The Catholic Example

If New York City’s public school system could educate a child for what it costs to educate a child in one of New York’s Catholic schools, the city would be spending about $6.5 billion less on its Department of Education each year. That’s setting aside special education, which is a topic for another editorial.*

In 1962, New York educated a student population of about one million with about 40,000 teachers. Today, the city educates about 100,000 more students, but the number of teachers has doubled to about 80,000. Has the quality of education improved by a factor of two? If the question doesn’t make you cringe, you haven’t seen the latest test scores for New York City’s schools. Only 29.8% of the city’s eighth-graders, to take but one of many examples of the public school system’s failings, were able to test to standard on the math test.

The cost to educate the students in New York’s Catholic schools averages $3,200 a pupil for Kindergarten through eighth grade and $5,800 a pupil for high schoolers, according to a spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of New York, Nora Murphy. Most of that comes from tuition, but contributions from graduates and other donors cover a 10% to 20% share. The public schools spend nearly double that, about $10,000 each in elementary and middle schools and more than $9,000 for each high-school student.

The two largest factors that account for the difference in costs are the government bureaucracy surrounding the schools and the enormous power of the city’s teachers union. These two factors, minimized in the Catholic school system, are the biggest obstacles to education reform in New York’s public schools.

The Archdiocese of New York is able to administer to about 110,000 students with a total central administrative staff of 28. At that level, the city’s school system would have no more than a few hundred administrative staff. But New York has almost 9,000 administrators, secretaries, clerks, accountants, and other assorted bureaucrats. In total, the city’s school system employs more than 136,000 persons, a ratio of about one employee for every nine students.

When asked what makes the Catholic schools stand apart from the public schools, Ms. Murphy of the Archdiocese said the differences are a lower average teacher salary, less top-down management, an administrative consciousness toward cost-effectiveness, and small schools. New York’s Catholic schools have few assistant principals. They don’t centrally budget everything that goes into making a school run.

Jay Greene of the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Civic Innovation had a different way of expressing the bureaucratic obstacles to improving the city’s education. In the Catholic schools, teachers and administrators “trust each other,” he said. Because the teachers share a sense of philanthropy and there are fewer rules and administrators to enforce them, Catholic schools offer a better work environment and a sense of mission, something that allows the schools to attract teachers who will work for about half the salary of a New York City teacher.

Granted, some of the Catholic school teachers are nuns and priests. By definition, these teachers do not have families to support or other expenses that non-clerical teachers have. But, despite the popular stereotypes to the contrary, Catholic school teachers are not primarily nuns — religious figures make up a minority of these teachers. Also, the public school system does provide some services to the private religious school system, such as transportation. These costs are added to the Department of Education’s budget and diminish the per-pupil cost of Catholic schools. Catholic schools also have a limited special education program. Still, says Mr. Greene, the per-pupil costs would still be much lower for Catholic education with these factors figured in.

A sense of philanthropy is hardly something that is missing from potential teachers in New York’s pool. The New York City Teaching Fellows program saw a 21% increase in applications this year. What is missing is the sense of urgency. Schools Chancellor Joel Klein has made some steps toward improving the way the schools do business —laying off administrators and moving to privatize some of the school system’s accounting functions. But the city faces a $6 billion budget gap and already high taxes. It’s hard to see how the politicians can go on claiming there is no room to cut when the Catholic schools are educating students at half the price that the city bureaucrats are — and with better results on standardized tests. Parents seem to realize this: When private philanthropists offered 7,500 scholarships to New York City private and parochial schools in 1999, applications were filed for nearly 170,000 students.

The city could try wrestling concessions out of its unions, laying off administrators, and increasing class sizes until it could educate a student for what it costs the Archdiocese — and then try improving quality so that it attains the same results.

But a simpler way might be to just offer a publicly funded voucher to any student who wants one, and let the schools sprout up to fill the need. If the demand for vouchers is still at 1999 levels, that would mean 162,500 students channeled out of the public school system. Assume that it costs $7,000 to educate each one — far more than the current level of spending on Catholic schools, but enough to adjust for whatever backdoor transportation funding the public schools are currently providing and for some of the capital costs of space for the influx of new students. The city still saves $406 million.

BUT with vouchers, what USED TO BE public money is now the original owner's (of that money).

Not true.

