5 ms·

> it is evidence that there is bipartisan support for educational spending, That does not correspond with the rhetoric that I've seen. Republicans are adamant

> it is evidence that there is bipartisan support for educational spending, That does not correspond with the rhetoric that I've seen. Republicans are adamantly opposed to increasing spending for public education, and have systematically cut support for higher education spending in state budgets. Instead, I regularly see the meme that there's tons of fat in the education system; that we spend just as much as everyone else, but have worse outcomes. The fault is in the schools for not spending what they have wisely enough. And I think that the funding story is flatly untrue. Because the dominant source of public education funding is from local taxes, there are vast differences in the per-student level of funding across the country.

rayiner 6y ago
> And I think that the funding story is flatly untrue. Because the dominant source of public education funding is from local taxes, there are vast differences in the per-student level of funding across the country. This is patently false. Local governments provide 45% of K-12 educational spending. State governments spend 47% and the federal government spends 8%: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/styles/optimized_default/public/2020-03/fig_3_6.png?itok=sFXMqDkX https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/styles/optimized_d.... State and federal funding go overwhelmingly to erasing the disparities in local funding. Look at the funding numbers in your own state. Here is mine: https://i2.wp.com/conduitstreet.mdcounties.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Screenshot-2019-02-19-19.37.24-1.png?w=998&ssl=1 https://i2.wp.com/conduitstreet.mdcounties.org/wp-content/up.... The funding differences are based on cost of living, not local income. My solidly middle/upper middle class county has spending near the bottom because it’s pretty rural. Baltimore which is very poor has among the highest. Montgomery and Prince George’s, which are opposite sides of the income spectrum, get almost the same amount of funding. You can also see in that chart how differences in local funding are more than compensated for by differences in state funding.
- brandmeyer 6y ago
  > State and federal funding go overwhelmingly to erasing the disparities in local funding. And it isn't enough. Not even close. Boulder Valley: 13.8k/student. Pueblo: 10.5k/ea. Fort Morgan: 9.5k/student. Those are sufficiently widely varying that looking at "average spending" paints an inaccurate picture. Durham public schools: 10.5k/ea. Chapel-Hill/Carrboro: 15k/ea. https://ballotpedia.org/Analysis_of_spending_in_America%27s_largest_school_districts https://ballotpedia.org/Analysis_of_spending_in_America%27s_... Range of total spending per student spreads by over a factor of 4x.
  - rayiner 6y ago
    First, you look at the whole country, there is in fact not a difference in most states: https://apps.urban.org/features/school-funding-do-poor-kids-get-fair-share/ https://apps.urban.org/features/school-funding-do-poor-kids-... Second, I’m not sure what your Colorado example is supposed to prove. Boulder is a much more expensive city than Pueblo. Land for schools is cheaper, salaries are lower, etc. Those costs seem roughly comparable accounting for local costs. Third, comparing spending across states is deeply misleading. The cost of schooling in Idaho (which makes up several of the lowest spending school districts in your link) bears little relation to the cost of schooling in New York (which makes up several of the highest spending school districts in your link). The irony of your example is that Idaho spends about 1/3 of what New York spends per student, and Idaho students outperform New York students: https://www.sde.idaho.gov/assessment/naep/files/general/naep-2017/NAEP-2017-Idaho-Results.pdf https://www.sde.idaho.gov/assessment/naep/files/general/naep... Fourth, even the low spending school districts in your examples spend more than European countries: https://www.statista.com/statistics/381745/education-expenditure-per-pupil-england-region-uk https://www.statista.com/statistics/381745/education-expendi.... School spending in London is about $7,402 per student. That’s substantially less than Pueblo or Durham, and only a bit more than the state average for Idaho ($7,100). I guarantee you that money goes a hell of a lot further in Durham or Boise than London!
    - brandmeyer 6y ago
      And yet, we still can't afford 5 full days per week of school. 60% of all districts in our state only have funding for 4 days per week. Many of the remainder are on 4.5 days/week. > Third, comparing spending across states is deeply misleading. This is why you cannot use averages to talk about school funding relative to the rest of the OECD. That's my point. You asked for statistics in my state. I gave them, in my most recent two states of residence.
      - s1artibartfast 6y ago
        Why do you think that the individual school districts have so much of a problem providing and equivalent educations when compared to other individual school districts that have much better outcomes with less funds, even controlling for cost of living? I wonder if it has to do with the level of services expected and provided between locations, states, and counties. For example, I know that special needs students, which can be notoriously expensive to educate.
s1artibartfast 6y ago
>Because the dominant source of public education funding is from local taxes, there are vast differences in the per-student level of funding across the country. This is what I said as well. There is also vast difference in per-student spending within blue states and blue counties. This is evidence that the problem crosses party lines.
bluGill 6y ago
You hear that rhetoric often. However the truth is different. If both the democrats and Republicans propose increasing spending, but one increases less than the other, the one that increases less is said to cut spending. I've seen cases where the larger spending passes and they take credit for it the next year even though the states budget didn't balance (the state has a balanced budget requirement) and so what was actually spend was less than what the spending cut party proposed. (we don't know what would happen if the other party had won, since they claim they would have delivered by spending less elsewhere)

