Funding Alert

Let's see. It's called "the Urban Schools Scholarship Act," proposed to pay $20 million a year in "scholarships" in at least five cities including Newark for low-income students to attend private schools, funded by corporations which would receive dollar-for-dollar tax credits for contributions made into the scholarship fund. In other words, public money for school choice. Hmmm... sounds like vouchers to me. But vouchers are a bad word for some people, so is this a way to catch the public off guard and send a less controversial message to the governor and the Legislature?

Proponents argue that "urban scholarships" don't touch the Abbott funding, and actually add to the pot of resources available for education. But then again we're only targeting 4,000 children in the first year, and the remaining beneficiaries, some 16,000 spread over five cities, will have to wait five years for relief.

And what about the quality of the schools? Does this bill carry with it any standards for physical space and academic standing, or will any private school do?

And what about personnel and programs for student well-being: dropout prevention coordinators, before-school and after-school programs, parent coordinators, football teams, bands, choirs, school radio stations, media centers? Are any of these programs contemplated, and will the money to be allotted pay for these services?

Recently many political leaders have lined up their considerable celebrity and influence behind this bill, which is a sidelight to the question of school funding for school districts across the state. Therefore public-school advocates wonder whether this scholarship program should be the primary issue on the education policy radar screen.

In Newark alone, the fate of 44,000 schoolchildren is at stake in the school funding formula debate, as opposed to the 4,000 children who may benefit from the proposed scholarship program in a few pilot cities in the first year. In other words, where is the leadership on the state's plans to change the education funding formula in Abbott and all other school districts?

How do we interpret the silence on the issue of Abbott among those who promote the "scholarship bill" and those who study the new funding formula? Abbott has brought increased education dollars to Newark and 30 other school districts along with a formula for school reforms. There are many who fear that under a state plan for property tax reform, insufficient money will be made available in Newark and other districts with similar economic and social demographic characteristics.

What do Newark and the state stand to gain from Abbott, which has only been substantially funded since 2000? Studies have shown that fourth-graders who have come through the entire Abbott experience have improved in their standardized test scores. This experience includes, among other things, two years of preschool, full-day kindergarten, one-to-one tutoring in reading, small class size, special small-group reading programs and various "whole school reform" programs including increased counseling and social services coordination through the elementary grades.

On the other hand, eighth-graders through 11th-graders have shown no such success. Why not insist that the Department of Education evaluate the Abbott program, as has been ordered by the New Jersey Supreme Court, to see what needs to be changed to make schools more productive for the older students? We need our political leaders to champion full accountability at all levels of public school finance, from the Statehouse to the schoolhouse door.

What does Newark stand to lose? If the Abbott dollars are frozen or decreased on a per-pupil basis, it will be ironic that homeowners could get a tax decrease from the state and a tax increase from Newark. For 15 years the education portion of Newark's taxes did not increase because of the availability of Abbott money, although school costs went up. So to keep local property taxes from increasing in the future, the Newark school district must consider layoffs or not hire new teachers and other staff. This will eliminate some of the main Abbott benefits, such as small class size and one-to-one tutoring. Already, as a result of this year's freeze in Abbott funds, there are reports of increased class sizes in Newark.

Does this scenario seem like a way to empower parents and ease overcrowding? Those of us who believe in good schools and quality education urge the Democrats and Republicans to lead the struggle for public school education; to insist that Abbott will remain the school funding vehicle of choice for Newark and all other special-needs school districts beyond those currently considered Abbott districts.

True scholarships are fine for private schools, but let's take care of public education first.

Junius W. Williams is a Newark resident and the director of the Abbott Leadership Institute in the Department of Urban Education at Rutgers University, Newark.