Gregory Freeman: Give Students A Fair Share. P-D 4/6/1997

Headline: GIVE STUDENTS A FAIR SHARE
Reporter: By Gregory Freeman

Publication: ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Last Printed: Sun., Apr. 6, 1997
Section: NEWS ANALYSIS, Page: 7B, Edition: FIVE STAR LIFT

WHY CAN'T all school districts get the same amount of money per pupil?
   It's a question that's crossed my mind more than once as I've considered the disparity in education that students get. Why, for instance, does the Ladue School District pay $9,348 a year to educate each pupil while the De Soto School District pays $3,975 for each student? Why does the Clayton School District pay $9,400 for each of its students while the Jennings School District pays $3,854? Does society place more value on a student from Ladue than on a student from De Soto? Is a student in Clayton considered more important than a student in Jennings?
   As it stands, most school districts get their money from state and local sources. Some districts have more money available than others because they have a larger tax base; the school desegregation case also plays a role is some of the disparities.
   But should students from districts with smaller tax bases suffer because their parents may not have as much money as other parents from another part of the area? Should a child be punished because her parents are not as affluent as some other parents?

I thought about this last week as Neal Peirce and Curtis Johnson - authors of the Peirce Report, an encyclopedic study of the region - discussed their findings during a sold-out luncheon at America's Center.
   Johnson told the group that the "single most powerful tool" to ensure that this area remain economically viable is education, preparing young people for the future.
   "The difference between those who have and those who have not is the difference between those who are prepared and those who aren't, " he said.
   "A lot of people agree that nationally this issue is the equivalent of nuclear weapons in the 21st century, " he said. If our young people aren't prepared for the future, we will all suffer in the long run.

Some have begun to recognize that. Gov. Mel Carnahan wants to put computers in every school, and he wants to offer $1,500 tuition tax credits for college students. Illinois Gov. Jim Edgar has been stumping for a tax increase for education.

All well and good. But even if all of those ideas were implemented, the school systems in Missouri and Illinois would still offer unequal education to its students.
What would happen, though, if all the funds for education in the state - Missouri or Illinois - were consolidated and each school district spent the same amount of money per pupil? It would seemingly make certain that each student in the state was offered the same educational opportunity.

Some who might disagree with this idea might suggest that those who make more money have the right to a better education for their youngsters than those who don't.
I would agree with them if we are talking about private schools and private funds. Certainly that's the capitalistic system; if you have more money, you're free to spend it in any way you wish.
But when we talk about public schools, we're talking about public money.

In this country - theoretically, anyway - it should make no difference how much money one makes when it comes to getting public services. It doesn't always happen that way, of course, but it's a noble goal and one that most would argue for.
In the city of St. Louis, for instance, officials would surely argue against any suggestion that the more-affluent Central West End got better and more frequent street cleaning than the less-affluent Wells-Goodfellow neighborhood. Both neighborhoods are entitled to the same service, regardless of how much money their residents make.
The same argument can be made for all school districts in the state to get and spend the same amount of money per pupil. Not only would it offer an equal opportunity to all students in the state - whether their area is rural or urban, poor or wealthy - but also it would help prepare all students for the future.

As Peirce and Johnson point out, in short order these students will make up the basis of our regional economy. Preparing the future work force means making sure that all of our students get a good education.
As we look at the challenges that face us in the next century, it would be wise for us to make sure that each youngster gets a fair shot at the brass ring.

Daniel Schesch - Webweaver

back