This essay is short but complete．The writer uses a comprehensible mathematical example to point out a possible flaw in the original reasoning and follows up with a suggestion about future study．No eFrors in English usage OF mechanics detract from the argument．

The state school-board association presents an impassioned argument in favor of modifying state cuts to schools to make them more equitable．Since the cut per student is less at rlch schools than at poor schools，they argue，the cuts are harmful to poor schools．

The problem is that as things stand，the state already glves less per student to wealthy districts，who presumably then make up that difference using their own existing wealth．so a rich district might receive $2000 per student from the state， while an average district gets，say，$5000 per student．A cut of 10 percent to that rich district’s aid then limits their

payment to$1800 per student，while the average district still gets$4500．Yes，the cut to the rich district is only$200 per student，while the cut to the average district is$500． However．the result is still a 2：5 rati0 0f aid-exactly the same ratio as before the cut was made．

Despite this,the school board is not entirely wrong inits supposition that poor schools will be harmed．They will be harmed not because of an inequitable aid cut but because they do not have the money to supplement state aid．The state school—board association would be better off addressing that fundamental inequity．If school districts have to make up the difference through property taxes，or if they are simply unable to make up the difference at all and therefore have

 less to offer their students than wealthy districts do，that’s a real problem that warrants everyone’s immediate attention．