Discuss The Pros And Cons Of Increasing Funding In Schools

Increasing Funding for Low Performing Schools History

Title I is funding for elementary and secondary schools in the legislation that was passed by Congress on April 9, 1965 (Phyllis McClure, Center of American Progress). Furthermore, this title is to ensure that disadvantaged children in middle to low class neighborhoods have a fair and equal opportunity to receive a high-quality education like other individuals in other districts. Moreover, Title 1 was also to help students reach at least a minimum score of proficiency on state standardized tests (U.S Department of Education). Also, the California Supreme Court in 1971 created the Pupil system to equalize the funding throughout the school districts throughout the state. (Margaret Weston, PPIC Publication). Title 1 funds are still used today in public schools. Pros of Increasing Funding

For instance, the funds can help the large number of students who are living in poverty by providing them access to more resources they could not reach on their own (U.S Department of Education). Additionally, test results for schools “with substantial funding and low student poverty are similar to those earned by the highest scoring countries on international tests (U.S Department of Education).” Subsequently, the extra funding for students in poverty increases their scores, so the scores are comparable to international countries. At the same time, other benefits include decreased chances of the students to be poor as adults, and increased the chances of them graduating (Max Ehrenfreund, Washington Post). The increase in test scores appeals to parents and may result in a larger number of enrollment of students from different races. In addition, some districts that had increased funding were able to directly link it to increased test scores (Turney Corey,