The relationship between a city and its school district is a relationship that is often underestimated. While the city and its school district are separate entities, they are mutually dependent on each other for their prosperity.
A city prospers by attracting corporations to conduct business in their city. The quality of life in a city increases as corporations hire residents from the city and surrounding areas and relocate employees from other cities. The increase in the quality of life leads to growth in the home ownership, which generates a rise in tax revenue for the city. The school district benefits from the increased tax revenue and they are able to attract high quality teachers, they are able to upgrade and maintain its infrastructure, they are able to provide the resources to deliver a quality educational program, and produce an ongoing stream of graduates who are workforce ready. However, when both entities fail to acknowledge their dependency on each other, the result is a decaying city and a failing school district.
An example of this scenario is being played out in Kansas City, Missouri. The Missouri Board of Education revoked the district’s accreditation due to meeting only three of the fourteen state proficiency standards. According to a published report, the district received failing grades for attendance, graduation rate, math, reading, and writing scores[i]. Compounding the situation is the decline in student enrollment. There are less than 16,000 students enrolled in the Kansas City School District.
With the loss of accreditation and declining student enrollment the state of Missouri introduced legislation to disband the Kansas City school district and make the adjoining districts “absorb” Kansas City’s schools. While absorption is a drastic step, there is already a piloted absorption program that has been successful in turning around a former Kansas City high school. The high school, which was, absorbed a couple of years ago by a neighboring school district, improved test scores and graduation rates of students who live seventy percent below the poverty line[ii].
Critics of absorption argue that the success of the piloted program should not become the blueprint for the whole district. They further argue that Kansas City should be allowed to work through its districts problems. Citing evidence that the district has met two additional state standards this year, critics believe they just need more time. The Mayor expressed this same belief, but added an additional concern that demonstrates the importance of the school district to the future prosperity of the city. According to the Mayor:
“I can’t think of anything that I am supposed to do
as Mayor of this city that isn’t some way affected
by or built on education..the education system
affects everything, from lowering crime to creating
The statement by the Mayor demonstrates an understanding of the symbiotic relationship the city and the school district have. More importantly, the Mayor knows that a city without a school district is a city whose growth will be stunted. Without a school district, the tax base will erode, as tax revenues will be sent to the surrounding districts that absorb its schools. Additionally, it will be harder for the city to attract new businesses or maintain current businesses since the pool of graduates will be greatly diminished. If the state takes away Kansas City’s schools, it better have a plan to save the city, because neither can thrive without the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment