2 ms·

> K12 education spending in the US has increased by 2-3X per student per year since 1960. Uh what? That's not even close to true...

• nkurz 8y ago
  I'm not familiar with the statistics, and may be misreading them, but for what I can find with a quick search, 2-3X seems about right, possibly even low. Total expenditure per pupil in average daily attendance in constant 2016 dollars: 1959-60: $3,890 2014-15: $14,013 $14,000 / $4,000 = 3.5x https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_236.55.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_236.55.a... Separately, here's a link claiming a 3x increase for Nevada in particular: https://www.npri.org/issues/publication/nevada-has-nearly-tripled-its-k-12-spending-since-1960 https://www.npri.org/issues/publication/nevada-has-nearly-tr... And here's an article claiming a 2x increase since 1970: https://www.cato.org/blog/public-school-spending-theres-chart https://www.cato.org/blog/public-school-spending-theres-char... What do you think the numbers are instead? More meta, why do you post a harsh correction like this without offering any sourcing or evidence? If your goal was to provoke someone else into doing some research, I guess it worked, but this seems rude. What's your model for how others will react to your comment?
  • ninkendo 8y ago
    Maybe it’s just poor phrasing? Because: > has increased by 2-3X per student per year reads to me like it’s saying that every year, the cost is 2-3x higher than it was the year before. Which is obviously impossible.
    • smnrchrds 8y ago
      He must have meant "spending per student per year has increased by 2-3X".