Paid Advertisement
view counter

October 2010 Vol. 18. No. 2 Focus on School Funding

Theme articles

Changes in federal role, funding continue under Obama

By by Katherine Saviskas

Even though the federal role in education is the subject of constant attention, until recently the federal government's contribution to all the money spent on K-12 schooling in the United States has been pretty small—only about 8 percent.

Yet, since the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) during the George W. Bush administration, federal influence has had a profound and unprecedented impact on what happens inside schools and classrooms.

That influence shows no sign of waning in the Obama administration. In fact, the impact of federal aid and Washington-driven policies is increasing under Obama.

On top of boosting the amount of recurring federal aid, the administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided an enormous one-time infusion of education dollars equivalent to around a year’s worth of education expenditures. The stimulus funds caused the 2009-2010 federal share of education spending to surge to 10.5 percent.

Like most cities with high percentages of low-income students, Philadelphia gets a higher percentage of money from federal aid than the average. But under Obama, that share has dramatically increased from its usual range of 10 to 12 percent to 21 percent last year and 23 percent this year.

Most of this surge is due to stimulus dollars, including those from the recent Education Jobs Bill that Obama signed on September 13. And while welcome now, it may present the District with a problem down the road. “Either we will have recurring revenues that replace the non-recurring stimulus revenues….or we’re going to have to cut spending,” said Michael Masch, the District’s chief financial officer.

Beyond the stimulus, Obama and his Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, are using federal dollars to leverage change. They have taken the philosophy of the Bush administration and NCLB to a new level by distributing some $4 billion in aid to states through a competition called Race to the Top (RttT). The money was awarded this year to 12 states, based on their willingness to adopt specific reforms favored by the administration.

While Pennsylvania did not win either of the two rounds of RttT, from the beginning it has been enthusiastic about adopting reforms promoted by the Obama administration.

“Pennsylvania seems to have made the decision right from the get-go that it was going to take an uncritical view of Race to the Top and look at it as a funding opportunity and embrace the policy initiatives,” said James “Torch” Lytle, a professor at the Graduate School of Education of the University of Pennsylvania and a former administrator in Philadelphia.

Especially regarding the turnaround of low-performing schools, the reform approaches of Ackerman and the SRC, were fundamentally in sync with the RttT priorities.

“Philadelphia is a leading case as a city that has embraced all of these policy initiatives,” Lytle said. Besides Renaissance Schools, the aggressive school turnaround initiative, he cited a large network of charter schools and unprecedented accountability provisions in its latest contract with the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers.

Seven Renaissance Schools have been converted to charters and another six given makeovers as Promise Academies under the District. In all those schools, a majority of the staff were replaced, and nearly all have new principals.

But, in the RttT competition, Pennsylvania did not take high-profile state-level actions specifically designed to enhance its chances, like passing legislation on charter schools or teacher compensation.

Pennsylvania qualified for $400 million under RttT, and was a finalist in both rounds. If the state had won, the money would have cushioned the blow of losing the stimulus dollars. Philadelphia alone was in line for some $100 million of RttT money.

In addition to failing to win RttT funds, Philadelphia was not awarded the $5 million it hoped for from the smaller competition-based Investing in Innovation Fund (i3) to upgrade its data system.

Bruce Baker, associate professor at the Graduate School of Education at Rutgers University, suggested that the Commonwealth had already taken a bold step worthy of federal recognition by adopting a new education funding formula in 2008 that is based on bringing all school districts to spending “adequacy.” But fair funding is not a favored reform strategy of RttT.

“With its new adoption of the funding formula and its partial phase-in, Pennsylvania would be much more deserving than Delaware or Tennessee,” Baker said, citing the two Round One winners of RttT.

Duncan argues that states that did not win RttT will still gain from the school reforms established as they prepared to the competition. He said other sources of federal funding will support the continuation of RttT-inspired changes.

About the Author

Katherine Saviskas is a graduate student at Temple University and a Notebook intern.

Comments (1)

Submitted by Jamal (not verified) on June 6, 2014 8:34 am
Obama made the worst changes. Most of the principles are bad and this is the reason why administrators ran away from them.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. We reserve the right to delete or remove any material deemed to be in violation of this rule, and to ban anyone who violates this rule. Please see our "Terms of Usage" for more detail concerning your obligations as a user of this service. Reader comments are limited to 500 words. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Table of Contents

Read the latest print issue


Philly Ed Feed

Become a Notebook member



Public School Notebook

699 Ranstead St.
Third Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Phone: (215) 839-0082
Fax: (215) 238-2300

© Copyright 2013 The Philadelphia Public School Notebook. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Usage and Privacy Policy