Should public schools rely on students to bridge funding gaps? While the intent behind school fundraising activities and fees may be noble, it raises important questions about the equity and responsibility within our education system.
One stark contrast in the landscape of education is the way colleges and universities handle student access to school events. College and university students typically do not need to purchase tickets for school events because these costs are generally included in their tuition fees. In essence, higher education institutions prioritize access to extracurricular activities as part of their educational package.
In contrast, public schools, which do not charge tuition or student fees, often find themselves resorting to various fundraising activities and fees to support school events and essential supplies. Access to extracurricular activities is not considered a part of the educational package but a fundraising bonanza for schools.
About two decades ago, Monroe City Schools took a significant step by passing a special sales tax aimed at providing necessary school supplies for every classroom and ensuring that each student had access to two sets of books.
However, despite these tax distributions to each school, many still find it necessary to rely on students to raise additional funds for school extras. This raises concerns about the efficiency and transparency of the allocation of tax revenue.
Just after school started this year, one Northside school had its students sell cookie dough to purchase playground equipment, even though the school board is presently placing new playground equipment on every elementary school campus.
While parent-teacher organizations traditionally raise extra revenue for non-essential items not covered by public funding, the question arises whether it is fair to send students out to sell products like candy, popcorn, or cookie dough to purchase basic necessities that should be covered by tax dollars in a public school system.
A troubling example is the persisting practice of requiring students to bring supplies like tissue, Lysol, hand cleaner, and paper towels, even when schools have leftover supplies from previous years. It is baffling that schools with limited storage space accumulate stockpiles of cleaning supplies while the financial burden falls on students and their families.
Perhaps the most glaring issue is the requirement for public high school students to pay fees to attend school events. While it is understandable for visitors and fans to pay fees, charging students to attend their own school activities raises concerns about accessibility. Many students are left with the choice of either not attending or resorting to begging for handouts or alternative means.
Furthermore, for some schools, athletics has become a lucrative business, generating thousands of dollars each week in much-needed revenue. However, it is crucial to ensure that these costs do not disproportionately affect the students of each school. It is time to consider exempting home students from such expenses to promote equity in access to extracurricular activities. Visitors and the general public expect to pay, they are not students at the local school.
Lastly, schools should refrain from promoting student sales of products, subscriptions, or services that do not provide students with a fair share of the profits. These practices can inadvertently exploit students and divert their focus from their primary role as learners.
It is high time for a comprehensive reevaluation of funding models in public schools, emphasizing equity and responsibility. The education system should prioritize providing an equal and accessible learning environment for all students, free from financial burdens. It is our collective responsibility to ensure that every child has the opportunity to succeed, regardless of their socioeconomic background, and that our schools are places of learning and growth rather than arenas for financial inequality.
