Opinion: The myth of equal opportunity in schools – Concord Monitor

Report on Educational Inequities and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in New Hampshire

Introduction

This report examines prevailing misconceptions in the education system of New Hampshire, emphasizing their implications for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). The analysis highlights systemic issues related to standardized testing, resource allocation, and local control policies that perpetuate educational inequities.

Standardized Testing and Its Impact on Education Quality

Standardized testing has long been used as the primary metric to evaluate school effectiveness, equating higher test scores with better educational outcomes. However, this approach contradicts individual assessments where skills and competencies are demonstrated through projects and practical achievements rather than proficiency scores.

• SDG 4: The reliance on standardized testing undermines inclusive and equitable quality education by failing to capture diverse student capabilities.
• There is a disconnect between the metrics used for schools and the actual skills students possess and demonstrate.

Socioeconomic Disparities and Educational Resource Allocation

A critical falsehood in New Hampshire’s education system is the belief that children from wealthier households deserve more resources than their less affluent peers. This misconception is embedded in the state’s public education structure and is reinforced by the principle of local control.

1. Income Spectrum Impact: Resource distribution varies significantly across communities, affecting opportunities and support available to students.
2. Local Control Policy: While intended to empower communities, local control has enabled wealthier towns to neglect the needs of poorer districts.
3. Infrastructure Disparities: Wealthier communities often have modern educational facilities and better teacher retention, whereas adjacent poorer districts face aging infrastructure and limited resources.

SDG 10: These disparities contribute to increased inequalities in education access and quality.

Consequences of Local Control Beyond Individual Communities

Decisions made at the local level have broader implications beyond the immediate community, affecting neighboring towns and the state as a whole. Examples include:

• Zoning policies influencing regional desirability and economic development.
• Teacher salary disparities impacting educator commitment and school improvement.
• Student migration patterns influenced by availability of resources and employment opportunities.

SDG 11: This highlights the interconnectedness of communities and the need for sustainable urban and regional planning.

Statewide Funding Structures and Policy Developments

New Hampshire has introduced policies such as charter schools, Education Freedom Accounts, and open enrollment to address educational funding and choice. However, these measures have often exacerbated inequities due to the absence of an equitable statewide funding framework.

1. Charter Schools: Impact local funding by redirecting resources.
2. Education Freedom Accounts: Provide vouchers for private and religious schooling, reducing public school funding.
3. Open Enrollment: While conceptually beneficial, its implementation without systemic equity reforms disproportionately harms economically disadvantaged and special education students.

SDG 4 and SDG 10: These policies risk undermining inclusive quality education and increasing disparities among students.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The persistence of the false belief that wealthier children deserve more educational resources undermines efforts to achieve the SDGs related to education and inequality. To align with SDG 4 and SDG 10, it is imperative to:

• Develop and implement equitable statewide funding structures that ensure all students have access to quality education regardless of their community’s wealth.
• Reevaluate the role and impact of standardized testing to better reflect diverse student abilities and learning outcomes.
• Balance local control with state-level policies that promote resource sharing and reduce disparities between communities.
• Ensure that policies such as open enrollment are introduced alongside systemic reforms to prevent exacerbating existing inequities.

Addressing these issues will contribute to sustainable and inclusive educational development in New Hampshire, supporting the broader goals of the United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda.

Author

Carisa Corrow of Penacook is co-author of “126 Falsehoods We Believe About Education” and founder of Educating for Good.

1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Addressed or Connected

1. SDG 4: Quality Education
   • The article discusses inequities in education funding, standardized testing, and access to resources, all central to ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education.
2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The article highlights disparities based on wealth and local control, affecting educational opportunities for economically disadvantaged students, which relates to reducing inequalities within and among countries.
3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article touches on governance issues such as local control and legislative actions that impact equity and fairness in education funding and policy.

2. Specific Targets Under Those SDGs Identified

1. SDG 4: Quality Education
   • Target 4.1: Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.
   • Target 4.5: Eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including economically disadvantaged children.
   • Target 4.c: Increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries.
2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • Target 10.2: Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of income or other status.
3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied to Measure Progress

1. Indicators Related to SDG 4
   • Proficiency scores and standardized test results: The article critiques reliance on standardized test scores as a measure of school efficacy and student ability, implying these are common indicators used to assess educational outcomes.
   • Access to educational resources and infrastructure quality: Mention of disparities in school facilities and resources implies indicators related to school infrastructure and resource availability.
   • Teacher tenure and salaries: The article notes that wealthier communities retain teachers longer due to better salaries and benefits, implying indicators on teacher retention and compensation.
2. Indicators Related to SDG 10
   • Economic disparities in education funding: The article discusses funding inequities linked to local property taxes and wealth, suggesting indicators measuring disparities in education funding per student by income level or locality.
3. Indicators Related to SDG 16
   • Legislative actions and policy frameworks: The article implies the need to measure transparency and accountability in education policy decisions, which could be tracked through governance indicators.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: concordmonitor.com