Getting the Facts Straight on Per Pupil Spending in California

Did/does the author of this article connect the dots within her own research?

She opined here:

"It was above average in per-pupil income from federal and state sources and about $1,700 per pupil below average in local revenues, thanks to Proposition 13, the 1978 property tax limit measure."

And then:

"Back to the cost of living discussion....even though we have extremely high costs, housing in particular,..."

Do you understand WHY Proposition 13 was put in place by a majority of voters now?

I hear these arguments re: per capita spending per student, and it makes me cringe when people attempt to simply what is a complex issue.

Welcome to sound bite thinking! Maybe if we spent more on education we would be able to think more clearly and completely.

Fact. Property taxes have increased over the long haul because home prices have gone up. Had Prop 13 not been put in place, home values could not have increased at the same rate they have.

We can't have it both ways. Either we pay higher taxes or we keep the median price of homes lower.

Fact. California's budget has major problems that the people and politicians don't have the political will to fix. For instance, many programs have built in formulas which automatically increase spending, and we are unwilling to raise taxes. This puts further strain on the State's fiscal resources.

Something has to give (and it has - California is headed for $16 BILLION in debt this year).

Fact. Teachers generally say (scream?) that their pay is too low AND that we don't spend enough per student.

However, let's look at some of the hidden costs to education - teachers' retirement benefits. Teachers are one of the few (if not the only) group which receive LIFETIME medical benefits. Tell me that this doesn't take away from the $$$ that districts can spend on students.

Pay me today, or pay me tomorrow. You can't have it both ways.

Fact. Student test scores are low. So what do we do - blame the teachers that they are not doing a good job, and implement a "No Child Left Behind" program?

Here's the problem. If we want to improve something 5%, we work 5% harder - right? What if we want to improve something 50%? 100%? Work that much harder? It's impossible.

There are structural problems wrong in education that need to be addressed. Making people work harder (or throwing more money at it as in per capita spending) ISN'T GOING TO WORK.

Remember the iceberg - 13% is above the water whereas 87% is below. We have to fix what is below the surface, the structure and processes, before we will see any improvement on what is above the surface.

Bottom line, there are no free lunches, nor are there simple solutions. We must come up with real solutions which will work, and not everyone will get what they want. Welcome to the real world.

Einstein said that we cannot solve today's problems with the same mentality which created them. We must set aside our special interests (such as teachers' unions) to do what is best for our kids - get them educated.

Lest we forget, we are educating the generations which will be the leaders of our country and (hopefully) take care of us in our senior years. Scary thought that we are doing so poorly by them . . .

D

The "per pupil" spending statistics are easily manipulated and are misleading. How about these numbers for the 2007-2008 budget for the Los Angeles Unified School District: total budget $19,500,000,000 (actual was $19.986 billion) for an enrollment of 691,897 students. That looks like $28,179 per student to me.

That fact of the matter is that I can put my child in private school for $2,500 a year. My child is better educated, safer, has smaller class sizes (15-20) and the paying parents are a part of the decision making process.
Oh, how I remember that glint of resentment my children’s public school teachers reserved for any parent with a suggestion or concern. It is a wall between elite educators, administrators and the unknowing public.
I wonder what the ratio is between educators and administrators here in California’s public schools. ; 1 teacher to 10 admin personnel? In our private school we have one administrator, two part time secretaries, one part time accountant and one part time handy man. The educator count is 8 teachers, 2 daycare workers and 150 or so students.

That fact of the matter is that I can put my child in private school for $2,500 a year. My child is better educated, safer, has smaller class sizes (15-20) and the paying parents are a part of the decision making process.
Oh, how I remember that glint of resentment my children’s public school teachers reserved for any parent with a suggestion or concern. It is a wall between elite educators, administrators and the unknowing public.
I wonder what the ratio is between educators and administrators here in California’s public schools. ; 1 teacher to 10 admin personnel? In our private school we have one administrator, two part time secretaries, one part time accountant and one part time handy man. The educator count is 8 teachers, 2 daycare workers and 150 or so students.

Isn't it wonderful that in our country we have the option to choose the type of education we want for our children? I am a public school teacher at a Title I school. Oh, how I would welcome a parent with a suggestion or concern in my classroom!
Let's not be so quick to blame the teachers. It takes more than just a teacher to raise citizens for the future. It takes participation from the parents, and the community. The African proverb: It takes a village to raise a child, should become our motto.
Parents need to become involved in the school and their child's life. Check their homework, read with them, discuss their day with them, provide life experiences for them, get them to school and on time, and love them and make them feel safe. Those reading this may say, I do; however, there are many parents who are not reading this or cannot read this entry, and they do not spend the time with their child.
Getting the community involved in schools is another challenge. No one has the time or resources to host an event or volunteer to spend time with students. Our local library is the only community entity that hosts events, and sends volunteers to our school to read to students.
We can blame and judge teachers, administrators, and budget cuts for low test scores. Blaming and judging do not solve the problems in our public schools. California has a diverse population with over 1.5 million students who speak a language other than English as their first language. There is also a large number of students whose family income is below the poverty level. Their parents may not have graduated from high school, may be incarcerated, on drugs, ect. These students come into school with limited vocabulary and background experiences needed to understand the curriculum.
In my opinion, teachers make an adequate salary. I did not go into teaching for the money. I went into teaching with a passion to educate children who could make decisions, think for themselves, and make a difference in our world. It takes more than just a teacher to raise citizens for the future.

