Details
Nothing to say, yet
Comment
Nothing to say, yet
Listen to CurricPodcast-G1 by ADAM GHARIB MP3 song. CurricPodcast-G1 song from ADAM GHARIB is available on Audio.com. The duration of song is 33:36. This high-quality MP3 track has 826.837 kbps bitrate and was uploaded on 6 May 2024. Stream and download CurricPodcast-G1 by ADAM GHARIB for free on Audio.com – your ultimate destination for MP3 music.
Comment
Loading comments...
The podcast discusses the issues of school funding and the economic disparities in schools across America. The main question is how to create equal opportunities for all students. The principal of a high school in Milwaukee Public School District talks about the challenges faced by large districts in terms of funding and the diverse needs of students. The principal also highlights the impact of underfunding on schools and the importance of staffing. The per-pupil funding model can create schools of choice within the district, but it can also exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities. Suggestions for improving the system are not provided. Welcome to our podcast, Dollars for Scholars, Navigating the Maze of School Funding, where we will be addressing major issues of school funding and education today. My name is Mallory, and I will be joined by a few of my other classmates to help address this critical issue. To start, I want to ask you all to think back to your own schooling experiences. What resources did you have, and what resources did you not have? How did this compare to the other schools in your area? Have you ever considered the reasoning for these differences? Well, today we are going to be talking to you about the problems with school funding and the reasons for these economic discrepancies in schools across America. No matter where you attended school, your experience is most likely different from your peers. There are so many things that impact a student's schooling experience, from the quality of classes, the curriculum, the extracurriculars, or even the course schedules, all of which tie back to our big issue of school funding. Our big question that we are going to try our best to answer today is how can changes in school funding be made to create equal opportunities for all students? As students ourselves, we have learned more about the issues of school funding and how these impact every individual student's schooling experiences. The major theorists that we are going to pull from in order to answer our big question are Gloria Ladson-Billings and Gintis and Bullitz. We will discuss the work of Gloria Ladson-Billings and how the education debt can be attributed to discrepancies within funding. We are also going to address how this issue of school funding relates to what we see in the media, as well as how it relates to teaching and learning. And now that we have established the basis for this discussion, let's jump right into our first segment of the podcast, where we will hear from Mike Raymer, who is the principal of a college preparatory high school within the Milwaukee Public School District. A recent referendum was passed in the Milwaukee Public School District, and Principal Raymer will speak about this, as well as answer some other questions relating to school funding asked by Naomi. I wanted to thank you first for meeting with me and welcoming you to the podcast. Of course. So, I think that it should be recognized that the student need is an important consideration when we think about funding schools, since it costs more to serve students entering with greater needs. So, what challenges do you think a large public school district like Milwaukee Public Schools faces regarding funding that other smaller districts might not have to consider? Sure. Large public school districts like Milwaukee Public Schools, they do face unique funding challenges compared to smaller districts. One example of a significant challenge is the diversity and scale of student needs that a large district would address and that Milwaukee Public Schools addresses. Serving a large and diverse population also requires more resources, including specialized programs and support services and facilities to accommodate those various requirements, particularly around learning. Additionally, large districts encounter difficulties in many times efficiently and effectively allocating resources across numerous schools and programs, while ensuring equity and the equitable distribution of those funds. Programs can become a complex bureaucracy, where coordinating resources across a large district logistically can be challenging and may lead to disparities depending on the programs or lack thereof. But moreover, like MPS often contends with socioeconomic disparities, with higher concentrations of students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. And addressing these inequities requires funding, both at the state and federal levels, such as extra academic support, counseling services, and, of course, partnering with community outreach programs. But also, as you might be aware, like the other thing, like MPS was a district in need of improvement. So because of that, when you're a large district, you face pressure from state as well as federal mandates requiring compliance on those things that needs to be addressed with regulations and accountability measures. So that can be challenging versus a smaller district as well. So overall, I would say that our school district, the Milwaukee Public Schools, faces distinct challenges around