Whitney Tilson's School Reform Blog: Debate on Weighted Student Funding

Not surprisingly, the UFT and AFT blogs pan the idea, as -- SURPRISE! -- they view it as a distraction from their main objective of getting more money into the system:

The initiative has the support of prominent Republicans and Democrats (hence Paige and Podesta at the podium), but definitely not Rebell. (Edwize also expressed skepticism about the idea when it first came out this summer. In fact, we wondered if it might be a “Trojan horse” reintroducing vouchers. The Fordham weekly “Gadfly” shot back that it was “a gift horse, not a Trojan horse.”)

Rebell said he was amazed that Podesta and Ackerman were supporting the idea, that the proposal pays no attention whatsoever to the money coming into a school district, but is “dividing the scraps.” He said he believes it is a “political device” to shift the debate away from adequacy lawsuits around the country (including CFE). It’s fine to have funding address differing student needs, he said, but what’s really needed in schools that serve disadvantaged students is capacity building, including smaller class sizes, better academic supports and highly qualified teachers, not a rearrangement of the same inadequate pot of school money. Also, “It’s a back door to charters and vouchers,” he charged, and there is no reason that this system would be any less “political” than the way schools are currently funded.

They're right, by the way, that WSF could lead to greater support for vouchers (another reason to like it!) because once parents know how much money is in their child's "backpack", they might ask a simple question (for which I've never heard a good answer): "Why can't I use this money -- MY CHILD'S MONEY! -- to send my child to whatever school I think is best?"

--------------------

Fund the Child Debate

September 11, 2006 10:39 AM (UFT's NCLB blog)

http://www.letsgetitright.org/blog/2006/09/fund_the_child_debate.html

The Center for American Progress hosted a lively debate Friday on the Fordham Foundation's Fund the Child proposal, which calls on states and districts to adopt weighted student funding (WSF) models because they provide more resource equity within and between districts. It was a heavy-weight panel--including Arlene Ackerman, Rod Paige, John Podesta and Michael Rebell--moderated by John Merrow and, as far as these events tend to go, sparked some controversey that kept it interesting for the audience.

The panel was a little lop-sided, with Rebell the only speaker who opposes the Fund the Child "manifesto," as he so terms it, because he thinks it is designed to distract the debate from the more urgent need to address funding adequacy. -------------------

Weighted Student Funding–100% questionable

Filed under: General — Maisie @ 9:18 pm (AFT's Edwize blog)

http://edwize.org/weighted-student-funding-100-questionable

Weighted student funding is the latest thing in systemic school reform, in part because its many well-heeled, well-connected backers are making sure of it. This morning in Washington DC, there was a staged debate about it, moderated by John Merrow of PBS, with panelists Rod Paige, Bush’s first Education Secretary; John Podesta, Clinton’s former chief of staff; Arlene Ackerman, recently superintendent of San Francisco schools and former superintendent in DC and Seattle; and Michael Rebell, who originated the Campaign for Fiscal Equity.