EEUU: The constitutional right to education is long overdue

América del Norte/EEUU/Diciembre 2017/https://theconversation.com/

 

Public school funding has shrunk over the past decade. School discipline rates reached historic highs. Large achievement gaps persist. And the overall performance of our nation’s students falls well below our international peers.

These bleak numbers beg the question: Don’t students have a constitutional right to something better? Many Americans assume that federal law protects the right to education. Why wouldn’t it? All 50 state constitutions provide for education. The same is true in 170 other countries. Yet, the word “education” does not appear in the United States Constitution, and federal courts have rejected the idea that education is important enough that it should be protected anyway.

After two decades of failed lawsuits in the 1970s and ‘80s, advocates all but gave up on the federal courts. It seemed the only solution was to amend the Constitution itself. But that, of course, is no small undertaking. So in recent decades, the debate over the right to education has mostly been academic.

The summer of 2016 marked a surprising turning point. Two independent groups – Public Counsel and Students Matter – filed lawsuits in Michigan and Connecticut. They argue that federal law requires those states to provide better educational opportunities for students. In May 2017, the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a similar suit in Mississippi.

At first glance, the cases looked like long shots. However, my researchshows that these lawsuits, particularly in Mississippi, may be onto something remarkable. I found that the events leading up to the 14th Amendment – which explicitly created rights of citizenship, equal protection and due process – reveal an intent to make education a guarantee of citizenship. Without extending education to former slaves and poor whites, the nation could not become a true democracy.

Why a federal right to education matters

Even today, a federal constitutional right to education remains necessary to ensure all children get a fair shot in life. While students have a state constitutional right to education, state courts have been ineffective in protecting those rights.

Without a federal check, education policy tends to reflect politics more than an effort to deliver quality education. In many instances, states have done more to cut taxes than to support needy students.

And a federal right is necessary to prevent random variances between states. For instance, New York spends US$18,100 per pupil, while Idaho spends $5,800. New York is wealthier than Idaho, and its costs are of course higher, but New York still spends a larger percentage on education than Idaho. In other words, geography and wealth are important factors in school funding, but so is the effort a state is willing to make to support education.

And many states are exerting less and less effort. Recent data show that 31 states spend less on education now than before the recession – as much as 23 percent less.

States often makes things worse by dividing their funds unequally among school districts. In Pennsylvania, the poorest districts have 33 percent lessper pupil than wealthy districts. Half of the states follow a similar, although less extreme, pattern.

Studies indicate these inequities deprive students of the basic resources they need, particularly quality teachers. Reviewing decades of data, a 2014 study found that a 20 percent increase in school funding, when maintained, results in low-income students completing nearly a year of additional education. This additional education wipes out the graduation gap between low- and middle-income students. A Kansas legislative study showed that “a 1 percent increase in student performance was associated with a .83 percent increase in spending.”

These findings are just detailed examples of the scholarly consensus: Money matters for educational outcomes.

The new lawsuits

While normally the refuge for civil rights claims, federal courts have refused to address these educational inequalities.  In 1973, the Supreme Court explicitly rejected education as a fundamental right. Later cases asked the court to recognize some narrower right in education, but the court again refused.

After a long hiatus, new lawsuits are now offering new theories in federal court. In Michigan, plaintiffs argue that if schools do not ensure students’ literacy, students will be consigned to a permanent underclass. In Connecticut, plaintiffs emphasize that a right to a “minimally adequate education” is strongly suggested in the Supreme Court’s past decisions. In Mississippi, plaintiffs argue that Congress required Mississippi to guarantee education as a condition of its readmission to the Union after the Civil War.

While none of the lawsuits explicitly state it, all three hinge on the notion that education is a basic right of citizenship in a democratic society. Convincing a court, however, requires more than general appeals to the value of education in a democratic society. It requires hard evidence. Key parts of that evidence can be found in the history of the 14th Amendment itself.

The original intent to ensure education

Immediately after the Civil War, Congress needed to transform the slave-holding South into a working democracy and ensure that both freedmen and poor whites could fully participate in it. High illiteracy rates posed a serious barrier. This led Congress to demand that all states guarantee a right to education.

