Book Description
This book examines the fundamental role of politics in funding our public schools and fills a conceptual imbalance in the current literature in school finance and educational policy. Unlike those who are primarily concerned about cost efficiency, Kenneth Wong specifies how resources are allocated for what purposes at different levels of the government. In contrast to those who focus on litigation as a way to reduce funding gaps, he underscores institutional stalemate and the lack of political will to act as important factors that affect legislative deadlock in school finance reform. Wong defines how politics has sustained various types of "rules" that affect the allocation of resources at the federal, state, and local level. While these rules have been remarkably stable over the past twenty to thirty years, they have often worked at cross-purposes by fragmenting policy and constraining the education process at schools with the greatest needs. Wong's examination is shaped by several questions. How do these rules come about? What role does politics play in retention of the rules? Do the federal, state, and local governments espouse different policies? In what ways do these policies operate at cross-purposes? How do they affect educational opportunities? Do the policies cohere in ways that promote better and more equitable student outcomes? Wong concludes that the five types of entrenched rules for resource allocation are rooted in existing governance arrangements and seemingly impervious to partisan shifts, interest group pressures, and constitutional challenge. And because these rules foster policy fragmentation and embody initiatives out of step with the performance-based reform agenda of the 1990s, the outlook for positive change in public education is uncertain unless fairly radical approaches are employed. Wong also analyzes four allocative reform models, two based on the assumption that existing political structures are unlikely to change and two that seek to empower actors at the school level. The two models for systemwide restructuring, aimed at intergovernmental coordination and/or integrated governance, would seek to clarify responsibilities for public education among federal, state, and local authorities--above all, integrating political and educational accountability. The other two models identified by Wong shift control from state and district to the schoool, one based on local leadership and the other based on market forces. In discussing the guiding principles of the four models, Wong takes care to identify both the potential and limitations of each. Written with a broad policy audience in mind, Wong's book should appeal to professionals interested in the politics of educational reform and to teachers of courses dealing with educational policy and administration and intergovernmental relations. This book is part of the Studies in Government and Public Policy series.


From the Back Cover
"Well conceived and well written, this pioneering work should cause much rethinking by both scholars and policy makers."--Herbert J. Walberg, editor of Advances in Educational Productivity "A very compelling argument for a more effectively aligned and better 'integrated' structure of federal-state-local resource allocation for the schools by one of the most highly regarded scholars in this field. Timely and important, it will be widely read and extremely well received."--Robert Crowson, author of School-Community Relations Under Reform "Fascinating and insightful. Joins two disparate traditions to bring new illumination about how our cities and schools work."--Terry Nichols Clark, editor of The New Political Culture


About the Author
Kenneth K. Wong, associate professor in the department of education and the college at the University of Chicago, is the author of City Choices: Education and Housing and coauthor of When Federalism Works.

FROM THE PUBLISHER

"Well conceived and well written, this pioneering work should cause much rethinking by both scholars and policy makers."—Herbert J. Walberg, editor of Advances in Educational Productivity

"A very compelling argument for a more effectively aligned and better 'integrated' structure of federal-state-local resource allocation for the schools by one of the most highly regarded scholars in this field. Timely and important, it will be widely read and extremely well received."—Robert Crowson, author of School-Community Relations Under Reform

"Fascinating and insightful. Joins two disparate traditions to bring new illumination about how our cities and schools work."—Terry Nichols Clark, editor of The New Political Culture

Author Biography: Kenneth K. Wong, associate professor in the department of education and the college at the University of Chicago, is the author of City Choices: Education and Housing and coauthor of When Federalism Works.

SYNOPSIS

This book examines the fundamental role of politics in funding our public schools and fills a conceptual imbalance in the current literature in school finance and educational policy. Unlike those who are primarily concerned about cost efficiency, Kenneth Wong specifies how resources are allocated for what purposes at different levels of the government. In contrast to those who focus on litigation as a way to reduce funding gaps, he underscores institutional stalemate and the lack of political will to act as important factors that affect legislative deadlock in school finance reform.

Wong defines how politics has sustained various types of "rules" that affect the allocation of resources at the federal, state, and local level. While these rules have been remarkably stable over the past twenty to thirty years, they have often worked at cross-purposes by fragmenting policy and constraining the education process at schools with the greatest needs.

Wong's examination is shaped by several questions. How do these rules come about? What role does politics play in retention of the rules? Do the federal, state, and local governments espouse different policies? In what ways do these policies operate at cross-purposes? How do they affect educational opportunities? Do the policies cohere in ways that promote better and more equitable student outcomes?

Wong concludes that the five types of entrenched rules for resource allocation are rooted in existing governance arrangements and seemingly impervious to partisan shifts, interest group pressures, and constitutional challenge. And because these rules foster policy fragmentation and embody initiatives out of step with the performance-based reform agenda of the 1990s, the outlook for positive change in public education is uncertain unless fairly radical approaches are employed.

Wong also analyzes four allocative reform models, two based on the assumption that existing political structures are unlikely to change and two that seek to empower actors at the school level. The two models for systemwide restructuring, aimed at intergovernmental coordination and/or integrated governance, would seek to clarify responsibilities for public education among federal, state, and local authorities—above all, integrating political and educational accountability. The other two models identified by Wong shift control from state and district to the schoool, one based on local leadership and the other based on market forces. In discussing the guiding principles of the four models, Wong takes care to identify both the potential and limitations of each.

Written with a broad policy audience in mind, Wong's book should appeal to professionals interested in the politics of educational reform and to teachers of courses dealing with educational policy and administration and intergovernmental relations.