Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

graceyperkins t1_j7nrt0x wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Landmark Pa. school funding case decided: The state’s system is unconstitutional by Hashslingingslashar

You have a viable solution of increasing funding to improve outcomes but don’t want to because it won’t solve all problems. It should be a multi-tiered response that includes an increase of funding to an equitable level.

1

[deleted] t1_j7nsstq wrote

[deleted]

0

graceyperkins t1_j7nwrpy wrote

I’m saying fund them equitably for the services they have to provide. How much of the per pupil funding does to debt service? Building maintenance? Special services? How much actually reaches the classroom/student and not legacy costs?

You keep saying “parent engagement” but are not offering one measurable metric besides what some teacher friend told you? That’s not policy, that’s platitudes. There are real, tangible things that can be targeted with increased funding. Money cannot fix everything, but it’s a start to just get them on a level playing field. You don’t even want to do that. I don’t even know what you want other than not adequately find schools for “reasons”. If there was an actual, successful way to increase parent engagement, you don’t think schools would have done that by now? Seriously? Equitable funding is an evidence-based lever they can pull— hence the court case.

1

[deleted] t1_j7oyizb wrote

[deleted]

0

graceyperkins t1_j7p95d1 wrote

Why not look at the court case? They proved to the judge that inequitable funding directing harms kids.

I’m honestly not interested in changing your mind. I’ve asked you numerous times about your metric for parent engagement. You’ve ignored it and then ask me to prove myself? You’re clearly not arguing in good faith.

Have the day you deserve, sir. :)

2