its size, diversity, and the complexity of meeting the needs of large and varied student populations that we have. I would definitely agree with that. I'm curious, then, in your role as a principal, how you ensure this equitable distribution of resources within your school, like you said, like MPS considers diverse needs of students. Sure. So, you know, and I think, as principal, my foremost priority is to ensure the fair distribution of those resources throughout the school, and this involves careful consideration of the diverse needs of the students here and implementing the strategies to maximize the impact of that funding. And of course, it all really should boil down to the best interests of students and student learning outcomes. One crucial aspect is always being mindful of the per-pupil allocation received by each school after the distribution of state and federal funds to the district. I think you might find this interesting, because some of this happened, obviously, while you're here, but due to the state of Wisconsin underfunding schools, MPS, you know, facing a $200 million budget shortfall this year would be an example. But in 2021 and 22, the state froze per-pupil funding for public schools for two years in a row, obviously, there. And that freeze, coupled with the highest inflation since 1981, accelerated the decline in support for our children, and the last time that per-pupil funding matched inflation was 2009. So, you might find this interesting, because I was – obviously, I was here this whole time at Reagan during that time. So, in 2009, when I did the budget, Reagan received an allocation of $5,500 per pupil, whereas in this past year, it was $3,750. So, over the span of 15 years, obviously, this represents a decrease of a little less than $2,000 per pupil. Well, let's just do the math, and I was a history teacher, not a math guy, so I had to follow the calculator. So, if you take 1,350 students, which is the current enrollment at Reagan, and you multiply it by the difference, which is around $1,750, that is over $2 million this year. I mean, could you imagine what we could do with $2 million that we had 15 years ago? So, I think that answers part of your question, and then the other part is, nothing's more important, Naomi, in running a school from a principal's perspective, in my opinion, than staffing. I can give you an example of that. In the Wisconsin Framework for Principal Leadership, which has 22 components for principals, and whoever, in my opinion, created that document was genius, because out of the 22 components, the first two are, hires the right staff, and then assign them correctly. I mean, I'm over saying it, but it's basically saying, of course, hire the right teachers and assign them, right? And nothing's more important than that. So, going back to the money part of what you were asking about, when you look back in 2008-2009, that was important for us, because while we were growing, we were a school, we were an IB school. So, as you know, an IB, Phi Ed, Art, those things are as important as the four core. So, during that year, there was a recession. If you look online, every school but us was hiring, I mean, was laying off, was accessing because of some of the things that were going on initially. But we had to hire, because you can't be an IB school, follow me, and then not have the core four. Right, right. So, we had unique challenges, and I always joke, like, that year was the beginning of the reuse staples budget, because essentially, like, we had to put all our money in, which we had to do anyways, but like, to the extent where, like, we really didn't have supplies that we would need and other things that, that year to effectively run a school. Insane, that's insane. You briefly touched on this idea of, like, a per-pupil basis in your, like, in funding and how MPS does that, and I'm curious how this nature of resource allocation, you know, creates schools of choice. We're in, within the district, we're in, like, schools that can better retain students and attract them. You know, they receive more funding, which then they can update the infrastructure, and you talked about that a little bit earlier in one of your responses about how we have these big, like, infrastructure issues within the district, and how that, you know, can kind of create and exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities within our district. Do you think this method of funding is equitable, and do you think it, like, meets the diverse needs of students within MPS? If not, can you offer some suggestions, maybe, how we could improve this system? So, I think the first part, yeah, the first part for the per-pupil funding model employed by MPS, where schools receive funding based on their enrollment, can indeed lead to the formation of schools of choice within the district. So, these schools, like, attract and retain students, benefit from the increased funding. So, for example, at our school, and I forget exactly what it was, but I think it was close to $175 more per pupil for IB, because of the costs around IB, around the academic resources, and what have you. So, there is a benefit from increased funding around that that enables those schools to enhance their facilities or resources, and which then perpetuates attracting more students, et cetera. So, it's this cycle. However, this system can exacerbate socioeconomic disparities within the district. So, as schools in wealthier neighborhoods may naturally attract more students, and