An edited version of this essay was published in the Concord Monitor on July 12, 2022.
Lawsuits around school funding have proven ineffective in actually improving school funding in New Hampshire. Claremont certainly changed little. The Conval lawsuit is slow moving and while the most recent filing in Grafton County might produce positive results for our communities, we can’t rely on that outcome to actually change anything. While some are optimistic that the courts will step in, the real change will come from the conversations communities have about the purpose of public education and the structure in place to serve that purpose. And, if we’re really going to do it right, it has to be in that order, purpose, then structure.
I don’t know about everyone else, but if I’m going to invest in something, even if it’s my time, I want to know what I’m actually investing in. In my twenty years of education in New Hampshire, I’ve heard varied reasons to invest in public education. Some think it’s to make sure kids have enough basic skills to at least be college or career ready. Others hope that kids will have the skills they will need to be whatever they want to be. Some want to ensure we have an educated citizenry who will work together to solve problems, and most want some combination of all of these ideas.
But, we haven’t codified it, well, not really in an inclusive way. Sure, the NH Constitution is a good start, but too vague and open for interpretation. And, the values, goals and culture of NH's founders are much different than the diversity of thought and technological innovation we are living with today.
So, folks don't know exactly what they're funding, which makes public education an easy target for those who are looking out for their own prosperity over the success of the community.
A lot of people are jaded by their own imperfect experiences in school. Public schools initially weren’t designed for every learner, and they certainly weren’t informed by brain research that we now have access to. When we look at the way schools are organized, it's very similar to how they were organized fifty or one hundred years ago, with little innovation. We’re still organizing learning by siloed subjects, in arbitrary amounts of time and in grade levels in most of our schools. So, I understand why folks who didn’t like school, whether they did well or not, have some criticism. I share that critique.
We’re also only understanding the quality of a school using standardized tests scores as the sole measure of school quality. If you are one of those people who look at scores, I’d like you to think about your own experience as a learner. What’s the best way you show your knowledge and skills? Honestly, those tests we rely on each year to shame our schools can’t tell us anything about what a student can do with the skills and knowledge that they have. They’re barely reliable as an indicator of what students know. So, we don’t have a clear purpose, and we have fallible measures that can’t tell us about the skills we want kids to have.
What if we had written a constitutional amendment after Claremont case that made purpose clear. I wonder if we’re brave enough to have that conversation now.
Defining "the why" might actually be the easiest dialogue we need. We must also be willing to have brave, truthful and difficult conversations about how we're structured. Honestly, for a small state we have a lot of SAUs and even more school districts. Hawai'i has a slightly larger population and just one school district. Many states organize their districts by county just fine, and Concord, New Hampshire is an anomaly with two school districts operating separately in the same city.
For example, Concord's Penacook Village, one of the examples in the most recent fair funding lawsuit, is home to Merrimack Valley School District. Teachers there make $25,000 less than their counterparts at Concord School District. Both schools are in the same city. If you own a home in AND work at MVSD, you make less and pay more in property taxes. If you have kids in MVSD, they have access to fewer resources and academic opportunities than kids in the same city. This is not new, but it's hard to make this make sense. Imagine what one city, one district would look like.
I don’t have an exact vision about what the structure would look like, but we can’t ignore this part of the fair funding conversation. It will be uncomfortable, but it’s a necessary examination, if we're being honest.
Perhaps another lawsuit will change things. Maybe it will spark a new dialogue. I'll cross my fingers, but won’t hold my breath. Instead, I’ll be talking (and writing) about purpose, structure and then funding.