Rural Advocates Want a High Quality Education, not “Adequacy”

All students deserve an education that offers students opportunities for a meaningful high school diploma, enables them to participate as neighborly citizens in communities, take advantage of higher education, and find a decent job that pays a living wage and supports families, say rural advocates. The term “adequate education,” however, does not sufficiently describe this concept, they claim; while those in the school finance world use “adequacy” as the term-of-art to describe the legal theory underlying many school funding lawsuits, the word implies minimum expectations or results to the general public. Instead, advocates, lawyers, and researchers should apply a different term, e.g., “high quality” or “first rate,” to education.

This discussion is part of the findings in Providing Rural Students with a High Quality Education: The Rural Perspective on the Concept of Educational Adequacy, a report released by the Rural School and Community Trust and authored by Greg Malhoit. The paper also highlights the particular challenges in providing a high quality education to rural students.

The Rural Trust convened a meeting of five leading state-level rural advocacy organizations, the Rural Equity Collaborative Group (REC Group), and charged it with exploring how rural parents, students, and community groups can bring valuable insight to the discussion of educational “adequacy” and school funding. As over one third of all schools nationally are in small towns or rural places and almost 21% of all students attend rural schools, issues surrounding rural education remain important for policymakers.

Funding and Support for a Quality Education

The REC Group addressed ten questions about defining, costing-out, and providing all students with a quality education. It found that school financing must be both adequate and equitable. The Group identifies dependence on local property taxes as the leading cause of inequity; as long as school finance is rooted in the availability of local funds, the system will be inherently unequal. In the case of low wealth communities, the state may need to pay a greater portion of the cost of education. And money does indeed matter, as research proves that better qualified teachers, smaller classes, tutoring, and early childhood programs result in better education for children.

But money alone will not ensure that all students have equal and excellent opportunities for education. The collaborative Group recommends establishing a system of “accountability” through the involvement of local community members. Teachers, parents, students, and others should be involved in selecting school leaders, providing input in policy decisions, and working toward establishing equal opportunity to an excellent education.

Some policymakers, arguing that small rural schools are cost inefficient, have endeavored to consolidate rural schools and districts. The REC Group, however, believes that this reflects a biased opinion that poor, rural communities do not have the capacity to run strong schools, an attitude that only further reinforces the decline of such communities. The report points to research showing that smaller schools are more effective than larger schools at improving graduation rates, student discipline, and parental involvement. Furthermore, consolidation leads to long commutes for children and negative effects on the local economy.

To achieve a high quality education, states must invest in rural schools, the Group concludes. Rural education programs should include expanded early education, smaller class sizes in safer schools, qualified teachers being paid competitive rates and teaching relevant curricula, effective school administrators, access to technology and transportation, targeted strategies for “at-risk” students, and community involvement.

Rural Perspective

The report identifies specific needs of rural schools, communities, and students and argues that these unique characteristics must be taken into account when states devise their funding systems. It found that rural community members are often bonded together by commitments to protect and support their children, a form of “community capital” that makes rural areas attractive places to live. They are strong supporters of public education and local, community-based schools; however, their schools are affected by isolation, long distances between places, and sparse population. Rural populations are frequently dominated by minority students with unique educational challenges and needs, the advocates said.

Poverty afflicts most rural areas; the average rate of child poverty in rural communities is higher than that in urban areas. Falling property values, already low, and a declining population of young people contribute to the low tax base. Access to basic technology is limited, social services infrastructure and philanthropic institutions are frequently absent, and a lack of public transportation compounds all of these issues.

The Group finds fault with traditional state funding for rural education, stating that the level of funding is often determined by political compromise, not by “real” costs. Supplemental costs should be determined by actual needs and costs, consultants advised by panels of rural residents, and teachers paid a competitive salary. Further, states should devise a “rural funding index” which takes into account the specific challenges that affect rural school districts; the “index value,” determined by school and student characteristics (e.g., geography, poverty concentration, transportation needs), would be used to determine the need for additional funding.

The report asserts that rural students have the right to be educated in a quality school close to home, and the focus of such schools should not be merely on bringing achievement to a uniform level, but on enabling each child to realize his or her full potential. With careful analysis, thoughtful policies, and a commitment to providing sufficient funding for education, the goal of offering a high quality education to all rural children can be accomplished.

Prepared by Katherine Lu, September 9, 2005