Private Funding In Public Schools
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-02-03/private-funding-public-schools
Public schools face huge challenges today. President Obama recently called for greater investments in education and innovation. At the same time, a growing number of states and cities teeter on the edge of bankruptcy. Cash-strapped school districts are relying more and more on private funding to close budget gaps. Corporations and foundations now offer schools free curriculum, teacher training -- even buying the rights to name cafeterias. Some critics fear these actions will lead to the commercialization of school – a place where many believe students should be free from advertising. Diane and her guests discuss the benefits and drawbacks of private funding in public schools.
Guests
Susan Linn
Director of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood and Instructor in Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. She is the author of "Consuming Kids: The Hostile Takeover of Childhood."
Brett Pawlowski
president of DeHavilland Associates and publisher of the K-12 Partnership Report newsletter.
Fawn Johnson
education correspondent with National Journal
Michelle Pierre-Farid
Executive Director of New Leaders for New Schools in Washington, D.C.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Where private funding is there, so will be private interests. Period. Compare to lobbying of public officials. There is already a large gap in the USA between private and public schools. If the USA wants to improve its education across the board, it will have to put the money where its mouth is.
My spouse and I have no children, by choice. I pay more taxes than people who have children. I believe that you should pay for the choices you make in life and that the responsibility for education should fall more on parents. I realize the education of these children affect my life, but I pay more than my share.
I do not have a problem with outside funding. These kids watch TV don't they?
In addition to corporations and foundations, foreign governments are also providing funding to public school programs.
I have included a link to and some text from a report that describes a program that receives funds from the Chinese government.
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/01/19/china.funds.language.programs/?hpt=C1
China-sponsored language programs in U.S. raise concerns, hopes
By Chris Welch, CNN
January 19, 2011 -- Updated 1350 GMT (2150 HKT)
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
China's government is sponsoring the Confucius Classroom program
It sends teachers and money to U.S. schools to teach Chinese language and culture
A suburban Ohio classroom is set to receive $30,000 from China to help fund the program
A Los Angeles-area school district rejected the program after oppositionColumbus, Ohio (CNN) -- Teaching Mandarin is a growing trend across schools in the United States, where the number of students enrolling in Chinese language and cultural programs has tripled in recent years.
A school district outside Columbus, Ohio, is on track to receive more than $1 million in federal grant money for its Chinese arts and language program. But what's really caught people's attention is the $30,000 that the district is getting from the government of China.
I lean right, but raise taxes! Funding for schools is an investment to America's future.
Also, pay teachers based on performance, not by how many years employed. The teachers who care about students are inventive enough to make the best of any budget. I've had TONS of teachers growing up that didn't care to teach, but did it because it was their job. I've also had a couple that LOVED their job and I learned so much, and was enthusiatic because they were, and they made a difference in my life.
Also, cut advertising, but encourage shared usage of the building. Maybe evening facility rentals?
Melissa K.
Even with property taxes, those with large holdings and therefore large taxes carry a large burden but also have sway in how the schools are run. Should not the educators, those who are specialists in educating, be the ones who decide what is best for the students?
As a parent, former PTA president and School District employee I have strong feelings about schools taking money from corporations. While I realize how difficult it is to come up with a school budget with increasing health care costs and unfunded mandates, I worry about the slippery slope of accepting corporate money. In our school district (an upper-middle class suburb of Boston) we have not gone so far as to have Bus Radio, Channel one or the Coca Cola High School but commercialism creeps in quietly. Exxon donates to a science program, Hewlitt Packard donates technology, book fairs are sponsored by Scholastic or Barnes and Noble and thereby receive free advertising. For-profit standardized prep institutions make deals with our school system. Nestle tried to give away "free" stuff through our outside school lunch program vendor. Kids are used to sell things to raise money for the schools--my neighbor's kindergartener was herded into an assembly during the first week of school last year to explain to her about selling wrapping paper. She was totally confused. Kids are encouraged to collect "Box Tops for Education," which means nagging their parents to buy certain products, often unhealthy, in order to make miniscule contributions to the PTA. Kudos to Susan Linn and the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood and to the Diane Rehm show for highlighting this issue.
Amarelle,
Massachusetts
I have raised three children and put them through the public school system, that last graduating in 2008. The quality of education lessened with each child, and the items families were expected to buy throughout the year increased! It was hard enough to keep them in clothes and properly fed, without the added pressure to buy something every time we turned around. Why don't allocate some of the "war fund" on our childrens education? That was the promise when Obama took office.....where is the follow through on that promise?
Legal (but limited) gambling! Like the state lottery (that does not advertise in schools), it could pay a portion to public schools as a fee to run a gambling house.
Native Americans have gambling houses that fund their private schools and healthcare for their people, we should imitate their models.
It's perfect! :)
How can speaker say that we don't give a priority to education. We with a modest home now pay some four thousand dollars each year in school taxes. The rate has increased dramatically over the past decade.