consequently receive more funding, while those in disadvantaged areas struggle to compete. And where I think MPS has done a fantastic job is it puts close to 90 percent of its resources, regardless of where you live, into schools for students. So, which I think doesn't happen, perhaps, at smaller districts or whatnot, or districts that are non-MPS. But MPS really has focused that every dollar almost goes into the schools for funding schools to run. So, one potential solution would be to involve implementing, like, a weighted funding formula, where the formula would allocate additional resources to schools based on the level of need among the student population. And factors such as, again, socioeconomic status, EEL proficiency, special education needs, et cetera, are taken into consideration in those funding allocations. But by providing this additional support to schools who serve the most vulnerable population, I think this approach would tend to mitigate the disparities that might exist in a funding model. And I also think, additionally, like, investing in targeted interventions and support services for schools. I've been a big advocate over the years, as well as our district. I can remember, again, way back before 2011, we didn't have a school nurse. Actually, that year, I was the school nurse. I was the school counselor. You know, we were so small, where, like, you took on all those roles. And that, you know, I didn't... My job at the time, I was becoming, obviously, a school admin. But I was also a teacher. So, like, I wasn't equipped on those things. But that's what happens at schools like that across our state that necessarily don't have the funding for those specialized services. I was happy as a clam when we had a nurse that said, oh, I don't have to distribute medications every Tuesday to the... You know, so, but I'm just making a point that, you know, that whatever funding model would be used, I think that's so important to target interventions and specialized services for schools. And then, you know, lastly, ultimately, while the per-pupil funding model has its advantages, it's essential that we... That it doesn't perpetuate inequalities within any district. So that would be my two cents. Yeah. I appreciate your insight into that and then proposing that new funding model. I know as one of your students, and just through Emily, that you do a lot of advocacy for funding, especially for Reagan. I'm curious if you could offer, you know, a little bit into that and how you fund funding and community outreach and other stuff. Sure. I would say that persistence and having a dream and then strategizing to turn those dreams into reality is the key. And without question, you know, you haven't been a student here. I think the largest... I mean, the most challenging issue has been the facility because, you know, we started with 100 kids in 2003, now we're up to 1,350. We grew up, obviously... I always say we're like... We were like the family that had 15 brothers and sisters but three bedrooms, right? So for years, that was a dream since 2005, Naomi, when it started advocating for a new building or a campus expansion, which really became the most significant endeavor, I think, for our school. And it's been a challenge given the district's declining enrollment and all the politics around education in Milwaukee in terms of, you know, how should MPS use its buildings and what have you. But with this in mind, you know, finding funders willing to support MPS was... Over the years, I give you a little bit of background, you know, a lot of it came down to the superintendent that I was working for and their perspective on the district and our own school development. So I'll give you an example of that. Some superintendents, like Superintendent Thornton, were unyielding with what we could or could not do, while others, like Dr. Driver, entertained the notion of Reagan's expansion, even contemplating a merger with Pulaski. And under Dr. Driver's tenure, we collaborated with a student design team from UWM called UWM Design Solutions, and to visualize the possibilities and that really literally kept me motivated. So during that time, they had renderings, if you were in my office, you saw like I had this image that I would just stare at, like, you know, how do we make this happen? And honestly, it happened because of the leadership of Dr. Posley. When he assumed his role as superintendent, he basically said, Mike, you know, I get it, you need a... But like, we don't have the money in MPS right now. So he gave me, and this is the first time it happened, he gave me the go-ahead to put an advisory board together, recognizing the school's, you know, shortcomings with the facilities and its challenges. So when that happened, Naomi, I was able to, over the years, we've had a lot of benefactors that have really made our school tick. The Zilber Foundation would be one, Northwestern Mutual, the Milwaukee Bucks, so, like, over the years, I've been able to develop relationships and friendships with people. And so, for example, we had the Keltners from the Kelvin Foundation, who, you know, in UW-Madison, they donated, I think, $25 million for their new athletic facility. Tim Sheehy, Pat Fagan from the Bucks, Pat Connaughton from the Bucks. So we had these people. So when ESSER came, when ESSER, I should say when COVID hit, right, in 2020, and ESSER money were coming from the government, and I just want to clarify, because at that point, we had, MPS was given, like, $500 million, and