Middletown transcript., 1916-07-15
BOARD OF EDUCATION
The State Must Raise More Money
For Nonresident Pupils
WOULD HELP RURAL SCHOOLS


The limit of 250 nonresident pupils
in each county for whom the state ap-
propriates money to pay tuition in town
High Schools, is too low, as more than
25O pupils would like to use such an
opportunity. The State must either
appropriate more money for this pur-
pose and raise the limit to 300 or $50, or
the money now appropriated must be
apportioned among the students on
some basis other than the present,
which fixes twenty cents a day as the
pay to town High School for non
resident pupil. The effort to increase
the appropriation has been made and
failed. 1t may fail again. Therefore,
some plan should be devised to meet
the difficulty if the appropriation can
not be increased. Three plans have
b zen advanced to meet the need.
First, the State Grange meeting
favored an increase of the appropria-
ton from $4,000 (the present annual
appropriation to $25,OOO. Admit to
town High Schools all who are qualified
and wish to go, then apportion each
county's share of the appropriation
-third) among all the children ad
mitted in that county. Thus if 250 can
be paid for, as now, with 81, 333 33, the
state paying the full twenty cents a
day, the state will be able to pay only
twelve or fifteen cents day when the
number of pupils is increased to $50, as
might easily be the case under new
plan. Who should pay the difference
between the twenty cents day allowed
by the law and the twelve or fifteen
cents apportiOned by the state? The
State Grange favored having the par
ents of the children who go to school
make the extra payment. This is one
plan.
Second, it is advocated that the home
school district should pay that part of
the cost not provided for by the state
appropriation, otherwise this proposal
is just like number one.
Third, since the money appropriated
for these nonresident pupils comes out
of the State Treasury, and therefore
does not include local tax money, it has
been proposed that the entire state ap-
preparation for High School attendance
be apportioned equally among all the
High School children of the state, with
out regard to whether they live in the
town or in the country. What the state
does for one child it should do for all.
Therefore, if the state intends to en-
courage High School education, it
should do the same thing for the town
child as it does for the rural child. The
state appropriation apportioned on this
basis would become smaller for any
child, but would be fairly and equally
given toward the. education of every
child. Thus the towns would receive
special help toward running their high
schools so that the children might Sc
cure a High School education. The diff
terence in the cost to nonresident
pupils must here too be paid, either by
the parents or by the district of resi-
dence of the pupil.
High School Appropriations in other
states are all made on the latter basis,
since paying for some and not paying
for others is showing special favors or
extending special privileges to some.
This change would tend to build up
High Schools in rural communities,
since each community would then get
help toward the maintenance of its High
School, not only by the attendance of
nonresident pupils, but also from the
attendance of home pupils. 1t would
not be unfair to the town High Schools,
since it gives them something substan-
tial in place of the pay from nonresident
pupils, namely. pay for the attendance
of their own pupils. Temporarily, some
of the town High Schools would get
more than in the past, since the new
plans all make provision for more
pupils, the state paying a part and the
home or the home district the other
part.
This change involves much discussion
and will require very careful considera-
ton. Some better plan than any here
proposed may come out of the discus
sion. To secure the best proposition is
the State Boards only desire.
CHARLES A. WAGNER,
Secretary of the State Board of Educa-
tion.