Search

The right to education depends upon a willingness to finance education fairly. Addressing the difference in educational achievement between learners of different backgrounds is a key aspect of fairness. Framed by contemporary neoliberal policies around marketisation and competitiveness, this paper examines fairness in the education finance policy (EFP) of three jurisdictions in England, Israel and Oklahoma. Using a comparative analysis of school funding formulae and an international survey on the perceptions of local policy actors, the "de jure" and the "de facto" EFPs are examined. Our findings reveal "de jure" policies attempting to address fairness through integrating different student background characteristics. However, variability is evident in the extent to which the "de facto" policies align with an aspiration for fairness. This is linked to the marketisation of education in each jurisdiction. We conclude that weightings of students' background characteristics can only be one feature in policy interventions orientated towards bringing about social equity.

Using grid and group theory (Douglas 1982, 2011), the study described in this article examined the intersections of technology and school finance in four schools located in districts differing in size, wealth, and commitment to technology integration. In grid and group theory, grid refers to the degree to which policies and role prescriptions either hinder or promote individual autonomy. Group refers to the degree of commitment a person has to the larger social unit. The dynamics of grid and group are simultaneously at work in any social setting, and consequently, over time, certain themes and dominant patterns of thought and behavior tend to define a particular setting. In this study of four schools, neither school size nor budget size were indicators of successful integration and equitable distribution of technology. However grid and group features that promoted either isolation or integration were important indicators for these schools. For example, the weak-group leaders did not provide vision and direction, and individual teachers chose whether or not to integrate technology or not. The strong-group schools were more intentional in their technology mission. Their leaders developed program goals, systems to be used, the types of computers purchased, and use by students. The conclusion that the authors draw from this case study is that technology integration and equitable distribution depended upon the intentionality of those who budgeted the funds and provided necessary training