3 ms·
It's not clear that money per student is the metric that matters. Parental involvement, for example, is crucial for motivating students, imparting various skil
by tikhonj 11y ago
It's not clear that money per student is the metric that matters.
Parental involvement, for example, is crucial for motivating students, imparting various skills (ie time management, studying) and setting appropriate expectations[1]. This is more a matter of cultural and structural factors. Parents that have the time and motivation to care for their children's education could have a significant effect without worrying about per-student outlays.
Perhaps there's a way to replicate this by restructuring school to provide positive parent-like influences? I don't know, but it's not a matter of throwing money at the problem, one way or another.
[1]: I remember seeing a few studies on this. "Student Motivation: An Overlooked Piece of School Reform" looks like a reasonable overview of the subject: http://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=405#sthash.ABEwXRV0.dpuf http://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=405#sth...
- kolbe 11y agoI don't think I claim that's the only metric that matters. If I did, that was a mistake. Money is a big influencing factor in-terms of saying what kinds of resources a child has access to for their education, because it's simple to turn money into tutoring or other life experiences. But obviously, for example, having parents who themselves are well-educated and understand how to educate children is a resource that can be more valuable than just having parents with money. There are, of course, many many other examples of non-monetary resources that are accessible by some children and not other, though.