rayiner 6y ago

> And I think that the funding story is flatly untrue. Because the dominant source of public education funding is from local taxes, there are vast differences in the per-student level of funding across the country. This is patently false. Local governments provide 45% of K-12 educational spending. State governments spend 47% and the federal government spends 8%: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/styles/optimized_default/public/2020-03/fig_3_6.png?itok=sFXMqDkX https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/styles/optimized_d.... State and federal funding go overwhelmingly to erasing the disparities in local funding. Look at the funding numbers in your own state. Here is mine: https://i2.wp.com/conduitstreet.mdcounties.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Screenshot-2019-02-19-19.37.24-1.png?w=998&ssl=1 https://i2.wp.com/conduitstreet.mdcounties.org/wp-content/up.... The funding differences are based on cost of living, not local income. My solidly middle/upper middle class county has spending near the bottom because it’s pretty rural. Baltimore which is very poor has among the highest. Montgomery and Prince George’s, which are opposite sides of the income spectrum, get almost the same amount of funding. You can also see in that chart how differences in local funding are more than compensated for by differences in state funding.

brandmeyer 6y ago
> State and federal funding go overwhelmingly to erasing the disparities in local funding. And it isn't enough. Not even close. Boulder Valley: 13.8k/student. Pueblo: 10.5k/ea. Fort Morgan: 9.5k/student. Those are sufficiently widely varying that looking at "average spending" paints an inaccurate picture. Durham public schools: 10.5k/ea. Chapel-Hill/Carrboro: 15k/ea. https://ballotpedia.org/Analysis_of_spending_in_America%27s_largest_school_districts https://ballotpedia.org/Analysis_of_spending_in_America%27s_... Range of total spending per student spreads by over a factor of 4x.
- rayiner 6y ago
  First, you look at the whole country, there is in fact not a difference in most states: https://apps.urban.org/features/school-funding-do-poor-kids-get-fair-share/ https://apps.urban.org/features/school-funding-do-poor-kids-... Second, I’m not sure what your Colorado example is supposed to prove. Boulder is a much more expensive city than Pueblo. Land for schools is cheaper, salaries are lower, etc. Those costs seem roughly comparable accounting for local costs. Third, comparing spending across states is deeply misleading. The cost of schooling in Idaho (which makes up several of the lowest spending school districts in your link) bears little relation to the cost of schooling in New York (which makes up several of the highest spending school districts in your link). The irony of your example is that Idaho spends about 1/3 of what New York spends per student, and Idaho students outperform New York students: https://www.sde.idaho.gov/assessment/naep/files/general/naep-2017/NAEP-2017-Idaho-Results.pdf https://www.sde.idaho.gov/assessment/naep/files/general/naep... Fourth, even the low spending school districts in your examples spend more than European countries: https://www.statista.com/statistics/381745/education-expenditure-per-pupil-england-region-uk https://www.statista.com/statistics/381745/education-expendi.... School spending in London is about $7,402 per student. That’s substantially less than Pueblo or Durham, and only a bit more than the state average for Idaho ($7,100). I guarantee you that money goes a hell of a lot further in Durham or Boise than London!
  - brandmeyer 6y ago
    And yet, we still can't afford 5 full days per week of school. 60% of all districts in our state only have funding for 4 days per week. Many of the remainder are on 4.5 days/week. > Third, comparing spending across states is deeply misleading. This is why you cannot use averages to talk about school funding relative to the rest of the OECD. That's my point. You asked for statistics in my state. I gave them, in my most recent two states of residence.
    - s1artibartfast 6y ago
      Why do you think that the individual school districts have so much of a problem providing and equivalent educations when compared to other individual school districts that have much better outcomes with less funds, even controlling for cost of living? I wonder if it has to do with the level of services expected and provided between locations, states, and counties. For example, I know that special needs students, which can be notoriously expensive to educate.

s1artibartfast 6y ago

>Because the dominant source of public education funding is from local taxes, there are vast differences in the per-student level of funding across the country. This is what I said as well. There is also vast difference in per-student spending within blue states and blue counties. This is evidence that the problem crosses party lines.

bluGill 6y ago

You hear that rhetoric often. However the truth is different. If both the democrats and Republicans propose increasing spending, but one increases less than the other, the one that increases less is said to cut spending. I've seen cases where the larger spending passes and they take credit for it the next year even though the states budget didn't balance (the state has a balanced budget requirement) and so what was actually spend was less than what the spending cut party proposed. (we don't know what would happen if the other party had won, since they claim they would have delivered by spending less elsewhere)