Money is not the solution to problems in education and expenditures must be restrained especially now that property values are declining to more reasonable levels.
Advertising might reduce the impact of declining property values and associated taxes, but schools too must get by with less.
Schooling is a local function. Why should federal or even state dollars go to local districts? Perhaps to balance needs of poor districts, but then why do even rich districts get state money? Better funding was strictly local. Then we would better see how much it costs to educate and demand that the belt be tightened.
Chuck Strehl
Altruistic endeavors do not do well in the commercial market place. This goes for public schools, universities, hospitals, retirement homes. The market place focuses on making money, which compromises any altruistic endeavor.
These are community endeavors. They should be based in non-profit, community-based organizations (state government, community governments, religious organizations, or altruistic organizations). They focus on their task of altruism instead of profit.
How can we make sure that corporate money lands in a school budget and not in a pocket of school principal?
I only have one child but was childless for a long time. People with more children should be paying more towards the education system than less. I am there with you. But, realize that allowing commercial/corporate interests in the public school system will likely strengthen the brainwashing of new generations and further enforce a system where childless folks are paying more than those with children.
Corporate interests are not altruistic and simply want to make money at all costs. Young people are already bombarded by corporate advertising in ways that is psychologically more manipulative than when we were young.
And, by the way, my daughter does not watch television...we don't have one.
Hello Diane, please visit our website www.tasteofoklahoma.org and see the event we are working on to help fund OKC Public Schools. Its very sad that we have to beg to educate our nations children. It apperas that America don't really care about their children.
Students are already walking commercials anyways! The clothes, phones, the electronics they use, all have brand names prominently displayed all over them. Whether or not you allow companies market in schools it’s happening anyways so schools may as well try to get some funding in the process.
Desperate times call for desperate measures, although I find the idea appalling, it’s not like we have much of a choice.
To companies: Support a school by underwriting a lab or a program and supplying other needs. Have your name published for that. The community will buy your products, your computers, beverages, foods... knowing that you are a supporter and you don't have to overwhelm children with marketing. Use the PBS model. I know that a company brought me this program and it gives me a positive opinion of that company. People will appreciate the financial backing but not the heavy marketing to kids. And you'll get the reward, too, from well educated children who ready to join the workforce.
I agree with Susan Lynn that marketing to students should be curtailed or eliminated. But please have Bret Polowski (sp?) correct or amend the impression he left with the audience when he said (paraphrasing) " that as Boomers retire their funds are withdrawn from the system". Boomers, who retire, still pay income tax on a portion of their pension, other income and Social Security. The amount is not as much as when we worked for obvious reasons. Yes ,there are a percentage of retirees whose income, including social security is exempt from taxation because of the level of their total income. Therefore, in as much as income taxes are used by the federal government to fund schools, Boomers and retirees are still contributing. Of course those of us who own some property are continuing to fund local schools through property taxes, even in retirement.
Too often listeners are given the impression that retired people are just a drain on society.
Current population levels are an enormous burden on communities and our living environment. I agree that families with more children need to pay more taxes. The tax system needs to remove deductions for dependent children. It sounds harsh, but families with 10 kids have no right to paying lower taxes when they place greater demands on our society.
Better tax policy may be giving tax deductions for only up to biological 2 kids and then permit additional income deductions for foster/adopted kids, dependent elderly parents, and handicapped dependents. This would help people who are providing for dependents with difficult situations (which helps society), but not encourage large biological families.
The elephant in the room is that there is a lack of consensus in this country about the fundamental purpose of education at any level. Without such a consensus how is anybody to set or enforce meaningful standards or policies for education?
Tim in Texas
I have a son in Kindergarten and with the increase in videos, on-demand programs and cable tv channels that are commercial free (like nick jr, disney), my child really has had very little exposure to commercials. Obviously he develops an attraction to certain characters or programs but he has actually had a lot less experience w/commercials/advertising than when i was a child (in the 70s). Of course this will increase as he gets older. Personally, I don't like the idea of advertising in public schools. But at the same time, what choice do they have? And as a parent, it is my job (not the schools) to be in tune to what my child is exposed to and more importantly help him navigate through that.
Also, regarding box tops for education . . . i felt that there was a gross generalization made earlier. Our school does this program - the only thing that is 'marketed' is the box-top symbol. Nothing is plastered around the school - there is a flyer that goes home maybe quarterly reminding people to collect box tops. And there is no list of products mentioned, only the box top symbol. The products that offer the box tops often change - so its not something I associate a certain product with or put a value on.
Does any state really want to figure how much it costs to educate a child per grade level. It's really easy, but not in the interest of special groups. Poor areas vs. Rich Areas?
