Opinion: School funding formula needs honest update


A recent front-page article in the AJC explains the reasons usually given to change the funding formula for Georgia’s schools. We can and should simplify the formula and increase flexibility, but not at the expense of other goals, including fairness and transparency.

Even the people who designed the original Quality Basic Education formula agree that it should be updated. However, the proponents of a new formula have been unwilling to accept any objective measure for determining student needs. They want the amount of financial support to be based solely on the judgment of the General Assembly.

The Georgia Constitution does not grant discretion in this regard to our state government. It mandates that the “provision of an adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the State of Georgia.” The definition of “adequate” becomes meaningless if it is left to the whim of our legislators.

The basic funding for each student should be enough to provide a teacher for a class of a reasonable size. Although local schools could still choose the form of instruction for their students, there should be a minimum amount of state funding that everyone can understand. There must also be clear expectations about performance.

Unfortunately, the current proposals for a new funding formula would allow the state to cut its investment in our schools arbitrarily, because there would be no benchmark. This problem can be prevented, however, by setting the “base amount” in the recommendations of the Governor’s commission at a realistic level, which represents the actual cost of a typical class. The other calculations in the formula would be adjusted accordingly.

The General Assembly could still provide less funding than what the formula indicates, but it would have to acknowledge what was being done so that the public would know.

In some of these proposals, the current programs for students needing extra help would be replaced by an overall adjustment for poverty. This approach may seem simple in one sense, but it is based on the fallacious assumption that all students from low-income families – and only those students – need this help.

Moreover, the proposed number of “economically disadvantaged” students is less than half of the students who now qualify for free and reduced-price meals, and the additional funding on a per-student basis would be only a third of the extra amount for the gifted program.

Nothing is being proposed to assist the school systems that are struggling because of a low property-tax base per student. Simply stated, the state should increase its supplemental funding to these systems so that they would have a floor of taxable resources that is equivalent to the average for all students in Georgia.

The important effort to update the financing of education in Georgia should not be delayed any longer, but it must be based on an objective measure of the actual costs and not a subjective opinion. The formula should also provide extra help when needed and address the huge disparities in the resources available to local systems.

The fundamental challenge cannot be met by lowering our expectations or reducing the support to our schools. Our state should do more – and not less – to ensure that every child in Georgia has a fair chance to do well in school.

Former Atlanta school board member Joseph G. Martin Jr. helped write Georgia’s 1985 Quality Basic Education Act funding formula and served on several subsequent committees that tried to amend it.



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Opinion: Trump isn’t first president to cozy up to Putin

WASHINGTON — The definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting to get a different result, which is one of the many reasons President Trump’s news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin seemed so insane. Trump is trying to do something that both of his immediate predecessors tried to do: turn over...
Opinion: ‘Sort of a double negative’

It is an unfathomable proposition that the day would ever come when America could rightly question the loyalties of its own president, but that is precisely where we have arrived. Donald Trump’s “Surrender Summit” with President Vladimir Putin of Russia was such a disloyal, traitorous display that it boggles the mind. Russia attacked...
READERS WRITE: JULY 20

Trump did ask re: meddling, Putin said ‘no’ So Donald Trump was told to ask Putin about Russian involvement in the 2016 elections. Well, Trump did ask, and Putin denied any involvement. Putin kind of chuckled when asked because he knows the Democrats are dividing the country over these fake accusations. This is the time to show the world...
Opinion: Two cheers for democratic socialists

WASHINGTON — “Socialism has known increments of success, basic failure and massive betrayal. Yet it is more relevant to the humane construction of the twenty-first century than any other idea.” With those words, the late Michael Harrington began his book “Socialism,” published in 1972. In his day, Harrington was often...
Opinion: Trump calls off Cold War II

Beginning his joint press conference with Vladimir Putin, President Trump declared that U.S. relations with Russia have “never been worse.” He then added pointedly, that just changed “about four hours ago.” It certainly did. With his remarks in Helsinki and at the NATO summit in Brussels, Trump has signaled a historic shift...
More Stories