Politics, Funding, and Equity in Curriculum Development

Introduction

Funding for resources that support curriculum development is influenced both politically and socially. Those in power can control the amount of funding given to schools and districts, which directly impacts the curriculum within each district.

Political influence on school funding, social factors affecting curriculum, economic implications of funding decisions, and equity and social justice aspects in curriculum development all fall within the spectrum of this issue. The literature on this topic is quite expansive in shedding light on each of these dimensions, starting with Freire (1996) and Tyack and Cuban (1997) and extending to Reardon et al. (2019) and Sahlberg (2021). Each theme is explored through a range of works spanning seminal to contemporary studies, with different researchers focusing on race, finance reform, social justice, and curriculum. Together, these works offer a deeper understanding of how different forces shape educational content and priorities.

Political influence on school funding, for example, is a major factor that dictates how resources are distributed, which in turn affects the nature of curriculum development. Authors like Apple (2012) and institutions such as the ETS Research Report Series illuminate the ideological elements and policy decisions that shape how governments at higher levels determine school funding. These works reveal the link between political agendas and educational equity, showing how political decisions reflect the power structures that sustain the system.

Social factors play an equally important role in shaping curriculum. The works of Banks (2015) and Freire (1996) are particularly important in demonstrating how cultural diversity, social systems, accepted norms, and social movements contribute to educational content that often goes unexamined. There is too little critical scrutiny of the systems that perpetuate existing norms; critical examination is central to Freire's (1996) argument. Overall, these perspectives underscore the need for leaders to challenge prevailing systems in order to achieve curricula that are not only inclusive and relevant but that actively work to overturn the inequitable system itself. Examining historical and contemporary social influences, as seen in these works, helps reveal the enduring relationship between society and education.

The economic implications of funding decisions are another crucial dimension for understanding the broad impact of educational policies on curriculum development. Research by Jackson et al. (2015) and Lafortune et al. (2018) provides empirical evidence linking school funding to educational outcomes and economic mobility. These studies demonstrate how financial disparities affect student achievement and long-term economic opportunities, and why equitable funding is necessary for promoting educational success.

Finally, equity and social justice are central to the discourse on curriculum development. Scholars like Darling-Hammond (2013) and Sahlberg (2021) make a compelling case for policies that promote equitable access to resources and robust support for teacher development. Their work advocates for curriculum reforms that address disparities and foster inclusive educational environments. By focusing on strategies to achieve equity, these studies contribute to ongoing efforts to build a more just and effective educational system.

This annotated bibliography provides an overview of the different factors influencing curriculum development. It highlights the interconnectedness of political, social, economic, and equity considerations, offering valuable insights for educators, policymakers, and researchers. The selected works help to elucidate the challenges and opportunities in curriculum development and can also be used to propose solutions for creating more equitable and effective educational systems.

Theme 1: Political Influence on School Funding

Apple, M. W. (2012): Michael Apple discusses how social structures and ideological frameworks shape curriculum development. He argues that political decisions regarding funding reflect broader societal values and power structures. This chapter provides insights into how political ideologies influence the allocation of resources for educational purposes. His overarching viewpoint is that systems are responsible for perpetuating a have-and-have-not type of educational experience, and he further contends that researchers and advocates share responsibility for the perpetuation of the status quo: "one can examine schools and our action on them in two ways: first, as a form of amelioration and problem-solving by which we assist individual students to get ahead; and secondly, on a much larger scale to see the patterns of the kinds of individuals who get ahead and the latent outcomes of the institution. These larger social patterns and outcomes may tell us much about how the school functions in reproduction, a function that may tend to be all too hidden if our individual acts of helping remain our primary focus" (pp. 134–135). The point here is that the system itself is a chokepoint — an argument that Freire (1996) develops as well.