Here's an idea to turn this situation of inadequate funding for our children's education into a positive learning experience, rather than turning to corporations for charity. The reason our schools are under-funded is not only because of the struggling economy - this has been a problem in many US schools for decades. The real problem is that public education isn't prioritized by those who have the power to make the right decisions. Corporate charity will never solve this problem. Instead, how about teaching kids about how to change things for the better, by bringing children, teachers, staff and parents together to create a strong advocacy movement to pressure our lawmakers to increase funding for education. Rather than marketing more consumer products to kids, how about re-directing their attention towards creating positive solutions to the problems we face?
My concern is the presence of costly item advertising within the schools will foster the already rampent haves versus the have nots. If there are both low income and high income children attending school, it will be the high income kids that can afford to buy the advertised items. The children sporting these wares will be more obvious and I believe will be given preferential treatment, even if it is subliminal. And, I still did not get a clear idea of the difference of a charter school from a "regular" school if both are funded the same way.
As high school social studies teacher I have to say that advertising on desks, lockers or classroom walls is a bad idea. However I think Ms. Linn has not provided any real solutions. Yes it would be wonderful to get rid of private interests in schools, but where else are they to get money when the federal, state and local governments can not or will not fund them. I have worked in 3 different school districts in 3 different regions and have not seen the massive advertising that Susan Linn speaks of in the buildings. I have never been influenced by the companies who have given money to schools.
School fundraising: How will this work for schools in low-income areas with low-income students? Their advertising opportunities (eg naming the cafeteria) will be much less valuable than those in higher-income schools. This will aggravate the disparity of needs and resources.
If a corporation cares about children and education let it donate all it cares to! But there should be NO advertisments on campus. If they donate they can mention this is their legitimate market ads. commonsense?
So many years ago, Ohio marketed its lottery by saying that it would support education. I'm not sure what's happened with this, but I do know that the list of "supplies" that the elementary school students here is huge--- and includes, besides the basic paper, pencils, erasers, crayons, etc.--- boxes of kleenex, bottles of soap, and more. Budget cuts! Doing more with less! And the state's lottery system?????
I was a teacher with the Miami-Dade County Schools from 1998 until last (June, 2010). I retired for personal medical problems. I taught History, Reading and Language Arts to a little-known sector of our school system - incarcerated children. This sector, labeled "Alternative Education" is serviced by a group of very dedicated men and women who go into mental health facilities, jails, and juvenile detention centers. They deal with minors who have committed crimes ranging from aggravated assault to grand-theft auto. Starting in 2008, using the cuts in State funding in Education and juvenile justice, the district slashed the incentive pay to our teachers, pulled teachers from centers and cut down the hours our visiting teachers. Some salaries have been cut by 10% or more. The impact of these decisions, made by District Administrators looking at "saving jobs", has wreaked havoc on our teachers.
Retailers are already advertising in public schools though the students garments, calculators, backpacks, sunglasses, communication devices, and alike. If the school board decides to allow sponsors in the form of advertisement, maybe they can solicit colleges who benefit from new graduates to advertise and get involved in the primary grades to encourage graduation and future opportunities.
If you dig a little deeper, they did the same thing here in Florida to justify the Lottery. What they didn't readily disclose, is the "expected" Lottery revenue would replace education funding previously supported with property taxes. Unfortunately, the State Lottery Director got caught mismanaging funds, and Floridians lost faith in the program and stopped participating. Along with the School Board mismanaging resouces, building beautiful schools with state of the art science labs (Titusville, FL) that never housed a student is now a government building. That is only the tip of the ice burg. If you look at the actual budgets, vs the planned budgets you will see very little actually is spent per student. I fought and lost, to keep the Arts and Vocational training at our local schools, (Art, Music, Metal Shop, Wood Shop, Electrical, etc.) because not all students can be good at all things, they rerouted funds to the athletic program, and built a field they keep locked up most of the time. When I went to school there were after school programs of some sort every night. Parent meetings where held at night so working parents could participate. Now, our schools are closed up, I'm surprised everyday that mine survived and graduated with honors.
I can't help but wonder if school vouchers would help to make schools raise their standards. It seems to me that if people began to pull their children out of public schools, into private schools then maybe our public schools would be motivated to improve standards and work within the budget to stay competitive. I am sure a lot of a public school's budget goes towards high administration costs and operating costs that could easily be streamlined if creative solutions are utilized.
In many private schools, the administration is small because the teachers are also acting in these administrative roles. Teachers should be in these roles, making big decisions about how our schools are run because they are the ones that know how to best teach our children, how education should be implemented, and they also have relationships with the parents of these children- giving them special insight into the unique needs of the community in general.
The solution is not simple when it comes to budget, but private corporations have no business advertising in our schools. If their intent is to strengthen communities then they should donate without advertising requirements. I agree with previous comments that the adults of our society will choose to buy from these companies because they are contributing positivly to our communities, but market directly to our children and they totally lose my respect. We need an overhaul to the educational system in general and then maybe some of these troubles with budget could disappear.