DEBATE MODULE
Topic: Schools should be the top priority of social programs in society
POINT (Affirmative Team)
States today face many tax-funded obligations, of which public schools are only one. Of all these, schools should be the absolute priority—if necessary, at the expense of other social programs—given how poorly funded schools eventually translate into higher remedial social service costs.
COUNTERPOINT (Opposing Team)
When states experience revenue shortfalls, all state spending—including for public schools—must be cut because states cannot and should not engage in deficit spending. In terms of priorities, schools are no more important than any other program or service the state funds. It is only fair that schools take their share of losses in state aid to help balance the state's budget.
Topic: Schools should be the top priority of social programs in society
POINT (Affirmative Team)
States today face many tax-funded obligations, of which public schools are only one. Of all these, schools should be the absolute priority—if necessary, at the expense of other social programs—given how poorly funded schools eventually translate into higher remedial social service costs.
COUNTERPOINT (Opposing Team)
When states experience revenue shortfalls, all state spending—including for public schools—must be cut because states cannot and should not engage in deficit spending. In terms of priorities, schools are no more important than any other program or service the state funds. It is only fair that schools take their share of losses in state aid to help balance the state's budget.
Opening Argument
In a tumultuous economic climate, governments must demonstrate financial responsibility through a lens of equity, accountability, and sustainability. When considering the impact of revenue shortfalls, it is important to recognize that difficult decisions must be made for the benefit of society as a whole, and not for a select program or initiative. Being fiscally responsible means equitable distribution of spending while being mindful of financial sacrifice, prioritization, and accountability. These are necessary for the economic future of the nation.
Equitable sacrifice ensures that the burden of financial constraints is shared equally between all public services, programs, and initiatives. If schools do not accept their share of budget cuts, other essential services may suffer, including but not limited to, national defense, healthcare, infrastructure, and public safety. Some may argue that governments are balancing budgets at the expense of schools and the nation’s future. Schools are undeniably important for economic growth and development, however, no single sector should be exempt from budget cuts when the country is faced with economic hardship (e.g., Inflation), healthcare crises (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic), and other difficult financial situations.
When all sectors contribute to budget and funding cuts, it helps maintain financial sustainability, while also contributing to a sense of national unity by sharing the challenges of fiscal responsibility. As a nation and society, Canada’s population is aging. In 2020, 18% of Canada’s population was 65 years of age or older. By the end of the 2030s, this percentage is expected to grow to 24% (Government of Canada, 2022). This creates a strain on economic growth while adding pressure to social programs such as healthcare, old-age pensions, and social security. . All social programs have value and importance. When budget cuts are not equally distributed, society suffers, as seen recently in healthcare with the prolonged repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic. As a country, Canada is facing a substantial healthcare challenge. “Primary healthcare in Canada is in crisis. One in six Canadians lack a regular family physician and less than half of Canadians are able to see a primary care provider on the same or next day.” (Flood et al., 2023, p. 327). Extensive research indicates that a stable and consistent funding system with a much higher level of investment would generate large economic and social returns. Financial stability within the government is what Canadians need to strive for with all public sectors receiving a fair share of the available resources.
Prioritization and accountability can reduce the burden of one or two sectors from bearing the financial burden. By involving all sectors in budget cuts, governments create efficiency and prompt organizations to examine their priorities. During the 2023 Federal Budget, Canada’s finance minister, Chrystia Freeland stated, “Finding that balance, I think quite appropriately, involves the government taking a look at how we do things ourselves, and doing it a little more efficiently,” (Woods, 2023). All industries need to increase efficiency in spending and advocate for reforms to maximize the impact of available resources. “Study after study has demonstrated that it is far more important to focus on how money is spent rather than worrying about the total amount spent. The key to better education isn’t spending more—it’s spending wisely.” (Van Pelt & Clemens, 2021). This is true in all industries; with limited resources, all industries need to look for ways to stretch the dollars they are given.