Baker, B. D., Farrie, D., & Sciarra, D. G. (2016): This report examines the impact of political decisions on school funding over two decades, highlighting periods of progress and retrenchment. It shows how changes in funding policies affect educational equity and student achievement, thereby influencing curriculum priorities. Baker et al. (2016) state clearly that "the fiscal capacity of states — their wealth and income — does affect their ability to finance public education systems. But, as we have shown in related research, on which we expand herein, the effort put forth in state and local tax policy plays an equal role" (p. 3). Their review of the literature on this problem also shows that "a sizable and growing body of rigorous empirical literature has validated that state school finance reforms can have substantive, positive effects on student outcomes, including reductions in outcome disparities or increases in overall outcome levels" (p. 8). The study is helpful in demonstrating why greater investment leads to better educational outcomes.

Jennings, J. L., & Bearak, J. M. (2014): Jennings and Bearak explore the effects of high-stakes testing on curriculum and teaching practices during the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) era. Their study investigates how predictable testing formats influence educational strategies and resource allocation, highlighting the political dimensions of standardized testing policies. Jennings and Bearak (2014) find that "the design of state tests used to hold schools accountable under NCLB created incentives for teachers to perform one variant of teaching to the test" (p. 386). In other words, teachers are teaching to the test because of the structure of the test itself and the incentives attached to it. This dynamic does not support the kind of meaningful curriculum development that students need to succeed in life; it functions more as a short-term remedy for schools seeking funds, which are not necessarily directed toward genuine school improvement.

Tyack, D. B., & Cuban, L. (1997): Tyack and Cuban trace the history of public school reform in the United States, illustrating how political agendas have shaped funding priorities and curriculum development. Their historical analysis reveals recurring patterns of political influence on educational policies. Tyack and Cuban (1997) point out, for example, that "a political perspective shows how groups become mobilized to publicize problems, devise remedies, and secure the adoption of policies by school boards and legislatures. Understanding actual implementation of reforms in schools — or lack of implementation — requires insights into the distinctive institutional character of schools" (p. 7). If schools are not changing to promote greater equity, it is because the political environment itself is not changing.

Theme 2: Social Factors Affecting Curriculum Development

Banks, J. A. (2015): Banks (2015) explores the integration of cultural diversity into education and its impact on curriculum design. He argues that social values and demographic shifts influence curriculum content and educational goals. This perspective highlights how social factors shape the inclusivity and relevance of curriculum resources. Banks (2015) also explains that "during the course of US history, marginalized and structurally excluded identity groups have organized and worked for their group rights, which resulted in greater equality and social justice for all Americans" (p. 25). In short, Banks (2015) implies that if equity is to be achieved in education, it will be the result of minority groups organizing and advocating for changes that benefit them, since relying on those in power to initiate change is not historically how progress has been made.

Urban, W. J., & Wagoner, J. L. (2004): This historical overview examines how social movements and changing social norms have influenced educational policies and funding decisions. It provides important context for understanding how social change shapes curriculum development in response to evolving societal needs and expectations. It is particularly illuminating for understanding the role that money behind education has historically played in society. Urban and Wagoner (2004) show that financing has always been a central constraint on what can be accomplished in schooling, and that the allocation of funds has consistently been the primary obstacle: "If the major innovation of the Founders in the realm of educational theory was their explicit commitment to broadening the dissemination of knowledge, one might wonder why so little was accomplished in that regard. Certainly one of the major obstacles was the expense, as James Madison informed Jefferson when his plan for Virginia was voted down in 1786. At the time, Jefferson's argument that the expense of school support would be trifling compared to the cost of ignorance fell largely on deaf ears" (p. 87). The problem the authors identify is one of failing to recognize the opportunity cost of not supporting schooling with adequate funding.

Freire, P. (1996): Freire's seminal work critiques the social structures that perpetuate inequality in education. He argues that curriculum development should empower marginalized groups and challenge dominant societal norms. Freire's (1996) ideas emphasize the transformative potential of socially conscious curriculum practices by challenging the status quo and the systems that inhibit change. Notably, Freire (1996) argues that "the capability of banking education to minimize or annul the students' creative power and to stimulate their credulity serves the interest of the oppressors, who care neither to have the world revealed nor see it transformed" (p. 28). As Freire sees it, the problem is a deliberate effort by an oppressive ruling class to prevent learners from recognizing the truth about the system in which they are embedded.