In 1868, two of our nation’s most significant events were occurring: the readmission of southern states to the Union and the ratification of the 14th Amendment. While numerous scholars have examined this history, few, if any, have closely examined the role of public education. The most startling thing is how much persuasive evidence is in plain view. Scholars just haven’t asked the right questions: Did Congress demand that southern states provide public education, and, if so, did that have any effect on the rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment? The answers are yes.

Poster with text from the reconstructed Constitution depicting African-American leaders in Louisiana. At center is a full-length portrait of Oscar J. Dunn, lieutenant governor of Louisiana, seated at a desk. Surrounding him are 29 portraits of African-American delegates to the Louisiana Constitutional Convention of 1868. Know Louisiana

As I describe in the Constitutional Compromise to Guarantee Education, Congress placed two major conditions on southern states’ readmission to the Union: Southern states had to adopt the 14th Amendment and rewrite their state constitutions to conform to a republican form of government. In rewriting their constitutions, Congress expected states to guarantee education. Anything short was unacceptable.

Southern states got the message. By 1868, nine of 10 southern states seeking admission had guaranteed education in their constitutions. Those that were slow or reluctant were the last to be readmitted.

A newly freed African-American group of men and a few children pose near a canal against the ruins of Richmond, Virginia. Photo made after Union troops captured Richmond on April 3, 1865. Everett Historical/Shutterstock

The last three states – Virginia, Mississippi and Texas – saw Congress explicitly condition their readmission on providing education.

The intersection of southern readmissions, rewriting state constitutions and the ratification of the 14th Amendment helps to define the meaning of the 14th Amendment itself. By the time the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, state constitutional law and congressional demands had cemented education as a central pillar of citizenship. In other words, for those who passed the 14th Amendment, the explicit right of citizenship in the 14th Amendment included an implicit right to education.

The reasoning of both Congress and the state conventions was clear: “Education is the surest guarantee of the … preservation of the great principles of republican liberty.”

The rest is history. Our country went from one in which fewer than half of states guaranteed education prior to the war to one in which all 50 state constitutions guarantee education today.

The new cases before the federal courts offer an opportunity to finish the work first started during Reconstruction – to ensure that all citizens receive an education that equips them to participate in democracy. The nation has made important progress toward that goal, but I would argue so much more work remains. The time is now for federal courts to finally confirm that the United States Constitution does, in fact, guarantee students the right to quality education.

Fuente: https://theconversation.com/the-constitutional-right-to-education-is-long-overdue-88445

Fuente imagen :

 

Comparte este contenido:

UK education unions warn that disadvantaged children to be hurt most by cuts

Europa/Reino Unido/8 de noviembre de 2016/Fuente: www.ei-ie.org

Los niños desfavorecidos es probable que sean los más afectados por los cambios de gobierno a los fondos escolares, de acuerdo con los nuevos recortes Escuela iniciativa en línea de sindicatos de la educación en marcha por dos sindicatos de la educación del Reino Unido. Las escuelas con los niños más desfavorecidos tendrán que hacer frente los mayores recortes de fondos cuando el gobierno reasigna fondos para las escuelas, según los cálculos de la Unión Nacional de Profesores (NUT) y la Asociación de Maestros y Profesores (ATL).

Sin autoridad local areaswould general estará mejor después de los fondos escolares reasignación

Los cálculos, que son objeto de schoolcuts.org.uk, un nuevo mapa interactivo de las escuelas de Inglaterra lanzado el 4 de noviembre por los sindicatos, que muestran lo siguiente ocurrirá si el gobierno simplemente reasigna el presupuesto de las escuelas generales existentes ‘:

– Las escuelas con las ingestas más necesitadas se enfrentarían a las mayores pérdidas medias en términos reales – 578 £ por alumno en las escuelas primarias y 780 £ en las escuelas secundarias.

– La pérdida media términos reales para las escuelas primarias sería £ 96.481, o 401 £ por alumno.

