3 ms·

CA spends less than half as much per student as New York: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/01/29/how-states-are-spending-money-in-education http

CA spends less than half as much per student as New York: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/01/29/how-states-are-spending-money-in-education http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/01/29/how-st... What the 'right' value is subject to debate, but as a parent in SF having negotiated the tragicomic SFUSD system for my own children, I'd wager it's a lot closer to New York's 19K per student than CA's $9K. This is pure speculation, but my subjective experience is that CA funds schools at close to the minimum possible level, and that there is a lot of headroom in which every dollar extra spend causes an immediate improvement in service and richness of experience. I say this because one of the differentiating factors of the most-desired schools in the SFUSD is the large amount of extra money parents bring in via fundraising. Yet even the most successful schools, which raise on the order of half a million dollars, are only adding something like ~$1K per student. Yet what they offer above and beyond comparable schools without that funding bump is very evident: all the 'enriching' staples my own generation took for granted as par of public education: art classes, PE, green space, staff with expertise in supporting kids with differing needs (at both ends of the performance/ability spectrum)... etc etc etc. I have also observed that affluent parents who privilege education also both prioritize and have the luxury of donating their time -- no small thing in a city in which a single-income household is mostly unthinkable. So that extra $1K may be multiplied by donated time, as well. But any way you slice it, a few extra K per student, judiciously spent, would make a hell of a difference in my parts. That said, a dollar raised and allocated by the parents, in accord with parents' priorities, and subject to their audit, is probably much better spent than one squeezed through the SFUSD. QED non-profit charters (of which there are several) are currently a very strong bet in SFUSD...

saryant 12y ago
I was in a CA high school as it fell apart (Benicia High in the North Bay). The district was in the hole to the tune of millions and cutting everything they could. Multiple teacher walk-outs a year, terrible morale. An administration more concerned with protecting their own asses than doing anything about education. The school had two copiers on the entire campus: one for the teachers that was always broken, another for the administration that was magically in great repair. I had a french teacher who finally flipped and stormed the admin copy room, refusing to leave until he'd made the copies he needed to teach his class. They put him on leave pending a psychiatric review. Buildings falling apart, bus service discontinued. Violence and an attempted shooting that was only thwarted through sheer dumb luck. I was fortunate that my family moved to Texas between my sophomore and junior years so I was spared the worst of it. Just after I left, the school ended all advanced classes and extracurriculars. AP classes gone. The band only survived due to a strong booster organization. A complete disaster in what was once the heart of America's dream. I was practically in shock when I started at my new school in Texas where the district seemed to have unlimited funds: I was in the first graduating class of the most expensive school ever built ($77 million). I told a teacher there that copier story and he couldn't believe it.
prostoalex 11y ago
> CA spends less than half as much per student as New York Is New York a baseline for efficient spending and "best-outcome-for-the-buck", so to speak? Also, in California, a good portion of education spending goes towards retired teachers' pensions http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_28061244/how-does-an-educator-get-to-that-lofty-pension http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_28061244/how-does-an-educ... so seems calculating the "per-student" spending should involve subtracting those fixed obligations.

saryant 12y ago

I was in a CA high school as it fell apart (Benicia High in the North Bay). The district was in the hole to the tune of millions and cutting everything they could. Multiple teacher walk-outs a year, terrible morale. An administration more concerned with protecting their own asses than doing anything about education. The school had two copiers on the entire campus: one for the teachers that was always broken, another for the administration that was magically in great repair. I had a french teacher who finally flipped and stormed the admin copy room, refusing to leave until he'd made the copies he needed to teach his class. They put him on leave pending a psychiatric review. Buildings falling apart, bus service discontinued. Violence and an attempted shooting that was only thwarted through sheer dumb luck. I was fortunate that my family moved to Texas between my sophomore and junior years so I was spared the worst of it. Just after I left, the school ended all advanced classes and extracurriculars. AP classes gone. The band only survived due to a strong booster organization. A complete disaster in what was once the heart of America's dream. I was practically in shock when I started at my new school in Texas where the district seemed to have unlimited funds: I was in the first graduating class of the most expensive school ever built ($77 million). I told a teacher there that copier story and he couldn't believe it.

prostoalex 11y ago

> CA spends less than half as much per student as New York Is New York a baseline for efficient spending and "best-outcome-for-the-buck", so to speak? Also, in California, a good portion of education spending goes towards retired teachers' pensions http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_28061244/how-does-an-educator-get-to-that-lofty-pension http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_28061244/how-does-an-educ... so seems calculating the "per-student" spending should involve subtracting those fixed obligations.