Over the past few years government officials from the President down to local school boards have been discussing ways to improve education. The focus of these discussions typically starts with the belief that American schools are failing. Reformers use this belief to argue for any number of changes.
Even though unions represent only 38% of America's teachers many say unions are ruining education. Even though they are not necessarily cheaper to run and don't have better outcomes some argue for more charter schools. Even though there is no data to suggest the Common Core standards are better than the current standards most states are making the change.
But perhaps the most peculiar talking point that reformers discuss is money in education. You would be hard pressed to find data that shows less money in education leads to better results but you can easily find people who complain that we spend too much on education. Of course if you believe we spend too much on education then you are either willing to accept worse outcomes to fix our financial issues or you believe that spending less can somehow have a positive result.
Typically this argument manifests itself with something like "Detroit spends more per pupil yet gets some of the worst results". While both of these things may be true this is a complete perversion of what people are discussing when they talk about money for education. For example if we really spent too much on education then why would any charter school ever spend more than a public school?
Also does anyone believe that the amount of money a school spends on administrators has greater correlation to student achievement than the amount spent on teachers? Because by comparison charter schools spend more on administrative staff and less on educators than public schools.
Of course beyond this if the education spending by cities like Detroit was meant as a serious discussion piece in determining the value of money in education it would require way more in depth analysis than simply "spending high + outcomes bad = more money doesn't work". If these armchair experts looked at where the money goes they would see that while Detroit Public Schools have 32nd highest per pupil rate in Michigan they are at the bottom of the list when it comes to "Average Teacher Salary" and spending on "Basic Programs". Unfortunately DPS spends around $4,500 per student or nearly 1/3 of their budget on "Added Needs" and another $2,100 on "Adult Education".
Given that a good teacher can have a lifelong impact on a student and that data shows higher teacher salaries correlate to better educational outcomes the fact that DPS teacher salaries rank at the bottom of all Michigan schools probably explains why the student achievement level is lower than other school districts. The reality is that per pupil spending represents hundreds of different smaller budgetary decisions for each school district so suggesting this data alone represents anything more than a surface level talking point is a massively uninformed position.
While cherry picking a few schools across the nation and ignoring the budgetary details is one popular method people offer as proof that more money doesn't lead to better outcomes another tactic often used is to suggest that we spend more on education now than ever before. The data shows that this trend has reversed itself recently but overall it is certainly true that the amount spent on education has been steadily increasing. The question then becomes what is too much?
The data shows that over the past 20 years spending on education has risen by 25% over inflation.
Defense spending over that same time frame increased by 83% over inflation.
The price of gasoline has risen by around 105% over inflation the past two decades.
Health Care costs have jumped by 79% over inflation during this 20 year period.
The cost of a college education has gone up by around 66% over inflation over the past 20 years.
CEO pay has increased by as much as 725% over inflation the last 30 years by some estimates.
To some extent those who argue for cuts to education have largely ignored or argued against cuts to these ever increasing numbers. Why then is education spending so different, especially since it has increased at a much lower rate than these other entities.
Unfortunately to the diehard reformer none of this makes any difference. They believe in their hearts that education is broken and needs to be fixed. The good news for these people is that data shows there is a simple solution that has the potential to make the US number 1 in the world in education. All the government needs to do is reduce the poverty rate in America because if you equalize results based on poverty rates the US is already the world leader in education.
Ironically the fact that so many people insist on improving education using methods that don't actually improve education suggests there is a problem. It's just not with the public school system.
No comments:
Post a Comment