– La pérdida media términos reales para las escuelas secundarias sería £ 290 228, o 365 £ por alumno.

En adición:

– Nueve de cada 10 escuelas de Inglaterra (92 por ciento) podrían enfrentarse a los recortes presupuestarios en términos reales durante los próximos cuatro años.

– No hay un área autoridad local es probable que vea un aumento real de los fondos términos de sus escuelas y academias, incluso después de que el impacto redistributivo de una nueva fórmula.

– Promedio de los recortes presupuestarios podrían ser del 6,5 por ciento en las escuelas primarias y 9 por ciento en las escuelas secundarias.

El schoolcuts.org.ukwebsite permite a los usuarios ver con precisión cómo cada escuela podría verse afectada en términos reales por la intención del Gobierno de aplicar una nueva fórmula de financiación para las escuelas, junto con los recortes términos reales a los fondos por alumno y el costo se incrementa ser impuestas por el gobierno. Mediante la introducción de un código postal en la página web, los visitantes pueden ver cómo todas las escuelas de esa zona es probable que irá hasta el año 2020 y cómo que la pérdida de financiación estimada equivale al número de puestos de maestros.

Disadvantaged children are likely to be hit hardest by government changes to school funding, according to the new School Cuts online initiative from education unions launched by two UK education unions.

Schools with the most disadvantaged children are likely to face the biggest funding cuts when the government reallocates school funding, according to calculations by the National Union of Teachers (NUT) and the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL).

No local authority areaswould overall be better off after school funding reallocation

The calculations, which are the subject of schoolcuts.org.uk, a new interactive map of England’s schools launched on 4 November by the unions, show that the following will occur if the government just reallocates the existing overall schools’ budget:

–       Schools with the most deprived intakes would face the greatest average losses in real terms – £578 per pupil in primary schools, and £780 in secondary schools.

–       The average real terms loss for primary schools would be £96,481, or £401 per pupil.

–       The average real terms loss for secondary schools would be £290,228, or £365 per pupil.

In addition:

–       Nine in 10 schools in England (92 percent) could face budget cuts in real terms over the next four years.

–       No local authority area is likely to see a real terms funding increase for its schools and academies, even after the redistributive impact of a new formula.

–       Average budget cuts could be 6.5 percent in primary schools and 9 percent in secondary schools.

The schoolcuts.org.ukwebsite enables users to see precisely how each individual school could be affected in real terms by the Government’s intention to implement a new funding formula for schools alongside real terms cuts to funding per pupil and cost increases being imposed by the government. By entering a post code on the website homepage, visitors can see how all the schools in that area are likely to fare between now and 2020 and how that estimated funding loss equates into numbers of teacher posts.

School funding reallocation not appropriate governmental solution to ensure quality education

“No head teacher should be put in the position of increasing class sizes, leaving building repairs undone or cutting staff and resources simply to balance the books, nor should any parent accept this for their child,” stressed NUT General Secretary Kevin Courtney.

We are one of the richest countries in the world, and can and should be funding our schools properly, he said adamantly.

The ATL General Secretary Mary Bousted also urged “the Government to increase the overall funding for schools.” If it just reallocates the existing budget many children will lose out, with some of the most deprived children being hit hardest, she condemned.

Highlighting that no school should be forced to cope with a drop in funding that will jeopardise its ability to deliver a broad and balanced curriculum and recruit and retain staff, she reminded that “all children deserve a fair chance to succeed and should not suffer because schools are under-resourced by the Government and teachers over-worked.”

In their joint statement, NUT and ATL are calling on the Government to take immediate action to inject much needed money into an already beleaguered system and protect schools from rising inflation, as it is in their views “the only sensible solution to a crisis already underway and which is set to get harder for schools to cope with”.

The report by NUT and ATL, “Invest, Don’t Cut – The predicted impact of Government policy on funding for schools and academies by 2020”, presenting findings from the NUT/ATL interactive website is available here.

Fuente: https://www.ei-ie.org/en/news/news_details/4164

Comparte este contenido:

El Salvador: Escuelas en aprietos porque Educación aún no les entrega fondos

El Salvador / elsalvador.com / 5 de ctubre de 2016.

