Monetarily, the state legislature allocated nearly $650 million more to public schools for the next fiscal year. Much of this increase goes toward special-education funding. Under an amendment to Michigan's Constitution, the state must pay a certain share of costs for programs it mandates that local schools provide, including special-education programs. Last month, the state Supreme Court ruled that the state had consistently underpaid its share of costs for the last 17 years, a major victory for public school districts.
While recompense for past funding shortfalls have yet to be determined, state lawmakers moved quickly to ascertain the state does not fail its students again. Ditching a complex, formulaic approach to special-education funding, they voted for an overall $752 million increase. Although opponents charge supporters with playing an economic shell game - diverting funds already earmarked for public school to specifically pay for special education - the gesture is necessary. Regardless of the path taken, school districts will welcome every funding increase they get.
Several districts will also emit an additional sigh of relief once the current funding session passes. Earlier this year, many districts - including a number in the metro Detroit area - were unpleasantly surprised by an announcement from the governor's office. Citing declining standardized-test scores, Engler unveiled a plan that would wrest control of academic and administrative matters from school districts beset by poor test performance. At the time, the proposal was slated for inclusion along with the funding issue, but it encountered heavy opposition. School officials were joined in protest by Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike, who felt Engler's proposal inappropriate for the current debate.
Some hinted, however, under different circumstances, they might agree with Engler's proposal. Engler may believe that having hand-picked lieutenants in Lansing controlling low-achieving school districts is the best solution for low test scores, but his solution ignores the side effects such a take-over might have on these school districts. Communities surrounding school districts are best suited to select its administrators and guide its policy decisions. Regardless of the state's success, once control passed back to the communities, districts would be returned to local hands out of touch with the district's day-to-day administration. While Lansing is ultimately responsible for the state's public schools, it should not have control over small portions of the system.
Given adequate funding, students' performance in these districts will improve without state intervention. Engler must permanently retire his blueprint for educational disaster.
07-16-97
should be sent to: daily.letters@umich.edu | should be sent to: online.daily@umich.edu |