How School Investments Matter for Educational Outcomes: Insights From School Finance and Governance Reforms

• In Event: Toward a Civil Rights Education Finance Research Agenda

Abstract

Purpose
Public schools in the United States are among the most inequitably funded of any in the industrialized world. On every tangible measure—from qualified teachers and reasonable class sizes, to adequate textbooks, computers, facilities, and curriculum offerings—schools serving large numbers of students of color have significantly fewer resources than schools serving more affluent, white students (Darling-Hammond 2010), and these resource disparities matter greatly to educational outcomes. Recently, these inequalities have been used as fuel in an argument for market-based reforms in education. This article poses the question: How should we invest resources to achieve high-quality education in ways that redress the effects of inequities and historical discrimination?

Theoretical Framework
We adopt structural inequality theory to understand school finance systems as societal institutions whose laws, practices, and methods of distributing resources can create, maintain, and reproduce inequalities in educational opportunity.

Method
Our methods include a review of research on outcomes of school finance reforms as well as on outcomes of privatization strategies. The research we review includes econometric studies of finance system outcomes, as well as studies using qualitative and quantitative methods to examine the experiences of students and the effects of the reforms on their educational attainment. We first discuss the extent and implications of resource inequities across the country. Second, we tackle the question of whether and how money makes a difference, examining recent research nationally and in three states—Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey. Third, we glean lessons learned from domestic (New Orleans and Milwaukee) and international (Chile and Sweden) charter and voucher expansion contexts, detailing the outcomes of these approaches to reinvesting public funds in privately operated schools.

Findings
Progress towards educational equity has been stymied over the last two decades as segregation has worsened, and disparities have grown. While some have debated whether increased school spending does indeed help improve student outcomes (e.g., Hanushek and Somers 1999), recent research indicates that money does indeed matter (e.g., Lafortune et al. 2016). Our three case study states have taken approaches that substantially increase funding to low-income students and students of color – through equalizing formulas addressing teacher salaries in Connecticut, weighted student formulas in Massachusetts, and a parity funding approach in New Jersey. These efforts have resulted in improved student outcomes (Baker and Welner 2011); however, this progress is fragile, as political shifts have often created tax or spending caps or formula changes that undermine the finance reforms. In the future, it is also possible that increasing calls for privatization through charters and voucher programs could deflect money from resource equalization efforts in ways that may further exacerbate racial and socioeconomic re-segregation.

Significance
The lessons offered by our review of the literature provide important insights into how resources may be leveraged to improve and expand quality learning opportunities. We use these insights to offer concrete state and federal policy recommendations for the advancement of equity in American schools.

Authors

• Linda Darling-Hammond, Learning Policy Institute

• Titilayo Ali, Learning Policy Institute