La cartera de Estado nada más ha entregado un porcentaje a las instituciones educativas; Los directores tienen la esperanza de que el gobierno les girará el dinero para operar en este mes, porque tienen muchas necesidades de todo tipo

En los institutos donde se brinda enseñanza técnica requieren comprar equipo e insumos para los talleres.

bien el año escolar termina oficialmente el próximo 11 de noviembre a estas alturas el Ministerio de Educación (Mined) aún no ha completado el desembolso de los fondos de funcionamiento a los centros educativos del sistema público, según confirmaron durante un sondeo los directores de algunas instituciones de este sector.

Jorge Sevillano, director del Instituto Nacional de la Colonia Santa Lucía, de Ilopango, explicó este viernes que el presupuesto de ese centro educativo es cercano a los $45 mil, de los cuales solo les han entregado el 40 %.

“Prácticamente solo (ha servido) para pagar lo que teníamos de deuda (con proveedores), el pago de servicios básicos como energía eléctrica, agua, internet, pero no nos ha quedado para invertir”, explica Sevillano.

El docente sostiene que ellos necesitan fondos para comprar recursos didácticos que se requieren para impartir las materias básicas, pero también para que los alumnos de las diferentes modalidades de bachillerato técnico cumplan con la parte práctica que se lleva en los talleres.

“Yo pienso que tendría que ser hoy en septiembre (que nos deberían de depositar lo que falta) para que siquiera en octubre podamos atender bien a los alumnos”, añadió Sevillano.

En ese instituto atienden alrededor de 1,110 alumnos y según lo externado por el representante de la institución la falta de recursos afecta el proceso de enseñanza aprendizaje, lo cual implica que  los muchachos no adquieren todas las competencias que necesitan para defenderse en el mundo laboral.

Su colega del Instituto Nacional Técnico Industrial (INTI), Óscar Melara, expuso que  el Mined tiene que asignarles $90 mil para funcionamiento, pero  sólo les  desembolsaron el 25 % en mayo pasado, pero al igual que su vecino de Santa Lucía, con esos fondos apenas ha logrado cubrir el pago de empresas que le proveen material.

En este momento el déficit de fondos les impide comprar  papel, plumones, tinta, tóner, electrodos, oxígeno, para las prácticas en talleres, materiales para la limpieza.

“El gasto es fuerte. Por ejemplo, de 40 computadoras que teníamos arruinadas solo hemos podido reparar 15, de los 10 cañones que tienen focos quemados solo hemos podido reparar dos, porque que cada foco vale $250”, precisó.

 Pero las instituciones  que brindan enseñanza media no son las únicas que todavía lidian con la falta de presupuesto de operación, también hay escuelas que están atravesando por el mismo problema, como el Centro Escolar San Miguel Ingenio, de Metapán, Santa Ana, y el Centro Escolar Planes de Mariona, ubicado en la zona rural de San Salvador.

Orlando Liborio, director del Centro Escolar El Ingenio, detalla que su presupuesto de funcionamiento es cercano a los $4,400 pero hasta el momento han recibido el 25 %.

 Liborio guarda las esperanzas de que en ese centro donde atienden a 335 alumnos, de parvularia a bachillerato, pronto les harán otro desembolso porque recientemente firmó y entregó ante la cartera de Estado los recibos correspondientes.

Con los fondos que está pendiente de recibir prevé llevar a cabo algunas reparaciones en la infraestructura de la escuela, reparar equipo informático y comprar material didáctico.

Otro que está pendiente de recibir financiamiento para operación es el Centro Escolar Planes de Mariona. El profesor Francisco Zelada, director de la institución, manifestó que de los $2,250 que les corresponde nada más recibieron $750 en julio pasado. Con los fondos que recibieron pagaron recibos y compraron algún material para preparar adornos conmemorativos del día de la independencia.

