DOCUMENT RESUME ED 467 451 EA 031 819 AUTHOR Brent, Brian 0., Ed. TITLE The Political Economy of Education: The State of the States and Provinces, 1999. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Fiscal Issues, Policy, and Educational Finance Special Interest Group (Montreal, Quebec, Canada, April 19-23, 1999). INSTITUTION American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC. Fiscal Issues, Policy, and Education Finance Special Interest Group. PUB DATE 1999-04-00 NOTE 225p. PUB TYPE Collected Works Proceedings (021) EDRS.pRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC10 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Educational Finance; Elementary Secondary Education; *Financial Policy; Foreign Countries IDENTIFIERS *Canada; *United States ABSTRACT If educational finance includes the acts of raising, allocating, and using resources for educational purposes, it is difficult to think of a schooling activity that is not simultaneously a fiscal activity. When conceptualized along these lines, issues of school finance are as relevant to principals and classroom teachers as they are to state-level policymakers, superintendents, and business officials. This volume embraces this broad concept of educational finance and examines numerous instances of fiscal policy that have bearing on or take place within states, districts, and schools. The monograph contains 38 articles that collectively provide an overview of school finance in the United States and Canada. It serves two purposes. The first is to provide a report on recent school finance developments in the states and provinces. Thus, the monograph serves as an update of the comprehensive Public School Finance Programs of the United States and Canada. Second, it facilitates the exchange of ideas among policymakers and researchers. The authors are experts in their fields, each of whom offers a unique perspective on educational finance issues in their state or province. Because the views are those of the authors, the articles may provoke discussion and debate, and, hopefully, influence policymaking. (Author/RT) ENTIRE DOCUMENT: nnOR PINT QUALI Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. Tio The Political Economy of Education: The State of the States and Provinces U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND ED ED CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS CENTER (ERIC) 1999 BEEN GRANTED BY This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) official OERI position or policy. 1 ifli I VIII IIII a IL IIII a Proceedings of the 11399 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Issues, Policy, and Educational Finance Special Interest Group Montreal, Quebec, April 1999 2 BEST COPYAVAILABLE The Political Economy of Education: The State of the States and Provinces 1999 Edited By Brian 0. Brent Warner Graduate School of Education University of Rochester Proceedings of the 1999 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Fiscal Issues, Policy, and Educational Finance Special Interest Group Montreal, Quebec, April 1999 3 Forward If educational fmance includes the acts of raising, allocating, and using resources for educational purposes, it is difficult to think of a schooling activity that is not simultaneously a fiscal activity. When conceptualized along these lines, issues of school finance are as relevant to principals and classroom teachers as they are to state-level policymakers, superintendents, and business officials. This volume embraces this broad concept of educational finance and examines numerous instances of fiscal policy that has bearing on or takes place within states, districts, and schools. The volume is the eighth annual publication of the American Educational Research Association's Fiscal Issues, Policy, and Education Finance Special Interest Group. The monograph contains thirty-eight articles that collectively provide an overview of school finance in the United States and Canada. The monograph serves two purposes. The first is to provide a report on recent school finance developments in the states and provinces. To this end, the monograph serves as an annual update of the more comprehensive Public School Finance Programs of the United States and Canada. Secondly, the monograph facilitates the exchange of ideas among policymakers and researchers. The authors are experts in their field, each of whom offers a unique perspective on educational finance issues in their state or province. Because the views are those of the authors, the articles may provoke discussion and debate. There would be nothing so satisfying than if the monograph influenced policymaking. Brian 0. Brent Warner Graduate School of Education University of Rochester Acknowledgements Thank you to Philip Wexler, Dean of the Warner Graduate School ofEducation, University of Rochester, and Tyll van Geel, Chair, EducationalLeadership Program, for their support for this project. Also, thanks toElizabeth Bentley for her editorial and technical support. