THE PUBLIC "EDUCATION" SHAM

Jaysun | 1/5/04 | Jaysun

[Jaysun]

As this election year starts, the subject of Public Education and the funding (or lack thereof) will be discussed on a national level. I’d like to share what I’ve found on the subject of Public Education. It may surprise some of you to learn that there is absolutely no correlation between funding and student performance. The idea that “poorer” students in less affluent districts are at an educational disadvantage isn’t at all true. In fact, the less money a district, city, county, or state spends on education the better the students seem to perform. The idea that smaller classrooms or more money is the answer to the educational crisis facing America is complete idiocy.

I’ll share some of the data that I have on a National level concerning K-12. I also have data on a state and local level in my home state of Alabama. I’d be happy to help others compile similar data in other states if needed.

According to data shown by the Nation Center for Education Statistics, the District of Columbia spent the most at $11,009 per student. The District of Columbia also ranked dead last on SAT scores with a 480 in Verbal and a 473 in Mathematics. (DC also has one of the smallest pupil per teacher ratios with 1 teacher for every 13 students.)

Utah Spent the least at $4,769 per student. Utah ranked tenth in the Nation on SAT scores with 563 in Verbal and 559 in Mathematics.

Look at the ten states in which the most amount of money per student was spent and their SAT ranks:

District of Columbia $11,009 51 New York $10,725 45 Connecticut $10,517 34 Rhode Island $10,216 37 Massachusetts $9,883 31 Vermont $9,798 32 Delaware $9,612 39 New Jersey $9,596 41 Alaska $9,430 30 West Virginia $8,742 26

Compare the ten states in which the least amount of money per student was spent and their SAT ranks:

Utah $4,769 10 Mississippi $5,235 16 Arizona $5,445 28 Tennessee $5,470 11 Arkansas $5,764 15 Idaho $5,789 22 Alabama $5,937 14 Nevada $6,134 1 North Dakota $6,173 35 Oklahoma $6,184 9

On average the ten states that spent the most spent $9,953 per student and ranked 37th on SAT scores. The ten states that spent the least spent $5,690 per student and ranked 16th on SAT scores.

Please help me in making sure that the coming education debate includes facts such as the ones listed above. In my view, we should reverse the trend of increased spending on public education in favor of home schooling and private schools. We should move to dismantle the dismal failure known as public education.

Nation Center for Education Statistics http://nces.ed.gov SAT scores http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d02/tables/dt136.asp Spending per pupil http://nces.ed.gov/quicktables/Detail.asp?Key=760

[Mr. K]

good post- keep it bumped

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
2	Montana	1,100.00	4	275.00	38	28.95

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[ClintonBeGone]

Good research. This would be even more powerful and make a better impact if you could diagram it in some sort of spreadsheet or chart.

[Jaysun]

Good research. This would be even more powerful and make a better impact if you could diagram it in some sort of spreadsheet or chart.

I have lots of spreadsheets and charts of the data. However, I've not become proficient enough in the art of HTML to post such things (as you may be able to tell from my jumbled article).

[bolobaby]

We should move to dismantle the dismal failure known as public education.

*Gasp*

Don't you realize that a public education is a CIVIL RIGHT??? I was educated in a public school so I *know* that it is somewhere in the Bill of Rights... let me just check... Oh! Look! "Friends" is on! Let me get back to you...

[inquest]

Not to mention that the federal government has no constitutional business being involved with education to begin with. The states are perfectly capable of handling these matters themselves.

[SoftballMominVA]

The District spends so much per pupil largely because of the special education population. The administration has lost so many lawsuits for not following basic IEP's that about 10% go to private schools, paid for by the District. In addition, the population has a large amount of special needs children, some requiring residential care. Residential care can go upwards of 250k per year, per child.

A better comparison would be one that compared dollars spent on regular education. Rural states do not have the incredible numbers of high needs children that can skew these types of reports.

[Spiff]

I educate my children using a state-of-the-art satellite receiver, wireless network, Dell Computers, DVD burner, widely-used home and Christian school curriculum and textbooks for around $600 annually per student. The satellite-broadcast teaching is done by degreed and certified teachers using standard teaching methods as well as computer animation, video, puppetry, etc. The textbooks are some of the most popular for Christian schools and home schools. My children can log into any computer in the house and watch their recorded teachers or they can load it from DVDs.

$600 per student per year plus the time and effort made by my wife and I. And my children are getting a better education. End the government monopoly on education.

[The_Eaglet]

Not to mention that the federal government has no constitutional business being involved with education to begin with. The states are perfectly capable of handling these matters themselves.

Good point. The best way to cut spending is eliminate the federal government's unconstitutional role and correspondingly reduce the tax burden. Allow the people of each state to decide the degree to which their state government should be involved rather than force them to pay for education of other states.

I hope to elect like-minded people in November.

[Jaysun]

The District spends so much per pupil largely because of the special education population. The administration has lost so many lawsuits for not following basic IEP's that about 10% go to private schools, paid for by the District. In addition, the population has a large amount of special needs children, some requiring residential care. Residential care can go upwards of 250k per year, per child. A better comparison would be one that compared dollars spent on regular education. Rural states do not have the incredible numbers of high needs children that can skew these types of reports.

I disagree with the notion that Special Education spending has caused these results to be skewed. The data that I provided above is just a sample of data that I have collected which proves that funding and achievement are not linked. Notice also that I only listed the top/bottom 10 states in this article. The other states (even the rural ones) show the same thing. The percentage of students in the District of Columbia that are served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is 15.3% which ranks 9th in the Nation. States such as New Mexico (18th on SAT scores and 29th on spending) have higher percentages of special education students.

[Jaysun]

$600 per student per year plus the time and effort made by my wife and I. And my children are getting a better education. End the government monopoly on education.


That's a wonderful example. I applaud you! I also call for the end of the government monopoly, but think that it must be done in an orderly fashion that will involve several steps (one of which is to DECREASE spending).

[Jaysun]

Not to mention that the federal government has no constitutional business being involved with education to begin with. The states are perfectly capable of handling these matters themselves.


I agree! The states are capable of handling education - but I think that the responsibility to education children should eventually rest on the parents rather that the federal or the state government.

[Jaysun]

Don't you realize that a public education is a CIVIL RIGHT??? I was educated in a public school so I *know* that it is somewhere in the Bill of Rights... let me just check... Oh! Look! "Friends" is on! Let me get back to you...


Nice Sarcasm. It's sad that it applies to many other things as well.

[ClintonBeGone]

I have lots of spreadsheets and charts of the data. However, I've not become proficient enough in the art of HTML to post such things (as you may be able to tell from my jumbled article).

Just get yourself a copy of Frontpage (kazaa maybe) and play around. It's not hard.

[Jaysun]

One thing we must trumpet constantly, however, it that roughly 75% of every education budget goes to the adults for salary and benefits, NOT the kids.


I agree to a certain extent. However, I believe that the education machine can explain away (or at least gain "understanding" on) that fact in the minds of most people. I contend that on the rare occasion that we're given the chance to "trumpet" some truth, we should attack at the throat. They've used the notion that there are poor kids being disadvantaged while rich kids get better educations in public schools. That notion has allowed them to continue to get more and more and more money for less and less and less performance. If we can show that the whole idea that they need more money to increase the quality of education given is false, we'll have gained HUGE! If we stop the endless flow of money, we stop the incentive to protect poor results.

[upchuck]

edukcshun dump bummp

[GluteusMax]

Bookmark ping

[inquest]

I clicked on your link. Do you know if any of these like-minded people are running for local offices anywhere where they have a decent shot at winning? It'd be nice to see them get a foot in the door somewhere.