Core Curriculum in the LB806 Context

We are told that uniformly across the state there seems to be great concern about attempts to link school finance to a so-called "core curriculum". Why are we hearing about a so called "core curriculum" from the leaders of the education committee of the legislature, especially when it is clear that the State Board of Education, not the leaders of the education committee, "shall be the policy forming, planning and evaluative body for the state school program."

Is it the Metro versus Rural Vendetta again?

At present, under Rule 10 of the State Board of Education, Core Curriculum means a curriculum which includes language arts, social studies, science, mathematics, vocational education, foreign language, visual and performing arts, and personal heath and physical fitness, and which in public schools, incorporates multicultural education in all areas as provided in 92 NAC 16.

Why then whittle Nebraska students availabilities down to merely English, Social Studies, Math, and Science? And why right now?

Because this all seems to be financial, it appears from a rural school perspective that talk of "core curriculum" is a desperate move on the part of certain leaders to preserve the finance concepts of LB806. So you ask, how are the two connected? Very simply:

Without sufficient finances there cannot be a full curriculum. Rule 10 of the state requires a full curriculum, and so if there isn't enough money (because the $1.10 lid law prevents a local board of education from getting enough local taxes...while at the same time LB806 does not provide enough state money) any school or parent could successfully sue the legislature to provide money for the mandated Rule 10 curriculum. Whether the suit was fully successful or not, it would be extremely embarrassing to the education committee and leadership, who pretend that their LB806 aid formula is sufficient. (A full hearing of the facts in open court would be devastating to those who have relied solely on political power rather than facts to achieve their ends.)

So, what do they do? Presto; just drop the Rule 10 requirements and put into place only a cheap "core curriculum" requirement. Make everything else a "local option" so that the rich districts can continue to provide a full curriculum, and the rural or poor are reduced to only "core". And it would all be very legal and tidy.

A very simple plan. And very very deadly toward the rural children of the state.