people were like, well, why doesn't every school just get air conditioning? Yeah. Well, that $500, if you can imagine, had buckets, and one of the buckets of the $500 million was $100 million had to go to, quote-unquote, new construction. So when that happened, you know, that dream became a reality, because literally, Dr. Posley said at a principal meeting, he was like, and we need more plans, because everyone had to get their plan. And our plan was, like, 20 pages and ready to go. And he's like, everyone needs to have this plan. So I want to be clear. And then he was able to really, he advocated for our school to get $10 million to the board. And then we received from that RA, the Reagan Advisory Board, who also connected with the MPS Foundation, another $5 million total. Yeah. So everything kind of fell in place, but I hope that answers the question in terms of, you know, the story behind how that was, and how it really was about the leadership from not only the school, but, like, the district saying, yeah, go ahead and do this. Yeah. No, I think that's very commendable, and I admire your resilience, because, oh, my goodness. I mean, now it's, like, coming to fruition, it's all, like, by now. And please come back and see it, because it's unbelievable. It's going to be amazing. I'm excited. You talked a lot about, like, funding and using community outreach to gain funding and, like, boost our schools. This is kind of where I'm going to bridge into talking about the referendum. You know, MPS isn't alone as a district in turning to referendums to bridge financial gaps, especially, as you've mentioned, like, state imposed revenue limits have failed to keep up with inflation. This past April, you know, 91 school districts across the state of Wisconsin, like, reached out to the community members to, like, seek referendums on their ballot. I'm curious why you think MPS was able to, like, we only passed, but I think it was, like, 7,000 votes or something like that. Like, why do you think we were able to win over Milwaukee voters where other districts were unsuccessful? Right. Well, I honestly believe that being from Milwaukee, born and raised in Milwaukee, I believe the community cares, and it cares about its public schools, and I think that's reflected in that it passed. And I think when you look at Milwaukee, a city that has, and the state of Wisconsin where you have, right, you have these school choice, and you have schools that perhaps have funding that is coming from private and benefactors outside of what normally would be, I do believe that many citizens do care about equaling the playing field for Milwaukee public schools, and I think that's exactly what happened, and we are blessed and thankful for that, and really, two words, endless gratitude, because without that, it would have been the first time here that we would have had to cut teachers, and no one wants to do that, and we're already strapped financially, so, you know, had that not passed, and I think people knew that. I think people, I think MPS did a fantastic job communicating to stakeholders that cared what this would do, because it would eliminate pretty much music, art, bi-ed, foreign language, and really get just back to the, you know, the four core, extracurriculars, sports, all of that was on the choppy block, and I think, again, I think our city demonstrated with the vote that they didn't want to see those things go away for its kids. I definitely agree with that. I'm going to skip over our sixth question just for time and move to the last one that I sent you. Sure. So, there's a lot of discourse around education and these educational pedagogies and how we can fix schools and make them better, so one of the theorists that we talked about extensively in our courses, Gloria Lentzen-Billings, and she talked a lot about achievement in schools and a lot about the idea of the achievement gap, and in one of her pieces, she, you know, put up this analogy of, like, the country's national debt and what the term that she calls education debt, and, like I said, so she described this as the foregone schooling resources that we could have been investing in primarily low-income kids, which deficit leads to a variety of social problems that we then have to publicly, like, reinvest. I'm curious in, like, kind of this world where we put so much emphasis on standardized testing and tracking and closing this gap, how, like, we really need to, like, zoom out and look at, like, the deeper, you know, like, pieces to it, and how we can, like, through adequate school funding, you know, we can actually bridge the gap that we have in education and then hopefully, you know, kind of move towards bridging the gap. Yeah. Yeah, so I think Reagan's a great example of what she speaks to, so, and Ruth is in the pudding. So when we, so how I would say this is nothing's more important than teachers and hiring, again, the right teachers and then assigning them accordingly. If you read Mark Tucker's Surpassing Shanghai and The World is Flat by Friedman, Thomas Friedman, in both those books, they acknowledge why, basically, America, the United States has laid back not only in middle of the pack in education, but also in commerce and our gross domestic product. And I think where you would start, pay teachers, pay teachers and pay them well, just like you would in these other countries who literally have surpassed us. And then how this relates to the achievement, well, when you have the right teachers, Reagan's a great point of this. We