Kentucky staate funding Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Kentucky staate funding - Essay Example Additionally, funding has also been supported by district leaders who feel there is a need to support low-income students while emphasizing on the need for equity and fairness among all citizens of the state clarifies (Ellis, 2011). Some of the past and the current funding policies for Kentucky include Free or reduced-price school lunch benefits: Having lagged behind in educational initiatives by around 1990, Kentucky State under commonwealth initiative introduced an economic reform system. The system could see funding of students from low-income districts receiving financial support from the government based on fairness and equity throughout the whole state (Ellis, 2011). Allocation of less funding for higher education: In the past, Kentucky instituted a policy that was aimed at allocating minimal funding to higher education. The state decided to reduce spending in higher education between the periods 1992 to 1993 (Ellis, 2011). Despite the fact that the policy was being visualized by some of the state economist as idea to inflict recession at the national level, it became so important in generation of more revenue to the state. Distribution policy: The council of the state government also came up with education distribution act. The distribution act was based on a formula that mainly targeted funding needs of higher education for Governors and General Assembly. The benchmark for the above model constituted a statistical procedure that only contained 20 nationally reported institutions (Ellis, 2011). Currently, it is impressive to note that the government has put in place new policies targeting to enhance performance at Kentucky schools, which have over the years attribute to high performance at both K-12 and high educational programs states (Welner & Chi, 2008). Tuition and Fees Revenue Standard Deduction: The tuition fee revenue policy was set up later by the end of the year 2001 and again reversed in 2008 clarifies (Welner & Chi, 2008). Having