Conclusion

The examination of political, social, economic, and equity-related factors in curriculum development reveals the intricate and interdependent nature of educational policy and practice. This annotated bibliography underscores the critical role of political influence in shaping school funding and, consequently, curriculum priorities. Apple's exploration of social structures and ideological frameworks, along with the ETS Research Report Series on school funding and achievement gaps, illustrates how political decisions reflect broader societal values and affect educational equity.

Social factors and entrenched power structures also play a significant role, as argued by Banks (2015) and Freire (1996), who demonstrate the importance of challenging the status quo and incorporating cultural diversity while addressing social inequalities in curriculum development. These works highlight the transformative potential of curricula that are responsive to societal changes and inclusive of diverse perspectives. Understanding historical and contemporary social influences on education is precisely where policymakers and educators can begin to recognize why schools have struggled in the past — and can then work to develop curricula that are relevant and equitable for the present.

Economic considerations, explored through the research of Jackson et al. and Lafortune et al., provide empirical evidence of the significant impact of school funding on educational and economic outcomes. These studies highlight the need for equitable funding mechanisms to ensure that all students have access to quality education and the opportunity to achieve their full potential. The economic ramifications of funding disparities underscore the importance of financial equity in promoting long-term educational success and social mobility.

Equity and social justice are fundamental to the development of effective and inclusive curricula. The works of Darling-Hammond, Sahlberg, and others call for policies that support equitable access to resources and professional development for teachers. These studies emphasize the importance of addressing funding disparities and promoting social justice through curriculum reform. Funding is essential, but practical approaches to equity and inclusivity offer concrete pathways for improving educational systems so that they can better serve diverse student populations and foster more equitable outcomes.

In sum, this annotated bibliography provides a comprehensive overview of the factors influencing curriculum development and reveals the importance of political, social, economic, and equity considerations in shaping educational policies and practices. The selected works offer valuable insights and recommendations for creating more equitable and effective educational systems. By addressing these factors, policymakers and educators can develop curricula that promote educational equity, social justice, and long-term success for all students.

Adamson, F., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Funding disparities and the inequitable distribution of teachers: Evaluating sources and solutions. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20(37), n37.

Apple, M. W. (2012). Social structure, ideology and curriculum. In Rethinking curriculum studies (pp. 131–159). Routledge.

Baker, B. D., Farrie, D., & Sciarra, D. G. (2016). Mind the gap: 20 years of progress and retrenchment in school funding and achievement gaps. ETS Research Report Series, 2016(1), 1–37.

Banks, J. A. (2015). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching. Routledge.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Inequality and school resources. In Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance (p. 77).

Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed (rev. ed.). Continuum.

Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press.

Jackson, C. K., Johnson, R. C., & Persico, C. (2015). The effects of school spending on educational and economic outcomes: Evidence from school finance reforms (No. w20847). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Jennings, J. L., & Bearak, J. M. (2014). "Teaching to the test" in the NCLB era: How test predictability affects our understanding of student performance. Educational Researcher, 43(8), 381–389.

Lafortune, J., Rothstein, J., & Schanzenbach, D. W. (2018). School finance reform and the distribution of student achievement. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 10(2), 1–26.

Levin, B. (2008). How to change 5000 schools: A practical and positive approach for leading change at every level. Harvard Education Press.

Reardon, S. F., Kalogrides, D., & Shores, K. (2019). The geography of racial/ethnic test score gaps. American Journal of Sociology, 124(4), 1164–1221.

Sahlberg, P. (2021). Finnish lessons 3.0: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? Teachers College Press.

Tyack, D. B., & Cuban, L. (1997). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Harvard University Press.

Urban, W. J., & Wagoner, J. L. (2004). American education: A history. Routledge.