Now that the S.C. Supreme Court has ruled that the state is inadequately funding the poorest school districts and failing to meet the constitutional standard of a minimally adequate education, what next? Have Abbeville, Allendale, Dillon, Lee and their fellow plaintiff districts really “won” anything?
The decision reflects an important understanding of the realities of life in rural South Carolina, which is a good start. It refers to the incredible challenges of attracting and retaining high-quality teachers in the Abbeville districts as well as the difficulties of simply getting students to school when they live in remote areas. There is much in the decision to celebrate, and the finality of the ruling, after 21 years, is a relief.
But now the real work of creating a new and fair funding system must begin.
Predictably, some would like to just erase problem districts by consolidating them out of existence. There’s no research that supports this as an effective cost-saving strategy, and as a practical matter, the students still will need to be educated no matter where district lines are drawn.
Never miss a local story.
So how will policymakers bridge the huge gaps that exist for rural students? As a brilliant cartoon by the Denver Post’s Mike Keefe implies, we can’t let our students go. We can’t let teachers go. We shouldn’t let districts go.
But the more subtle point is that we are making school funding a political process. In South Carolina — as in many places — the budget drives the functions of schools. In other words, what you get is what we decide we have in hand to give you.
But what if we had a data-driven, evidence-based starting point for funding schools, without any agenda, political or otherwise? What if we had a roadmap that showed us how to get a child from a poor rural area to the same finish line we expect for students in wealthy communities: holding a high school diploma? What if we had impartial school finance experts take a look at our students, our schools, our communities and their needs and calculate the true cost of providing a constitutionally adequate education everywhere in South Carolina? This is not just wishful thinking: It’s a real process used regularly by states all over the country, typically referred to as a “costing out” or “adequacy” study. The last time a costing-out study was done in South Carolina was 2000, so we are long overdue for a new analysis.
Could schools and districts continue to limp along on what they’ve been provided so far? Would they be happy to receive a few more crumbs from this budget initiative or that, from someone’s pet idea or project? Would throwing a few more dollars toward these districts soothe some consciences? Sure, but the resulting outcomes for our state — too few well-educated adults able to work good-paying jobs and contribute to our economy — are not acceptable. What we must let go of is the notion that what we’re currently doing is working.
Legislators have convened study committees, and proposals are being floated, but given the widely divergent and strongly held political and ideological positions of elected officials, education groups and, yes, rural school leaders, it makes more sense to have an impartial party provide the real bottom line of education costs in South Carolina.
Will the totals potentially be in the billions of dollars and seem staggering at first? Likely. But until we know how far we have to go, we can’t even start to figure out how to get there.
As many have said, there’s no silver bullet to fix the problem. But there is a next right step. Let’s take it.