Student Scores Lower for States That Spent the Most

Bloomberg | August 28, 2001

[First_Salute]

Originally posted last August, re-posted here in the new FR arrangement; F.Y.I.

[Dimensio]

Student Scores Lower for States That Spent the Most

and

More Money Urged

Kind of says it all.

[GuillermoX]

Bush = More Money Spent

[KC_Conspirator]

Democrats and other supporters of higher spending said the comparison is useless because in most high scoring states, the SAT is only taken by the very best students. They said the states that spend the most tend to be the urban northeast states, which must work with diverse populations, students who speak English as a second language, and students from low income homes.

Excuses, nothing but effing excuses for their collossal failures. The liberal education establishment has a leather jack boot on the necks of of those in public "skools"; which are namely minority. There is tons of data which show that spending does not lead to better education, but rather simple values such as discipline, community, curriculum, and family involvement lead to better education.

[Mister Magoo]

This is no surprise. States like Utah, North Dakota, et cetera, have comparatively few minorities. That's why their scores are higher. It has nothing to do with money. As for why minorities score consistently lower on all educational tests across the board, that's a topic for another time. One thing is for certain -- while the SAT may in fact be a culturally biased test, no educational organization has devised a test in which minorities (except for Asians) score higher, or even equal to, Caucasians.

[David]

"'Democrats and other supporters of higher spending said the comparison is useless because in most high scoring states, the SAT is only taken by the very best students. They said the states that spend the most tend to be the urban northeast states, which must work with diverse populations, students who speak English as a second language, and students from low income homes.'

Excuses, nothing but effing excuses for their collossal failures. The liberal education establishment has a leather jack boot on the necks of of those in public "skools"; which are namely minority. There is tons of data which show that spending does not lead to better education, but rather simple values such as discipline, community, curriculum, and family involvement lead to better education."

There is another much better response to the assertion that the higher score states are helped by an advantage in the quality of students who take the tests--like a number of the things the liberals say, there is no data to support the assertion--from anecdotal evidence available here, I have reached the conclusion that it is simply not so.

Further, again from observation of the facts here in the small southern town in which we live, a number of the students that did not do well in elementary school down here have been helped by higher standards and increased discipline at the high school level; the NA and lower income group students are studying harder and are doing better in school and thus can be expected to do better on the exam.

[Kevin Curry]

States like Utah, North Dakota, et cetera, have comparatively few minorities.

They have a much higher proportion of intact two-parent families, too.

[GailA]

IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN

[TontoKowalski]

This is no surprise. States like Utah, North Dakota, et cetera, have comparatively few minorities. That's why their scores are higher.

But the article points out:

Students from Southern states such as Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama and Tennessee, which on average spend less than $6,000 a student, scored above 1100.

As a native Southerner, I promise you we have a large minority population.

[xrp]

"These are the poorest, most disadvantaged kids'' who often drop out of high school, the Georgia Republican said.

No one is forced to drop out of high school. Kids either make a choice to drop out of high school or have made choices (such as getting pregnant, 100% preventable) that lead to them dropping out of school.

Their choices KEEP them poor and disadvantaged.

[denydenydeny]

Is there an existing link for this story?

[Blood of Tyrants]

Our RINO governor here in Tennessee has proposed that if we just give him an additional $100 MILLION PER YEAR, that the schools would actually start teaching the children to read. He seems completelly oblivious to the fact that if the schools aren't providing something as basic as reading education, that giving them more money isn't going to help them.

[First_Salute]

It's an older, pre-Sept. 4, 2001 post, in the "classic" Free Republic database. Such stories cannot be debated because they are "locked out" by FR. It's an old Bloomberg story which you might find in their archives.

[Straight Vermonter]

[EdReform]

"Many Democrats, backed by representatives of teachers and school administrators... "

That'd be unions, as in the National Education Association. Get the NEA out of public education, and you just might see some improvement in the schools.

Help defund the National Education Association

[Eugene Tackleberry]

Source data (?): http://www.alec.org/meSWFiles/pdf/education2000.pdf

[tcostell]

Democrats and other supporters of higher spending said the comparison is useless because in most high scoring states, the SAT is only taken by the very best students. They said the states that spend the most tend to be the urban northeast states, which must work with diverse populations, students who speak English as a second language, and students from low income homes...

I know that virtually everyone on FR has hear this from me before, but I'll rehash it one more time for those of you who need ammo in this argument. My wife and I live in a small town in Westchester NY. There are a total of 1500 students in the school system in a middle, and upper middle class town. Minorities make up approximately 5% of the total student body.

Last year we paid $18,600 per student, and this year will were hit with a 9% increase. That makes the new budget $20,300 per student.

For this princely sum, only 67% of the 8th graders are passing the state required standardized tests, and the average SAT score is below 1000. That means that we are the single most expensive, failing public school in the United States. The next time someone asks you how bad the schools will get before the NEA is chucked out, tell them these statistics, and remind them that we have no recourse. Short of burning the school to the ground, there is nothing we taxpayers can do to reign in an administration drunk with funding.

We can vote down the budgets (and have every year for the last 4) but they enact them anyway. We can lobby the school board, but 1 member is a teacher, and two of the others have their wives working in the administrators office so they are bought and paid for, and would never consider lowering a budget, or turning down a request for more funding. We can vote out the school board, but since they rotate their terms, it would take 4 years to affect any change, and my wife and I can't affort to stay while the issue is debated.

We're told that we can expect double digit increases for a minimum of the next 4 years. This year we will vote with our feet, just like 15% of our town is doing right now.