had the right teachers where we were able to take our ACT scores in a short amount of time from a 16 and literally almost raise it to five, six points in three, four years. Now, there was a lot that we did to do that, but none of that would have happened without the commitment to share vision and mission and wanting to prepare. And we didn't even talk about the ACT. We just talked about skills. Like how is half our kids don't know main idea? Like how does that happen, right? So my point is, none of that would have happened if we didn't have teachers who are like, oh, that's not a big thing. No, we're not going to work together on that. But if you have the right teachers that are willing to incorporate those skills across all the subject matter, anything's possible. I agree. I like that outlook. That's all the questions I have for you. I appreciate your time immensely, Mr. Raymer. Thank you, Naomi and Principal Raymer, for giving us some great insight into the school funding referendum in MPS. This brings us to our next segment, where I will be shining light on this issue as it has been addressed within the news. Looking at a news clip from CBS 58 News, this clip serves as a brief summary to discuss the facts of the MPS referendum and the possible effects on the funding and staffing of this district if it passes, while also providing insight from local teachers and administration on the issue. This news segment brings up various issues surrounding the referendum being proposed and possible implications on both sides of the argument. Thinking about our question of changing school funding to create more equal opportunities, we can see how the funding over the years has not increased regardless of inflation. Therefore, MPS has had to rework its funding and make cuts in order to keep their schools open. If the referendum did not pass, there would have been significant cuts needed to be made, therefore resulting in a lack of resources among the schools. By making these cuts, students' quality of education could have been compromised, putting them at lower levels in comparison to their peers in other districts. This would only result in further expanding the inequalities that are present within the education system. To further understand the impact of funding inequities within schools, let's look at the work of Bolz and Gintis in the Correspondence Principle. Here they argue that the differences in social relationships of education can be attributed to the financial funding of the schools. Schools that receive less funding have students who are offered less opportunities, whereas schools with more funding and higher overall socioeconomic status are able to provide more opportunities for their students. With less funding, schools have larger class sizes, less up-to-date technology and resources, and lower quality teachers. These factors are what create the disparities in education. Looking at the demographic of MPS, it is majority students of color from lower income families. This inherently puts these students at a disadvantage. Add in the lower quality education, and these students are left behind, with no way to catch up. The schools in MPS are simply attempting to maintain the current resources they have, and even still, they are an underfunded district and the quality of education is reflecting this. Now that we have gotten some additional context on how this issue presents itself within the schools, and the impact of funding on inequities within the education system, let's start thinking about this on a broader scale through the work of two key critical theorists in the education world. Thank you, Mason, for covering the potential effects of the referendum on funding and staffing in Milwaukee public schools discussed in the media. I, Diana Jones, will be talking a bit about our critical theorist, as mentioned, Gloria Lanson-Billings, and the importance of adequate school funding to ensure high quality education. For those of you who are unaware of who Gloria is, she is an educational researcher and critical theorist who works in fields of education and critical race theory. She focuses on and highlights in her work the concept of societal funding of race and its impact on education. Funding goes into several different parts when speaking about education, and one thing that some people may not think about is that funds go towards who is hired at schools and when determining what makes a good school and who is able to provide good education to others. It's based on quality of teachers a school can afford. Like Principal Raymer said, nothing is more important than teachers and hiring the right teacher and assigning them accordingly. Prioritizing the quality of teachers and quality of curriculum, while also prioritizing the needs of accommodations of students, is a huge factor to a good education. When funds are low and low quality teachers are hired, many students have poor teacher-student relationships and this can cause a decline in educational achievement. Within Gloria's research, she has spoken upon the significance of recruiting and retaining diverse teachers who reflect the demographics of the student population. Having teachers who can relate to and connect with students culturally can lead to a more positive educational experience and better academic outcomes. We read a story earlier on in the semester about a kid in their early years of schooling who assumed that another child in the classroom must be the child to the man that was the same race. This