4 ms·

I’m told that we don’t spend anything on education so this must be false.

by tnel77 4y ago

dekhn 4y ago
The US chronically underfunds pre-college education. Universities are typically flush with money coming from grants usually from the government but also rich people. Often a large fraction of the grant money a professor obtains is siphoned off to dean's lush funds which help support education, hiring top professors, etc.
- streptomycin 4y ago
  > The US chronically underfunds pre-college education Not true, US spends more on pre-college education than nearly any other country https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-expenditures-by-country https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-exp...
  - dekhn 4y ago
    yes, but that spend isn't well distributed, and things are more expensive in the US (I assume your nubers are not corrected for the price index of each country).
    - streptomycin 4y ago
      That's true, but generally the worst school districts are the ones that get the most money, although the exact way money is distributed varies by region. For instance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district describes how NJ gives tons of money to schools in poor areas, although it does not seem to have produced any better educational outcomes.
      - juve1996 4y ago
        Does "get the most money" equate to "has the most money?"
        streptomycin 4y ago
        Not sure what the difference is. But it does seem that no matter how much money you throw at a problem with no measurable impact, there will always be people claiming just a little bit more is needed because this time something will be different and it won't be squandered.
        juve1996 4y ago
        We have very clear evidence money solves a lot of problems. Why doesn't it work here? It works everywhere else in our capitalist economy. In any case the difference is quite clear. If a school in a rich suburb doesn't get much federal money than, say, a inner city school, that gets a lot. That rich suburb already has money. They obviously wouldn't get further funding - but are likely much richer?
        streptomycin 4y ago
        The numbers I cited before were total $ per pupil from all sources.
        juve1996 4y ago
        The numbers you cited also have a citation that leads to a 404 and are only for 1 year, in one specific state. Hard to draw any reasonable conclusion from that.
        streptomycin 4y ago
        NJ has been doing it for decades, the Wikipedia article gives a pretty good overview. There's similar programs in other states, and many examples of poor/bad schools that get tons of funding. Such as basically every major city in the country. Possibly entire states and nearly every city for decades is not enough time, success may be right around the corner!
- suchow 4y ago
  It’s rare for a large fraction of grant money to be siphoned to a Dean’s discretionary fund. Typically some smallish fraction (maybe 10%, often significantly less) of indirect costs (which, depending on the funder and the negotiated F&A rate may be anywhere from 0% or nearly 100% on top of the direct costs that fund the research staff and materials, etc.) goes back to the subdivision overseen by that Dean to do with as they please. Everywhere I’ve worked, that amounts to a few (low single digit) percent of total costs being used in the way you describe. And many places return none of indirects to the unit overseeing the PI and so then it’s a cool zero percent.
- jschveibinz 4y ago
  TL;DR In the US, primary education is a local matter An interesting note here is that in the US, federal government dollars are not a major funding component of primary education (k-12). Less than 8% (around $60 billion) of the total cost comes from the federal government; the rest comes from state and local property taxes. https://educationdata.org/public-education-spending-statistics https://educationdata.org/public-education-spending-statisti... https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/how-is-k-12-education-funded https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/how-is-k-12-education-fun...
- TMWNN 4y ago
  >The US chronically underfunds pre-college education. As streptomycin said, you are wrong. New York City spends more per student than anywhere else in the US (<https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-city-spend-on-each-student.html https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-c...>). Baltimore, an incredibly poor and run-down city, spends the third most. #4-6 and #8 are all wealthy suburbs of Washington DC, but their schools are all far better than those of Baltimore or NYC on average, despite Baltimore spending slightly more per student and NYC spending 60-70% more. Money can only do so much against dysfunctional families immersed in dysfunctional ethno-societal groups.

I’m told that we don’t spend anything on education so this must be false.

by tnel77 4y ago

I’m told that we don’t spend anything on education so this must be false.

The US chronically underfunds pre-college education. Universities are typically flush with money coming from grants usually from the government but also rich people. Often a large fraction of the grant money a professor obtains is siphoned off to dean's lush funds which help support education, hiring top professors, etc.

streptomycin 4y ago
> The US chronically underfunds pre-college education Not true, US spends more on pre-college education than nearly any other country https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-expenditures-by-country https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-exp...
- dekhn 4y ago
  yes, but that spend isn't well distributed, and things are more expensive in the US (I assume your nubers are not corrected for the price index of each country).
  - streptomycin 4y ago
    That's true, but generally the worst school districts are the ones that get the most money, although the exact way money is distributed varies by region. For instance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district describes how NJ gives tons of money to schools in poor areas, although it does not seem to have produced any better educational outcomes.
    - juve1996 4y ago
      Does "get the most money" equate to "has the most money?"
      - streptomycin 4y ago
        Not sure what the difference is. But it does seem that no matter how much money you throw at a problem with no measurable impact, there will always be people claiming just a little bit more is needed because this time something will be different and it won't be squandered.
        juve1996 4y ago
        We have very clear evidence money solves a lot of problems. Why doesn't it work here? It works everywhere else in our capitalist economy. In any case the difference is quite clear. If a school in a rich suburb doesn't get much federal money than, say, a inner city school, that gets a lot. That rich suburb already has money. They obviously wouldn't get further funding - but are likely much richer?
        streptomycin 4y ago
        The numbers I cited before were total $ per pupil from all sources.
        juve1996 4y ago
        The numbers you cited also have a citation that leads to a 404 and are only for 1 year, in one specific state. Hard to draw any reasonable conclusion from that.
        streptomycin 4y ago
        NJ has been doing it for decades, the Wikipedia article gives a pretty good overview. There's similar programs in other states, and many examples of poor/bad schools that get tons of funding. Such as basically every major city in the country. Possibly entire states and nearly every city for decades is not enough time, success may be right around the corner!
suchow 4y ago
It’s rare for a large fraction of grant money to be siphoned to a Dean’s discretionary fund. Typically some smallish fraction (maybe 10%, often significantly less) of indirect costs (which, depending on the funder and the negotiated F&A rate may be anywhere from 0% or nearly 100% on top of the direct costs that fund the research staff and materials, etc.) goes back to the subdivision overseen by that Dean to do with as they please. Everywhere I’ve worked, that amounts to a few (low single digit) percent of total costs being used in the way you describe. And many places return none of indirects to the unit overseeing the PI and so then it’s a cool zero percent.
jschveibinz 4y ago
TL;DR In the US, primary education is a local matter An interesting note here is that in the US, federal government dollars are not a major funding component of primary education (k-12). Less than 8% (around $60 billion) of the total cost comes from the federal government; the rest comes from state and local property taxes. https://educationdata.org/public-education-spending-statistics https://educationdata.org/public-education-spending-statisti... https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/how-is-k-12-education-funded https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/how-is-k-12-education-fun...
TMWNN 4y ago
>The US chronically underfunds pre-college education. As streptomycin said, you are wrong. New York City spends more per student than anywhere else in the US (<https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-city-spend-on-each-student.html https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-c...>). Baltimore, an incredibly poor and run-down city, spends the third most. #4-6 and #8 are all wealthy suburbs of Washington DC, but their schools are all far better than those of Baltimore or NYC on average, despite Baltimore spending slightly more per student and NYC spending 60-70% more. Money can only do so much against dysfunctional families immersed in dysfunctional ethno-societal groups.