|
Education Priorities and Finance,教育优先顺序和金融
在现代世界,教育是极为重要的。事实上,教育是重要的,不仅对个人,但对于整个社会和国家的,因为它创造了依据国家智力潜能和定义未来的国家。与此同时,现代教育正面临着一系列的问题,其中教育公平、有效的资金投入,也许是最主要的。
应该指出,如今几乎所有的州和地区特别担心教育的股权,以平等的机会和广阔存取所有学生接受可能更好的教育。在这样一个政策的结果多种程序被开发。例如,有程序,支持全面支持家长教育项目,风险学前教育计划,成天幼儿园到学生们开始准备学习。学校文化多样性的社区发展他们的预算考虑风险增加和双语教学的加权因子和其他的对策,以期给更多的时间和支持并不能满足学生年级的结果。
与此同时,情况下,当有额外的支持和全面支持特殊教育服务的成本为儿童特殊需要通过特殊学校财务、配方并不罕见虽然常常会激起讨论,为这样的资金和清晰的合理性和客观性的这种金融公式。
尽管如此,它是重要的战略提供学校有足够的资金,以使教育真的可以平等,虽然它值得提及的特别节目和项目的显著影响本区预算和经常教育成为一种负担的预算。在这方面,有必要强调问题的有效运用财务资金更重要的问题,严重的资金比恰到好处。
与当地地区预算,在州一级的资金是相当不同的。在这方面,有必要指出的一个主要关注的是国家预算的资助公立学校是一种最优先考虑的事。此外,经常支持公立学校一般以反映企业竞争实力阶段性水平的资助。它也是值得注意的,作为一个规则,一个州的预算不专注于特殊的计划和项目的预算相比,尽管它是当地地区传统上认为当地财政援助是必不可少的部分地区的国家为了增加本区的有效性的预算,已经提到的,并不总是能负担得起的资助的所有的程序。
然而,也有一定的相似之处地区国家和地方预算自从两个注意工资的教育者和传统上,在这两个层次的专家试图筹集资金才能不断增加工资的教育者和经济激励他们的工作。
与此同时,应该说,是国家预算的柔韧性差比当地地区预算。这就是为什么一些特殊的程序的实现主要是针对消除不平等是国家预算更加困难比当地地区的人。此外,后者能更好地实现社区的实际需求,更能有效地使用资金预算虽然状态,甚至在地方层面看,资金使用情况是不完美的。
至于联邦水平,教育经费更多复杂的,或许,可以有效地降低。与此同时,明显的特征是联邦资金进行教育的趋势,使教育更加容易获取,就可能花费更少的较大数量的人。难怪有各式各样的节目和策略的成本最低为目标的教育,尤其是对剥夺了类别,包括下层阶级的代表。作为结果,这样的程序,一个著名的总统主动不让一个孩子掉队正在发展壮大。#p#分页标题#e#http://www.ukassignment.org/liuxuezuoyedaixie/daixiehelanzuoye/2011/1107/19150.html
与此同时,通常最优先考虑的项目是公众教育和公立学校。在这方面,它是可能相同的趋势跟踪州财政预算,但不同的是,在联邦政府层面甚至有少接触与当地社区,更甚的是,那里几乎没有真正有效的项目目标天赋的学生,例如。实际上,联邦资助教育是集中在广大学生,无论他们的实际需要,不像当地地区预算更加意识到在当地社区的需求。
作为一个结果,现代教育的特点是相当荒谬的情况下,增加资金,但在联邦一级,它是集中在公共教育逍遥法外,并没有考虑在当地社区的需求。与之形成鲜明对比的层面上可能是本区的预算资金更加灵活,与当地社区的实际需要,但是,不幸的是,当地地区预算负担不起他们特殊的计划和项目的发展。在这种情况下,国家基金成为一种调停者使用资金当地地区更有效,但往往缺乏资金和联邦当局,但使用它们的资金不是很有效。
参考书目:
1。www.tcdsb.org
2。www.nysed.gov
3。www.ed.gov
In the modern world education is of a paramount importance. In fact, education is important not only for individuals but for the whole society and state as well because it creates the basis of the national intellectual potential and defines the future of the nation. At the same time, modern education faces a number of problems, among which equity and effective funding of education are probably the major ones.
