1 Running head: COURTS AND LEGISLATION

Courts and Legislation Effects on Funding Sabrina Salmon Capella University

2 Running head: COURTS AND LEGISLATION Courts and Legislation Effects on Funding A combination of federal and state legislation has shaped the policies and procedures for public school funding. The Brown v. Board of Education decision connected school funding with providing equal educational opportunity. Based on the Rodriquez decision, the US Supreme Court decided that school funding differences are not a violation of the Constitution (Heise, 2004). State courts handle school finance cases. Underwood (2008) acknowledged the importance of adequacy litigation for establishing guidelines that protect students rights to a free and appropriate education. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) established financial guidelines for funding public schools (Spring, 2008). Title II of ESEA allowed private schools to receive public aid. The reauthorization of ESEA is the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). NCLB expanded financial support from specific groups of students to all students in public schools. The provision of ESEA to provide funding to private schools compares with the choice schools portion of NCLB. NCLB requires that parents have an option to remove their children from schools that are failing to improve. Previous and current legislation in Oklahoma established a system of accountability to provide students with choices when accessing an appropriate education. The state of Oklahoma has established statues to improve student learning. Title 70 is the Oklahoma state statue that places a high priority on education (Garrett, 2010). This statue aligns with Adam Smiths belief in education being a government responsibility to maintain capitalism (Brimley & Garfield, 2008). The state of Oklahoma supplies sixty-five percent of the funding for public schools. Garrett (2010) explained that ninety-nine percent of education funds approved by the state go directly to schools. An equalization formula distributes state funds

3 Running head: COURTS AND LEGISLATION based on weighted student numbers and other factors. Congress established trust land grants in Oklahoma. Trust land grants receive revenue from the gas, oil, and coal in an area. Fifty percent of the revenue from trust land grants goes to public schools (Garrett, 2010). Citizens in Oklahoma are familiar with the impact of court rulings on school funding. Funding Court Case Oklahoma approved legislation to make improvements in the quality of education that students receive in public schools. Governor Brad Henry introduced ACE to Oklahomans in 2005. This plan proposed an increase in teacher salaries and health insurance, improvement in math scores and teacher training, end-of- course assessments, and promotion of college preparatory curriculum. These improvements in education would to increase the budget by six percent (Tonn, 2005). The governor explained that most of the funding would come from the education lottery and casinos on Indian reservations. ACE legislation affects the Ticket to Rose program. Ticket to Rose is one of the few programs not based on income that provides assistance for students to participate in postsecondary education. Students who graduate from the Mid-Del district with a 2.5 grade point average or higher can apply for the program. The Technical Area Education District funds this program. Local citizens and businesses make financial contributions to this organization. Tax revenue and profits from the lottery fund ACE programs and Ticket to Rose. When funding is limited, both programs will compete to retain enough resources to meet students needs. Impact on Students Learning

4 Running head: COURTS AND LEGISLATION Citizens expect states to provide the resources that each student needs to receive an appropriate education. The purpose of ACE legislation is to improve the quality of education in public schools. Mid-Del is one of the school districts that has benefited from additional resources and funds for students to attend post-secondary institutions. Brimley and Garfield (2008) reported that it is difficult to measure the output of funding. Test scores have improved and schools have offered more college preparatory courses since the introduction of ACE legislation. There remains much debate over if test scores are an accurate measure of student learning. Conclusion Federal and state courts have provided a framework for funding public schools. ACE legislation is one example of a court-approved initiative in Oklahoma to improve academic performance. Students in the Mid-Del school district can receive college tuition from the Ticket to Rose program. Assessment scores are the primary source to determine student performance. Stakeholders are not sure if test scores are a true measure of student learning.

5 Running head: COURTS AND LEGISLATION References Brimley, V. & Garfield, R. (2008). Financing education in a climate of change. (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Garrett, S. (2010). The progress of education reform. Investing in Oklahoma. 12(3) 1-58.

Heise, M. (2004). Litigated learning and the limits of law. Cornell Law Faculty Publication. 2418-2461. Retrieved July 19, 2010 from http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=lsrp_papers

Spring, J. (2008). The American school: From the Puritans to no child left behind (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Tonn, J. (2005). Governor gives Oklahoma lawmakers school to-do list. Education Week 24(23), 25-26.

Underwood, J. (2008). School money trials: The legal pursuit of educational adequacy. Journal of Law and Education, 37(4), 609-612.