools. Assessing the needs of each area and creating flexible means to allocate money provides a more promising future for Baltimore’s students.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree that teachers need more money. It is so frustrating because there never seems to be autonomy within the classrooms unless teachers spend their own money. Teachers only set up accounts with DonorsChoose in order to get vital supplies, like a class set of novels, or a document projector. Supplies like these are often beyond what teachers can feasibly buy, but with their presence in the classroom students are able to access so much more. But the question remains about simple supplies, from pencils, paperclips, paper, colored paper, markers, glue, folders. All those small supplies that teachers never seem to have enough of. I know that I have spent plenty of my own money supplying my kids with these resources because it was important for their learning. But why should I have to do that? Why does it seem that there are funds, but always a shortage for teachers?
There is a serious disconnect between the money received by these school systems and the allocation of funds. The goal of the school system is to provide students with a quality education. How can this be possible if money is not given to the schools to provide teachers with the supplies necessary to facilitate student achievement? The people making the decisions for the money must have never been in the classroom. Aside from resources, I also feel that my school is understaffed. Who is making these decisions? How can we, as teachers, make it known that the needs of the classroom should be one of the first on the budget list?
Post a Comment