Según explicó, les falta dinero para reparar equipo, comprar tinta para las fotocopiadoras e impresoras,  dar mantenimiento a las computadoras y realizar algunos proyectos como instalar aire acondicionado y cielo falso en el centro de cómputo, hacer reparaciones de fontanería, reparar la bomba de la cisterna y sustituir lámparas quemadas.

Uno de los que si ya recibió  el desembolso para funcionar es el Centro Escolar Anselma Sánchez de Mancía, de El Congo, Santa Ana, pero antes de ello tuvieron que recurrir a realizar actividades para reunir dinero para cubrir necesidades de la institución.

Fuente: http://www.elsalvador.com/articulo/nacional/escuelas-aprietos-porque-educacion-aun-les-entrega-fondos-125675

Comparte este contenido:

Morrison and Bowen produce a lively treasurers’ debate, but costings are no clearer

Oceanía/Australia/May 2016/Autor:  Lenore Taylor and Katharine Murphy/ Fuente: theguardian.com

Resumen:  El debate de una hora entre Scott Morrison y Chris Bowen fue transmitido, pero al final los votantes no se enteraron sobre los costos y beneficios de las grandes ideas económicas de cada uno de los aspirantes a tesorero de Australia, para crear empleos y estimular el crecimiento, así como su impacto en sus políticas educativas.

The hour-long debate between Scott Morrison and Chris Bowen was both informed and feisty, but at the end voters were no wiser about the costs and benefits of each would-be treasurer’s biggest economic ideas to create jobs and boost growth.

Scott Morrison is hanging his hat on $48bn worth of company tax cuts, and the government has pointed to economic modelling that shows it would boost growth by 1% over 20 years.

But that modelling has been questioned by analysts including the Grattan Institute, who think the benefit could be much smaller, and Bowen insisted the tax cuts were “unfunded” anyway because Morrison had not taken any other decisions to make up for the revenue forgone.

“The PM said two days ago that was fully funded because it’s in the budget,” Bowen said. That’s a novel accounting practice. Frankly if I tried that I would have to hand in my badge. You would have it on the front page, rightly, of your newspaper saying we were reckless by saying things were funded by putting them in the budget. You have to fund them from elsewhere. We’ve done that with our schools policy.”

Morrison didn’t really have an answer for that, but he did have a counterattack – Labor is claiming the “savings” from not going ahead with the same tax cuts to pay for other things.

But nor could Bowen give specifics about the benefits of his plans for $37bn extra spending on education, with OECD modelling used by Labor also raising questions.

“Frankly, I’m a bit surprised … that we are having a debate in Australia about whether better schools funding has an economic dividend,” he said. “I would have thought it is self-evident that better schools funding and lifting educational outcomes has an economic dividend. These are people in jobs. They probably wouldn’t have been in jobs beforehand. I don’t mind having a debate anywhere, anytime about the economic impact of better education.

“There is no surprise it takes a long time for investment in schools to pay off. That is self-evident. The treasurer says his policy has a 1% dividend … If you look at Treasury modelling it suggests it’s overstated the economic gains from this scenario … We can debate the figures, but I will defend vigorously the argument that an investment in schools has an economic dividend for the nation, as it does.”

There is an emerging and important point of conflict about the timeframes over which parties reveal the cost of their promises, with Bowen saying he will provide costings over both four years and 10 years and demanding Morrison do the same – since the government had tried to conceal the long-term cost of its tax cuts and has budgeted no long-term promises for things like climate change.

Morrison says Labor has to rely on 10-year costings because it won’t be able to make a dent in the deficit over four.

But the only really new information in the encounter was that Labor would definitely provide its full costings well before polling day, and frankly it would have been much more surprising if Bowen had said they wouldn’t.

Perhaps they’ll be out before 13 June, which is the date Bowen laid down a challenge for a rematch on the ABC’s Q&A. With some more facts on the table, that would definitely be worth watching.

Fuente de la noticia: http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/27/election-2016-scott-morrison-chris-bowen-treasurers-debate

Fuente de la imagen: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/6676ecc73427e8804e7a966259911634754b1899/0_0_4386_2632/master/4386.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=3fdb92a8d2a818dc574b6072ef424d18

Comparte este contenido: