Groups Ask Arkansas Supreme Court for Decision Supporting Rural Schools -- Rural Policy Matters, Volume 4, Number 3 (March 2002)

On January 31, 2002, the Arkansas Public Policy Panel and the Rural School and Community Trust filed a friend-of-the-court (amicus curiae) brief before the Arkansas Supreme Court. The brief, filed on behalf of the state's rural schools, urged the high court to uphold a lower court's ruling in the landmark Lake View school funding case currently on appeal. "Every school day, geography is determining the educational destiny of thousands of Arkansas students," the brief contends.

The groups asked the high court to uphold the decision that Arkansas schools are unconstitutionally under-funded and that the school funding formula is unconstitutionally inequitable. The state has appealed that ruling to the Arkansas Supreme Court.

The brief contends that:

Arkansas' large rural population and high rural poverty rate make it essential that the needs of rural students be considered in a court decision on the equity and adequacy of school funding;

Smaller schools and smaller districts are particularly beneficial to help overcome the effects of poverty on student achievement in poorer communities;

Equal school funding does make a difference: the effects of poverty and the disadvantages of rural geography can be mitigated for rural students if they have equal educational opportunity; and

The state's property tax system creates serious inequities for rural schools.

If the state is going to guarantee all Arkansas children equal educational opportunity, "the state's school finance system must take into account the extent of poverty in rural communities," the brief contends. Arkansas' poverty rate in 1998 was 16.4%, compared to 12.7% nationally. The poverty rate for rural Arkansas is 63% greater than the U.S. average. "With a declining tax base, Arkansas' rural communities are trapped in a cruel cycle of poverty that prevents them from adequately addressing their single most effective economic development strategy -- improving their public schools," notes the brief.

The brief cites recent research showing the benefits of smaller schools and districts for improving academic achievement, especially among poor and minority students, and cautions against closing or consolidating small rural schools. Commenting on this recommendation, Rural Trust President Rachel Tompkins said: "The state should recognize the benefits of small schools and small districts, and try to preserve them whenever possible. If you take poor, rural kids away from their small, community schools and put them in bigger schools far from home, research shows that you may be taking away the one advantage they have."

In their brief the two groups argue that, despite their disadvantages, rural Arkansas students have the capacity to achieve at far greater levels if they are provided with equal educational opportunities. Citing research showing the correlation between poverty, race, and educational achievement, the brief contends that "evidence abounds that with adequate resources, poor and minority children can succeed academically." However, the state's per capita expenditures on education are the lowest in the nation -- a fact reflected in poor state and national test results and very poor teacher salaries. "The connection between the State's educational achievement and its financial investment in education is unmistakable," the brief states. The groups recommend that Arkansas target resources based on student needs and local ability to fund schools. "The State's constitutional responsibility to provide students with equal educational opportunity cannot be simply achieved by providing identical funding or programs among all districts," they note.

The reliance on local property taxes to fund public schools has created a school finance system that is inherently inequitable, resulting in significant differences in per-pupil annual spending in "property rich" and "property poor" school districts. The brief points out that the $1,800-per-pupil difference between Arkansas schools spending at the 95th percentile and those spending at the 5th percentile "would be enough to raise teacher salaries, hire more teachers to reduce class size, renovate dilapidated buildings, offer remedial reading courses, or provide computers for every classroom" in a small school district.

"Property taxes can't solve the problem," said Bill Kopsky of the Arkansas Public Policy Panel. "Strapping farmers and rural residents with the highest property tax rates in the state still won't meet basic needs, because the property values in many of our rural counties simply are not very high."