is also a way that funding and race are related because it shows a lack of U.S. concept of race and how the funding of race is important along with how or where it's funded to. Gloria Billings also then focuses on low-income and minority-based schoolings where she found that inadequate funding leads to lack of resources, which directly impact the quality of education and shows that schools with limited funding struggle to provide up-to-date material, technology, support service, and maintain conductive learning environment. We will now be shifting gears to another critical theorist and another point of view of schooling funding presented by Michaela. Thank you, Dayona, for giving us insight on Gloria Lansing Billings and the importance of adequate school funding to ensure a high-quality education. Today I will be talking about Bell Hooks and how she sets the stage for transformative education relating to school funding and how school funding is not only affected by the students but the parents as well. Bell Hooks is an advocate for schools to become spaces where students are encouraged to think critically, question authority, and are actively participating in their learning process. This cannot happen if schools don't have enough funding to have engaging classrooms. Hooks emphasizes the importance of creating a classroom environment where students feel empowered to voice their perspectives, challenge ideologies, and engage in dialogue with both their peers and instructors. Students will not want to attend school or participate if they are not feeling the support from the teachers in school. If the school is not a welcoming, bright, and happy place to be for students, they are not going to want to try their hardest. Students want to be heard and understood and school funding is a big part of that to make a productive learning environment. According to Bell Hooks, to teach in a manner that respects and cares for the souls of our students is essential if we are to provide the necessary conditions where learning can most deeply and immediately begin. This cannot happen if there is little school funding for things like engaging classrooms, learning supplies, and a comfortable learning environment. Parents also rely on the schools to provide food, daycare, and transportation for their children. If their children are not being taken care of at school, parents will not want to send their kids there. Parents also want the best education for their kids and if the school is not funded adequately for a productive learning environment, there may be a reduction in student enrollment. Overall, there is a critical importance of school funding as funding and academic attainment are closely linked. Sufficient school funding ensures that schools can attract quality teachers, provide enriching curriculum, support students and families effectively, and invest in students' future success. As we close out from that conversation addressing the connections of teaching and learning to school funding, we will take a second to reflect on this discussion as a whole. First, a big thank you to Principal Raymer for meeting with us to give his input to the school funding and new referendum in Milwaukee Public Schools. His inputs about socioeconomic status and addressing the inequities and disparities between students were very insightful. We appreciate his time and knowledge that he contributed to this discussion as well as the real-world connection to the achievement gap with his school specifically. Adding to this, we heard from Mason about some media analysis of the Milwaukee referendum that gave us some good insight on the effects of this decision on both staff and students. Relating to the correspondence principle, we have learned that the difference in social relationships within schools can be attributed to the financial funding of the school. Schools that receive less funding have students who are provided with less opportunities as a result of this. Continuing on, we touch on the relation of school funding on teaching and learning. We were able to dive into the effects of the quality of learning, quality of teaching, and limited learning opportunities for students as a result of school funding. The economic gaps create many issues between the resources that students get depending on the school they attend. We learned how important it is to prioritize teaching and be passionate about it and the quality of the staff as well as prioritizing the needs of students. Considering what we have discussed throughout this podcast, we believe that there is a more effective way to deal with school funding. Due to the historic effects of redlining and the impact it has on low-income families and students, we believe that local and state taxes should not be at the center of school funding. After discussing this, we believe that reallocating funds from state level to the schools that are more in need of better funding and better resources would be a step in the right direction to correct these economic discrepancies between districts. And although this is a complex issue and it is highly debated, it is important to the education and future generations of students. School funding in America requires solutions to promote equitable resources and quality to improve our educational institution. Thank you all for taking the time to listen and we hope that you will continue to advocate for these pressing issues with school funding. Thank you.
There are no comments yet.
Be the first! Share your thoughts.