When the government faces revenue shortfalls, all public services should bear the responsibility of funding reductions. Governments should avoid deficits and maintain fiscal responsibility for the good of the country, its citizens, and the economy. As a society, it is imperative for individuals to hold the government accountable, demand transparency, and advocate for equitable spending. To promote equity, accountability, and sustainability, especially when faced with difficult financial situations, governments should divide the financial responsibility of economic shortfalls across all social programs.
Questions:
Barkova, L., Cléophat, R., Creighton, M., Kho, A., Laurin, M., & Nicol, C. (2023, July 27). Fiscal sustainability report 2023. Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. https://www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/publications/RP-2324-011-S--fiscal-sustainability-report-2023--rapport-viabilite-financiere-2023
Flood, C. M., Thomas, B., & McGibbon, E. (2023). Canada’s primary care crisis: Federal government response. Healthcare Management Forum, 36(5), 327–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/08404704231183863
Government of Canada. (2022). Seniors infographic - 2021. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/corporate/reports/esdc-transition-binders/seniors-2021-infographic.html
Van Pelt, D., & Clemens, J. (2021). The myth of education spending cuts in Canada. Fraser Institute. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/the-myth-of-education-spending-cuts-in-canada
Woods, M. (2023, March 28). Budget 2023 proposes across-the-board 3 per cent spending cut for government departments. CTV News. https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/budget-2023-proposes-across-the-board-3-per-cent-spending-cut-for-government-departments-1.6332668
In a tumultuous economic climate, governments must demonstrate financial responsibility through a lens of equity, accountability, and sustainability. When considering the impact of revenue shortfalls, it is important to recognize that difficult decisions must be made for the benefit of society as a whole, and not for a select program or initiative. Being fiscally responsible means equitable distribution of spending while being mindful of financial sacrifice, prioritization, and accountability. These are necessary for the economic future of the nation.
Equitable sacrifice ensures that the burden of financial constraints is shared equally between all public services, programs, and initiatives. If schools do not accept their share of budget cuts, other essential services may suffer, including but not limited to, national defense, healthcare, infrastructure, and public safety. Some may argue that governments are balancing budgets at the expense of schools and the nation’s future. Schools are undeniably important for economic growth and development, however, no single sector should be exempt from budget cuts when the country is faced with economic hardship (e.g., Inflation), healthcare crises (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic), and other difficult financial situations.
When all sectors contribute to budget and funding cuts, it helps maintain financial sustainability, while also contributing to a sense of national unity by sharing the challenges of fiscal responsibility. As a nation and society, Canada’s population is aging. In 2020, 18% of Canada’s population was 65 years of age or older. By the end of the 2030s, this percentage is expected to grow to 24% (Government of Canada, 2022). This creates a strain on economic growth while adding pressure to social programs such as healthcare, old-age pensions, and social security. . All social programs have value and importance. When budget cuts are not equally distributed, society suffers, as seen recently in healthcare with the prolonged repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic. As a country, Canada is facing a substantial healthcare challenge. “Primary healthcare in Canada is in crisis. One in six Canadians lack a regular family physician and less than half of Canadians are able to see a primary care provider on the same or next day.” (Flood et al., 2023, p. 327). Extensive research indicates that a stable and consistent funding system with a much higher level of investment would generate large economic and social returns. Financial stability within the government is what Canadians need to strive for with all public sectors receiving a fair share of the available resources.
Prioritization and accountability can reduce the burden of one or two sectors from bearing the financial burden. By involving all sectors in budget cuts, governments create efficiency and prompt organizations to examine their priorities. During the 2023 Federal Budget, Canada’s finance minister, Chrystia Freeland stated, “Finding that balance, I think quite appropriately, involves the government taking a look at how we do things ourselves, and doing it a little more efficiently,” (Woods, 2023). All industries need to increase efficiency in spending and advocate for reforms to maximize the impact of available resources. “Study after study has demonstrated that it is far more important to focus on how money is spent rather than worrying about the total amount spent. The key to better education isn’t spending more—it’s spending wisely.” (Van Pelt & Clemens, 2021). This is true in all industries; with limited resources, all industries need to look for ways to stretch the dollars they are given.