It should be pointed out that nowadays practically all states and districts are particularly concerned about the equity of education, wide access and equal opportunities to all students to receive possibly better education. In the result of such a policy a variety of programs were developed. For instance, there are programs that support full funding for the parent education programs, the at-risk preschool programs and all day kindergartens to students begin school ready to learn. Culturally diverse communities develop their budgets taking into consideration the increasing at-risk and bilingual weighting factors and other strategies in order to give more time and support to students who are not meeting grade level outcomes.
At the same time, the cases, when there is additional support and full funding for the cost of special education services for children with exceptional needs through special school finance, formulas are not rare though often they provoke discussions as for reasonability of such funding and clearness and objectivity of such finance formulas.
Nonetheless, it is strategically important to provide schools with sufficient funding in order to make education really accessible and equal, though, it is worthy of mention that special programs and initiatives affect dramatically local district budgets and often education becomes a kind of burden for the budget. In this respect, it is necessary to underline that the problem of effective use of financial funds is even more important and serious than the problem of funding proper.#p#分页标题#e#
Unlike the local district budget, the funding on the state level is quite different. In this respect, it is necessary to point out that one of the primary concerns of the state budget is funding public schools which are a kind of priority. Moreover, often general support for public schools reflects level funding. It is also noteworthy that, as a rule, a state budget is less focused on special programs and initiatives compared to local district budget though it is traditionally accepted that the financial aid to local districts is essential from the part of the state in order to increase the effectiveness of the local district budgets, which, as it has already been mentioned above, are not always able to afford the funding of all programs.
Nonetheless, there are also certain similarities between state and local district budgets since both pay attention to the salary of educators and traditionally, on both levels specialists attempt to raise funds in order to constantly increase salaries of educators and financially motivate their work.
At the same time, it should be said that state budgets are less flexible compared to the local district budgets. This is why the realization of some special programs targeting at the elimination of inequality is more difficult for state budgets than to local district ones. Moreover, the latter can better realize the actual need of the community and use funds more effectively than state budgets though, even on the local level, the use of funds is not perfect.
As for the federal level, the funding of education is getting even more complicated and, probably, less effective. At the same time, the distinguishable feature of the federal funding of education is the trend to make education more accessible and less costly for possibly larger number of people. No wonder that there are a variety of programs and strategies which target at the minimization of costs of education, especially for deprived classes, including representatives of lower classes. As a result, such programs as a well-known presidential initiative No Child Left Behind are developing.
At the same time, often the main priority of such programs is public education and public schools. In this respect, it is possible to trace the same trends in the state budget, but the difference is that on the federal level there is even less contact with the local communities and, what is more, there is practically no effective programs that really targets at gifted students, for instance. In actuality, the federal funding of education is focused on masses of students, regardless their actual needs, unlike local district budgets which are more conscious of the needs of local communities.
As a result, the modern education is characterized by quite a paradoxical situation when the funding increases but, on the federal level, it is focused on public education at large and does not take into consideration the needs of local communities. In stark contrast, on the level of local district budgets funding may be more flexible and correspond to the actual needs of the local community but, unfortunately, the local district budget cannot afford all special programs and initiatives they develop. In such a situation, the state funding becomes a kind of mediator between local districts that use funding more effectively but often lack funds and federal authorities, which have funds but use them not very effectively.#p#分页标题#e#
Education Priorities and Finance,教育优先顺序和金融
Bibliography:
1. www.tcdsb.org
2. www.nysed.gov
3. www.ed.gov
|
