The Conley Report, Part III (Section 1.1): What is Adequacy?

To review, here’s what the state constitution says:

It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders.

The key word in there is “ample”; it’s what the Washington Association of School Administrators seized on for their Ample School Funding Project, and to answer the question of what adequacy is the report offers these two definitions of ample:

Generous or more than adequate in size, scope or capacity
Generously sufficient to satisfy a requirement or need

There’s also a review of the four learning goals embodied in the 1993 revision of the Basic Education Act, which was the genesis of the WASL, and ties the section all together with this:

Productive citizens pay taxes and participate in civic institutions, thereby strengthening the state. For these and a host of other reasons, it is incumbent upon the state to consider what constitutes an adequate level of finding for public education, one that will ensure that school have the means to enable all Washington students to meet state performance outcomes. (p. 2)

Ask anyone in the schools and they’ll tell you that there’s not nearly enough capital available to meet those expectations. Ask many outside of education and they’ll tell you that they can’t see pouring more money into a system that they perceive as failing. It’s a "never the twain shall meet" sort of deal that I’m guessing will eventually have to be resolved by the courts.

To me adequacy means that I have the means to meet the needs of all the kids in my school, both high and low, without having to choose between the two. But let's save that for the next post!