Educational Equity

Ideological Worlds in Collision

Changes in fiscal policy and the roles of the federal and state government in promoting school reform changed markedly during the two previous decades. The overall optimism of the country in the 1980s gave way to the discourses of at-risk and school failure, especially in urban schools. This ideological shift affected the allocation of federal aid, which in turn altered the prism through which educational researchers and policymakers conceived of equity. For example during the flurry of school reform reports in the 1980s, spending for Chapter 1 programs decreased by 12%, on Chapter 2 by 62%, and on bilingual education by 47%. When the nation witnessed unprecedented growth in the economy in the late 1990s, the administration sought to increase funding for public education, focusing on reducing the achievement gap between White students and poor students of color. The promised increases came with an ideological price tag: accountability.

At the state level, urban schools faced the quagmire of reduced allocation and intense political pressure to lift student achievement. When the New York State Legislature apportioned its school aid for the 1987–1988 school year, the largest concentration of children needing the greatest number of special services were enrolled in New York City schools: 80% of all state students with limited proficiency in English, 63% of those students from impoverished families, 61% of those reading below minimum standards, and 54% of the handicapped students. Despite these staggering statistics, the neediest schoolchildren in New York actually received fewer per pupil dollars [Page 320]than less needy children. During political squabbles over its finance scheme, the New York State Legislature agreed on a formula in which each New York City pupil was counted as 94/100 of each pupil elsewhere in the state. Financially or otherwise, New York City schoolchildren counted for less.

This compromise formula brought $450 million less funding to New York City public schoolchildren than they would otherwise have received. It meant in part that two in five high school students operated at more than 110% of capacity and that the ratio of high school students to guidance counselors topped 600 to 1, double the rate outside of the city. A junior high school pupil, for example, had an average of 20 minutes during the entire year to discuss the choice of high schools with a guidance counselor, and 90% of the elementary school children had no library available to them.

...