Adequate Educational Funding: a study of US justice courts decisions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22491/2236-5907122609Keywords:
Educational Funding, Adequate Education, Courts of Law, United States of AmericaAbstract
The present study aims to map the court decisions that discuss educational funding in state courts in the United States of America (US) and analyze the disputes that have adequate education as its main claim. For this purpose, an analysis of litigations in courts between 2017 and 2020 on this issue was carried out. Since the 1960s, the disparity in educational funding has been discussed in courts of law, with changes in strategy over the years. Currently, the most present claim in educational litigations is the ability to fulfill the right to educational quality, which is foreseen in the states constitutions. During the period analyzed, 57 disputes on the subject were identified, 26 of which claimed for adequate education. It was observed that the post-recession environment is still visible in judicial decisions on educational financing, which brings more restrictive decisions on budget policies.
Downloads
References
BASTOS, Remo Moreira Brito. Segregação racial e socioeconômica no sistema educacional básico dos Estados Unidos. Pro-Posições, Campinas, v. 28, n. Supl. 1, p. 160-181, 2017.
ESTEBAN, Maria P. S. Pesquisa qualitativa em educação: fundamentos e tradições. Porto Alegre: Artemed, 2010.
FINE, Toni M. Introdução ao sistema jurídico anglo-americano. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2011.
KOSKI, William S.; HAHNEL, Jesse. The Past, Present, and Possible Futures of Educational Finance Reform Litigation. In: LADD, Helen F.; GOERTZ, Margaret E. Handbook of Research in Education Finance and Policy. Nova York: Routledge, 2015. P. 50-65.
PINTO, José M. R. Uma análise do financiamento da educação no Estado da Califórnia, EUA. Cadernos de Pesquisa (Fundação Carlos Chagas), São Paulo, v. 35, n. 126, p. 699-722, 2005.
PINTO, Isabela R. R. A discussão da qualidade do ensino no poder judiciário: a experiência Norte-Americana na Adequacy Litigation. 2018. Tese (Doutorado em Educação) – Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2018.
PORTZ, John. Federalismo e a política de educação nos Estados Unidos: a distribuição de autoridade e responsabilidade entre os níveis do governo. Massachusetts: Departamento de Ciências Políticas Northeastern University Boston, 2011.
REBELL, Michael A. Courts & Kids: pursuing educational equity through the State Courts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009.
REBELL, Michael A. Courts & Kids: pursuing educational equity through the State Courts. 2017a. SUPPLEMENT 1 (1973). P. 1-31.
REBELL, Michael A. The Courts’ Consensus: money does matter for educational opportunity. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, n. 674(1), p. 184-198, 2017b.
SALVADOR, Ângelo Domingos. Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa bibliográfica. Porto Alegre: Sulina, 1986.
SILVA, Nelson do Valle; HASENBALG, Carlos. Tendências da desigualdade educacional no Brasil. Dados [online], v. 43, n. 3, p. 423-445, 2000.
SILVEIRA, Adriana A. Dragone. The role played by courts in promoting equal educational opportunity reforms: New York and São Paulo cases. International Journal of Educational Development, v. 87, p. 102495-102495, 2021.
SIMON-KERR, Julia A.; STURM, Robynn K. Justiciability and the Role of Courts in Adequacy Litigation: preserving the constitutional right to education. Student Scholarship Papers, Yale Law School, 2008.
SPRINGER, Matthew G.; HOUCK, Eric A.; GUTHRIE, James W. History and Scholarship Regarding U.S Education Finance and Policy. In: LADD, Helen F.; GOERTZ, Margaret E. Handbook of Research in Education Finance and Policy. 2. ed. Nova York: Routledge, 2015. P. 17-32.
THRO, William E. Judicial Analysis During the Third Wave of School Finance Litigation: The Massachusetts Decision as a Model. B.C.L. Rev., v. 35, May 1994.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 FINEDUCA - Revista de Financiamento da Educação
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License that allows sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this magazine.
2. Authors are authorized to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, publishing in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (for example in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes, as well as increase impact and citation of the published work. See: http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