When the government faces revenue shortfalls, all public services should bear the responsibility of funding reductions. Governments should avoid deficits and maintain fiscal responsibility for the good of the country, its citizens, and the economy. As a society, it is imperative for individuals to hold the government accountable, demand transparency, and advocate for equitable spending. To promote equity, accountability, and sustainability, especially when faced with difficult financial situations, governments should divide the financial responsibility of economic shortfalls across all social programs.
Questions:
- Where is the money coming from and what other service(s) should be given up?
- Why should education be exempt from cuts when economic hardship (e.g., Inflation), financial forecasts (e.g., possible recession), and tight budgets demand cutbacks?
- It is estimated that the education system takes up to 40% of the overall budget. How can education be restructured to better use current or reduced funding allocations?
Barkova, L., Cléophat, R., Creighton, M., Kho, A., Laurin, M., & Nicol, C. (2023, July 27). Fiscal sustainability report 2023. Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. https://www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/publications/RP-2324-011-S--fiscal-sustainability-report-2023--rapport-viabilite-financiere-2023
Flood, C. M., Thomas, B., & McGibbon, E. (2023). Canada’s primary care crisis: Federal government response. Healthcare Management Forum, 36(5), 327–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/08404704231183863
Government of Canada. (2022). Seniors infographic - 2021. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/corporate/reports/esdc-transition-binders/seniors-2021-infographic.html
Van Pelt, D., & Clemens, J. (2021). The myth of education spending cuts in Canada. Fraser Institute. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/the-myth-of-education-spending-cuts-in-canada
Woods, M. (2023, March 28). Budget 2023 proposes across-the-board 3 per cent spending cut for government departments. CTV News. https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/budget-2023-proposes-across-the-board-3-per-cent-spending-cut-for-government-departments-1.6332668
Module 1: What happens when schools get more (or less) money?
Understanding the impact of financial resources on schools requires a nuanced perspective beyond the oversimplified notion that more money leads to a better education, while budget cuts result in program reductions. According to Wood, Thompson, & Maiden (2023), a more relevant question is, “What should schools do when they receive more or less money?” Districts, therefore, must proactively prepare for either scenario, aligning financial decisions with a comprehensive strategic plan.
A case in point is the Langley School District, which undertook the development of a new four-year strategic plan last year. This meticulous process involved multiple consultations with each stakeholder group a minimum of two times, ensuring a robust plan. With this strategic framework in place, the district's leadership team and school board trustees can make informed decisions, allocating additional funds to support growth or reduce spending with minimal impact on the system's integrity. While stakeholders may not universally endorse these actions, the strategic plan serves as a justifiable foundation.
Research reveals that when faced with reduced funding, school districts typically cut back on personnel and instruction, leading to increased class sizes. Reductions also occur in early childhood education, elective courses (art, music, physical education, science, technology, foreign languages, and advanced placement courses), and extracurricular activities such as athletics and drama (Bryant, 2011). Collective Bargaining Agreements influence decisions related to personnel reductions, prompting districts to consider areas like transportation and supplies if the minimum requirements are not met.
Conversely, when additional funding becomes available, it often comes with specific restrictions, creating frustration among stakeholders. The funds may not align with the district's goals, exemplified by the food in schools grant, which restricted funds to breakfast programs and food for students in need. Compounding this issue is the transient nature of specific grants, often one-time-only, leading to either the elimination of support or reallocation of existing funds to sustain programs.
Educational funding has struggled to keep pace with inflation and the evolving needs of schools. Aging school buildings necessitate budget allocations for repairs, replacements, and earthquake reinforcement. Consequently, districts may prioritize surplus budgets to prepare for future building costs, often at the expense of day-to-day operations.
The importance of targeted financial support was underscored during the COVID-19 pandemic. Grants provided essential funding for additional personnel, enhanced cleaning measures, increased supplies, and technology for remote teaching. However, concerns about misallocation surfaced, such as a school district using funds to provide each school with a snow blower in a region with infrequent snowfall. Despite the substantial $190 billion in COVID relief funds since 2020, commentators argue that the funding has been ill-spent due to a lack of rigorous research (Barnum, 2023).
