The economic stimulus recently presented by Congress includes 150 billion for school districts. The implications of this plan, if passed, are major, as the funds would be meant for use for all aspects, including school renovations.
This money is clearly part of a larger agenda to solve the economical crisis that that is currently happening, a solution to which I would be interested in (someone) finding. However, while I always support money being spent on public education, I foresee a number of problems with the bill. In my two years in Baltimore, and particularly in my school, I have not seen a huge number of systemic changes to address glaring problems. I worry first and foremost about how the money will be spent…will we build a new state of the art gym when our library doesn’t have books or computers? Another massive problem with the bill is that the funds will only last for two years. Will we start new programs that are wonderful, only to have them cease to operate when the money is gone?
The New York Times ran an article about Congress’ stimulus package, addressing both the support and criticism of the bill. Many are “wondering how school districts could spend so many new billions so fast, whether such an outpouring of dollars would lead to higher student achievement, and what might happen in two years when the stimulus money ends” (NYTimes, Jan 28). Everyone is always focused on student achievement, but the effects of new programs and spending may not be seen for perhaps 3 or 4 years…how will and when we assess how effective the spending is?
The NEA supports the bill.“We’ve been arguing that the federal government hasn’t been living up to its commitments, but these increases go a substantial way toward meeting them,” said Joel Packer, a lobbyist for the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union."
There is some interesting criticism:
“Frederick Hess, an education policy analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, criticized the bill as failing to include mechanisms to encourage districts to bring school budgets in line with property tax revenues, which have plunged with the bursting of the real estate bubble. It’s like an alcoholic at the end of the night when the bars close, and the solution is to open the bar for another hour,” Mr. Hess said.
Are we all going to become drunks in a late night bar?
I have found that, when drinking, the best way to stay drunk in a bar is to find an all night bar where I can keep drinking, or find some to take home. Perhaps schools will benefit most when there is a steady stream of support, which can be supported both on local and national levels.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/education/28educ.html?ref=politics
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think that just this once it may be appropriate to shift our gaze away from the all-important "student achievement." The purpose of the bill is to stimulate the economy, create jobs, and restore confidence, and with this in mind any benefit to schools will be a beneficial, but secondary, effect of the legislation.
I hold that renovations and physical improvements are the best use of these dollars. Such projects achieve the primary objective of creating jobs, while addressing a dire need for many of our struggling districts. Improved facilities may not have an immediate impact on achievement scores, but none would deny that they impact the quality of education students are receiving. And, counter to Mr. Hess's unfair and disingenuous metaphor, money spent on renovations now is more likely to decrease, rather than increase, future spending. Districts that make large capital outlays to replace aging heating systems, install new windows, and repair crippled plumbing will see a significant decrease in maintenance and energy costs. Meanwhile, they make schools more welcoming, attractive places, drawing in new families and raising property values.
Post a Comment