It seems like a twisted yet accepted rule of thumb: The richer your zip code, the better your public schools will be.
In the United States, it’s widely understood that because taxes fund local school districts, one of the paths to the American Dream is buying a home based on how good schools are, which usually means having the means to do so. Due to a history of racism and segregation that kept Black families out of the wealthiest and usually whitest neighborhoods, this has often led to the worst-performing and most under-resourced school districts being concentrated with the poorest and most socioeconomically disadvantaged children.
In 1981, representatives of 20 children in poor school districts in New Jersey sued the state over the funding disparity, alleging that the state’s school finance system was a violation of constitutional rights because it left these districts unable to meet their students’ needs, relative to the richer suburban districts.
The case, Abbott v. Burke, would ultimately land before an administrative judge who declared the state’s approach to funding unconstitutional and demanded a remedy that would ultimately impact 31 districts, known as “Abbott districts.”
Decades later, the impact of the Abbott ruling remains relevant, as New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy is facing litigation over the lack of a plan to address long-term funding needs for building repairs in some Abbott districts today. The influence of Abbott can also be seen in the expansion of free preschool education across the state.
Could Abbott v. Burke provide a blueprint for other states to dismantle the persistent school funding inequalities?
“The approach is one that’s rooted in equity,” said Dr. Chimaobi Amutah, a Trenton, New Jersey, native and Abbott district school graduate who was a teacher before creating educational consulting firm COA Education Solutions. It’s “very different,” he said from what he…
Read the full article here