In conclusion, the effects of financial resources on schools become evident over time, shaping the success or deficiencies observed in students. A strategic approach, guided by comprehensive plans, is crucial for navigating the challenges posed by both budget constraints and windfalls, ensuring a sustainable and effective use of resources in the education system.
Barnum, M. (2023, May 16). An economist spent decades arguing money wouldn’t help schools. his new paper finds it usually does. Vox. https://www.vox.com/2023/5/16/23724458/school-funding-education-outcomes-hanushek
Bryant, J. (2011). Starving America’s Public Schools. Washington, DC: Campaign for America’s Future. https://www.ourfuture.org/report/2011104111/starving-america-s-public-schools.
Ehrenfreund, M. (2015, January 20). When public schools get more money, students do better. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/01/20/when-public-schools-get-more-money-students-do-better/
Wood, R. C., Thompson, D. C., & Maiden, J. A. (2023). Money and schools (8th ed.). Taylor & Francis.
Understanding the impact of financial resources on schools requires a nuanced perspective beyond the oversimplified notion that more money leads to a better education, while budget cuts result in program reductions. According to Wood, Thompson, & Maiden (2023), a more relevant question is, “What should schools do when they receive more or less money?” Districts, therefore, must proactively prepare for either scenario, aligning financial decisions with a comprehensive strategic plan.
A case in point is the Langley School District, which undertook the development of a new four-year strategic plan last year. This meticulous process involved multiple consultations with each stakeholder group a minimum of two times, ensuring a robust plan. With this strategic framework in place, the district's leadership team and school board trustees can make informed decisions, allocating additional funds to support growth or reduce spending with minimal impact on the system's integrity. While stakeholders may not universally endorse these actions, the strategic plan serves as a justifiable foundation.
Research reveals that when faced with reduced funding, school districts typically cut back on personnel and instruction, leading to increased class sizes. Reductions also occur in early childhood education, elective courses (art, music, physical education, science, technology, foreign languages, and advanced placement courses), and extracurricular activities such as athletics and drama (Bryant, 2011). Collective Bargaining Agreements influence decisions related to personnel reductions, prompting districts to consider areas like transportation and supplies if the minimum requirements are not met.
Conversely, when additional funding becomes available, it often comes with specific restrictions, creating frustration among stakeholders. The funds may not align with the district's goals, exemplified by the food in schools grant, which restricted funds to breakfast programs and food for students in need. Compounding this issue is the transient nature of specific grants, often one-time-only, leading to either the elimination of support or reallocation of existing funds to sustain programs.
Educational funding has struggled to keep pace with inflation and the evolving needs of schools. Aging school buildings necessitate budget allocations for repairs, replacements, and earthquake reinforcement. Consequently, districts may prioritize surplus budgets to prepare for future building costs, often at the expense of day-to-day operations.
The importance of targeted financial support was underscored during the COVID-19 pandemic. Grants provided essential funding for additional personnel, enhanced cleaning measures, increased supplies, and technology for remote teaching. However, concerns about misallocation surfaced, such as a school district using funds to provide each school with a snow blower in a region with infrequent snowfall. Despite the substantial $190 billion in COVID relief funds since 2020, commentators argue that the funding has been ill-spent due to a lack of rigorous research (Barnum, 2023).
In conclusion, the effects of financial resources on schools become evident over time, shaping the success or deficiencies observed in students. A strategic approach, guided by comprehensive plans, is crucial for navigating the challenges posed by both budget constraints and windfalls, ensuring a sustainable and effective use of resources in the education system.
Barnum, M. (2023, May 16). An economist spent decades arguing money wouldn’t help schools. his new paper finds it usually does. Vox. https://www.vox.com/2023/5/16/23724458/school-funding-education-outcomes-hanushek
Bryant, J. (2011). Starving America’s Public Schools. Washington, DC: Campaign for America’s Future. https://www.ourfuture.org/report/2011104111/starving-america-s-public-schools.
Ehrenfreund, M. (2015, January 20). When public schools get more money, students do better. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/01/20/when-public-schools-get-more-money-students-do-better/
Wood, R. C., Thompson, D. C., & Maiden, J. A. (2023). Money and schools (8th ed.). Taylor & Francis.