Unless they earned one Hell of a lotta money, the voucher recipient did NOT pay taxes equal to the voucher amount.

As a matter of fact, only one of three taxpayers actually has children in school (K-12.) The other 2/3rds subsidize that education.

A voucher is a GREAT BIG CHECK written by the State to a parent so that parent can choose the school his children attend.

But it is NOT the money of the voucher recipient, NOR is it money that the recipient "earned."

Having said that, I still prefer the voucher system.

No fish here. I just paid $5 to park at a public beach for my buddy's wedding. Oh, yeah, that's my beach. I'm the public. My single buddy has no children. He pays property taxes too. Can he have a voucher to use that money to perhaps get his PH FReepin D? The point is, you don't get taxed differently than the guy that has no kids in school. We all pay taxes so that the kids in this country get a basic education. Here's the fish that I think you smell; you are all for the tax payers giving you a voucher to put your child in a superior school system, instead of you putting the bucks together to manage it yourself, which would, in all fairness, be available to everybody now, thus making these "private schools" the primary souce of education for a much larger portion of our society and then you expect the atheists, agnostics, homosexuals, new age believers, devil worshippers, selfish don't care about no one elsers, and their simpathizers, who have now put their kids in your Catholic or other Christian school to leave well enough alone. That rotting fish is your own selfish desire for a first class ticket with a coach budget. You need to find a way to put together the kind of money it takes to put your kids through the private school without ever giving the general public, or special interest groups, i.e. the government say in your curriculum. This is still somewhat of a free country, opportunity knocks.

you are all for the tax payers giving you a voucher

let's see, allowing me to keep my own money is, in your example, taxpayers giving me something? that fallacy keeps creeping in to your points.

We all pay taxes so that the kids in this country get a basic education.

and what a great job the liberals are doing, huh?

My single buddy has no children. He pays property taxes too.

because you value public, gubmint edukashun, he's paying for your kid! lol! (remember, i'm using my money-not his or yours-for my kid).

Can he have a voucher to use that money (oops! remember now, his money)to perhaps get his PH FReepin D?

hmmmmmm, not a bad idea!

That rotting fish is your own selfish desire for a first class ticket with a coach budget.

if wanting to lower taxes to keep more of my money brands me as selfish, then im guilty, otherwise, please refrain from personal attacks.

What you want(and I like the idea) is a total revamp of the education system. I would like to pay no taxes for education and be responsible for any education I feel is needed or desired for my family, or whomever I feel compelled to aid. I feel the same way about charity being a personal responsibility instead of our unaccountable welfare system where feel good politicians want to help everybody out with your and my money. In both cases, how we spend our own money for education and charity would be so much more closely monitored because of our true interest in the effectiveness of our spending, and the government would have no say ever in how we are spending our money or educating our children. Believe me, I am not happy with the effectiveness of government spending on ANY issue. The less taxes you and I pay, and the smaller we can make the government, the better. If the voucher system goes into affect and causes a reduction of taxes and a shrinking of government, you can tell me "I told you so" and I'll eat humble pie. If it does not work, let's start a bill to remove the government from schools completely. I'll help, and I won't rub anything in your face.

P.S. I didn't mean any personal attack, I'm sorry.

apology accepted, we all get carried away at times (my "weak" point is laughing at some of the off-color hilarity that pops up on these threads quite regularly).

i dont want to re-vamp the system, really, it'll die anyway, IF we ever get real freedom of choice.

Don't forget the nuns! My second grade teacher, a nun, was quick with a ruler on the back of one's hand. She also had the superhuman ability to twist an apple in half with her bare hands. Great woman!

ROFLMAO!!! Those were the days. My HS Biology Teacher, a layperson, never showed up for classes, so they dragged a nun out of retirement. When we reached the chapter on Human Reproduction, she covered it all by saying: "A boy reaches puberty when he begins to grown peach fuzz on his face. Now turn to Chapter 6." Amazingly, most everyone educated by the nuns in my "baby boom" generation, can spell faultlessly and has an excellent command of English grammar. We can find states and countries on maps and follow directions. My catholic elementary school class size was 60. Sister kept everyone in their seat. Those nuns taught for God, not a paycheck.

Today, there are few, if any nuns still teaching. As someone else pointed out, catholic schools attract recent college graduates who need the experience. Oftentimes, their inexperience can lead to bigger problems.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.