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS THE NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE 1 William J. Fowler, National Center for Education Statistics THE GOVERNOR'S VIEW 5 Linda Hertert LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY 15 Faith E. Crampton, National Education Association ALABAMA 19 Michael Sup ley, Texas A&M University-Kingsville ALBERTA 23 Frank Peters, University of Alberta CALIFORNIA 29 Lawrence 0. Picus, Univasity of Southern California DELEWARE 35 Yasser Nakib, George Washington University FLORIDA 43 Michael Biance, Florida State University Carolyn D. Herrington, Learning Systems Institute GEORGIA 49 Catherine C. Sielke, The University of Georgia ILLINOIS 53 David Braskamp, G. Alfred Hess, Jr. and Micere Keels Center for Urban School Policy at NorthwesternUniversity INDIANA 59 Neil D. Theobald, Indiana University KANSAS 65 Bruce Baker, University of Kansas KENTUCKY 77 Jacob E. Adams, Jr., Vanderbilt University LOUSIANA 83 Terry G. Geske, Louisiana State University MAINE 89 David L. Silvernail, University of Southern Maine MARYLAND 93 -Jennifer King Rice, University of Maryland MASSACHUSETTS 101 Mary Lynn Boscardin, Preston Green, and Sean Hutchinson University of Massachusetts at Amherst MICHIGAN 111 Michael F. Addonizio, Wayne State University MISSISSIPPI 117 Gary Johnson, Mississippi State University MISSOURI 123 Robert C. Shaw and Richard V. Hatley University of Missouri-Columbia MONTANA 129 Ernie Jean, University of MontanaMissoula NEBRASKA 135 Barbara Y. LaCost, University of Nebraska NEVADA 139 David W. Noonan, University of Nevada, Reno Terry Owens, Nevada State Department of Education NEW BRUNSWICK 143 Lawrence M. Bezeau, University of New Brunswick NEW MEXICO 147 Roberta L. Derlin, New Mexico State University NEW YORK 153 Brian 0. Brent, University of Rochester OHIO 161 Carla Edlefson, Ashland University iv 6 ONTARIO 167 Anne L. Jefferson, University of Ottawa PENNSYLVANIA 171 Scott R. Sweetland, Ohio State University SASKATCHEWAN 177 Vivian J. Hajnal, University of Saskatchewan SOUTH CAROLINA 183 Donald Tetreault, University of South Carolina TENNESSEE 191 Gary Peeve ly, Tennessee State University TEXAS 197 Catherine Clark, Texas Center for Educational Research UTAH 203 Patrick F. Galvin, University of Utah VERMONT 209 William J. Mathis, University of Vermont VIRGINIA 213 Richard G. Salmon, Virginia Tech Deborah A. Verstegen, University of Virginia Dixie White, Virginia Education Association WASHINGTON 217 Margaret L. Plecki, University of Washington WYOMING 223 Margaret R. Basom, University of Wyoming THE NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE National Changes in Resources for Elementary-Secondary Education William J. Fowler National Center for Education Statistics Introduction This paper is intended for those who are not specialists in educationfinance, who may be unaware of the sea changesthat have taken place in the financing of elementary education in the last quarter-century. Among the changes is ashift from local to state revenue for the average school districtand an abrupt end to continuous revenue growth over a century. Some school districtshave responded to less rapidly growing revenue by seeking private funds to supplement the funding of publiceducation. Both changes portend significant changes in the future of public education. The Shift from Local to State Funding A quarter-century ago, in 1974, the average schooldistrict provided 50.1 percent of the revenue to operate the school district, with the stateproviding 41.4 percent, and the federal government providing 8.5 percent (see Figure 1).By 1979, the state contribution had grown to 45.6 percent, thefederal to 9.8 percent, and the local had fallen to 44.6 percent. State contributions increased until 1987, whenthey reached 49.7 percent, and then have fallen back to the levels of 1979. Figure 1. -Sources of revenue for publicelementary and secondary schools: 1970-71 to 1994-95 Percent of revenue 80 ^ 60-Local governments 40- State governments 20-?edema'governments 11111[11111111111111111111990-91 1994-95 1970-71 1975-76 1980-81 1985-86 School year SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education,National Center for Education Statistics, Statisticsof State School Systems; Revenues and Expenditures forPublic Elementary and Secondary Education; and Common Core of Data surveys. 1