You can add ‘misleading the Kansas Advisory Authority to the U.S. Municipal Rights Commission’ to the list of honourable lapses committed by school teachers in their pursuit of money.? Your Advisory Council took testimony earlier this year to determine whether the Kansas school funding formula contributes to disparities around student achievement on the basis of rush, color, sex, national origin, disability status, or religion.
Educators who testified could have preserved the civil rights advisory local authority or council members a lot of time by simply praoclaiming that funding isn’t distributed according to race, color, sex, countrywide origin, or religion, so that the formula cannot be discriminating simply by design.? (Additional funding is provided for students with disabilities.)? Preferably, council members were put through a steady stream of misleading and also false claims designed to bring about support for more money.
The Advisory Government to the civil rights commission hasn’t reported its results at this writing, but it will hopefully see through the sheets and conclude that any kind of discrimination in the application of assets is by choice of local university boards and administrators rather than the structure of the school money formula.
Advisory Council member Tag Dodd commented, “-it’s not the formula. It is the lack of responsibility. So it is where they’re making use of money, not the submitting of money from the state, certainly not the amount of money.”
Mr. Dodd is correct.? It’s the best way money is spent that can make an impact rather than how much is spent. The utilization of money is at the control of neighborhood school boards.? And Mr. Dodd wasn’t the only advisory council new member who noted conflicting accounts.? Several members commented around the disparate claims of backing being cut and money setting new records (comprehensive disclosure