I think anyone interested in this subject should read the following:

http://cfx.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080413/news_1n13pupil.html

This article points out that last year's 46th place ranking in per pupil spending was derived from 2004-05 spending figures but used a federal “geographic cost of education index” from 1990. The article further illustrates there are many rankings used by different entities. I personally am suspicious of any figure quoted by the teacher's union.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/districts-student-students-2334859-school-revenue

This article argues that per pupil spending should not be the "guiding principle" in the education debate.

They spend way less per Capita in India per student, but they're churning out students that would whoop an American student's butt quite thoroughly.

The issue isn't about money. It's about an inefficient schooling system, bad teachers who are protected by a politically powerful Union, and each and every parent that doesn't know how to raise a responsible kid.

our school system isn't merely inefficient, it has a perverse incentive structure. Public schools actually get increased funding for failure. That's a recipe for disaster.

How can CA be ranked 28th in overall spending and nearly last for actual student spending and general admin costs? Where's the rest of the money going? Not-general admin costs? Building Costs? I wish someone would post a simple chart that shows the complete makeup of per pupil costs and not just quote the version of the story that supports their case.

How can CA be ranked 28th in overall spending and nearly last for actual student spending and general admin costs? Where's the rest of the money going? Not-general admin costs? Building Costs? I wish someone would post a simple chart that shows the complete makeup of per pupil costs and not just quote the version of the story that supports their case.

How can CA be ranked 28th in overall spending and nearly last for actual student spending and general admin costs? Where's the rest of the money going? Not-general admin costs? Building Costs? I wish someone would post a simple chart that shows the complete makeup of per pupil costs and not just quote the version of the story that supports their case.

Sorry for the above triple post. I only tried to post once. I found the NCES data for per pupil spending in CA...the percentages are as follows:

Instruction 60%
Student Support Services 5%
Instructional Staff Support 7%
General Admin 1%
School Admin 7%
Operation & Maintenance 10%
Student Transportation 2%
Other Support Services 4%
Food Services 4%

This same source has CA ranked 29th in overall per pupil spending, 28th for instructional spending, and 27th for overall support services spending. This is the full data not cherry-picked.

Sorry for the above triple post. I only tried to post once. I found the NCES data for per pupil spending in CA...the percentages are as follows:

Instruction 60%
Student Support Services 5%
Instructional Staff Support 7%
General Admin 1%
School Admin 7%
Operation & Maintenance 10%
Student Transportation 2%
Other Support Services 4%
Food Services 4%

This same source has CA ranked 29th in overall per pupil spending, 28th for instructional spending, and 27th for overall support services spending. This is the full data not cherry-picked.

California needs a voucher system. Then you would get end of the year bonuses to everyone like the real world rather than beginning of the year raises. Each teacher and public worker always believes its not them that is the problem. I am sure they are the good one. However for a 9k dollar voucher would go 3 times further in a competitive market than public. It is proven hence the 45 countries ahead of America in schools. Youtube John Stossels Stupid in America. Its great.

When are we going to start holding parents accountable? In our local schools we have children who are kept home, or brought in hours late, because the parents found it inconvenient to bring them at the correct time. Not to mention absolutely no support with their children's homework or even returning items to school. I know this from many years as a parent volunteer. I have no doubt that some places such as Utah can do well with less funds do to way less diversity and a very different culture. In California it is a harder job and would take more, not less, than the national average. Until we stop blaming teachers and hold parents accountable, we will not see any improvement. If you are not going to be a supportive parent, DON'T HAVE KIDS!

Haven't heard anything here about unfunded federal mandates to educate kids with special needs. How much do you think it costs to educate a blind child? How much money do the feds give toward that expense? Not enough to cover the costs. Where do you think the rest of the money comes from? The general fund is where. So when you start looking at budgets and numbers of kids like Dr. Drumm McNaughton above, you need to be aware of what you are saying or it is simply misleading. And private schools that do a really good job, with a few exceptions, spend between 25,000 and 40,000 dollars per child, and much more for kids with special needs!

Haven't heard anything here about unfunded federal mandates to educate kids with special needs. How much do you think it costs to educate a blind child? How much money do the feds give toward that expense? Not enough to cover the costs. Where do you think the rest of the money comes from? The general fund is where. So when you start looking at budgets and numbers of kids like Dr. Drumm McNaughton above, you need to be aware of what you are saying or it is simply misleading. And private schools that do a really good job, with a few exceptions, spend between 25,000 and 40,000 dollars per child, and much more for kids with special needs!

Haven't heard anything here about unfunded federal mandates to educate kids with special needs. How much do you think it costs to educate a blind child? How much money do the feds give toward that expense? Not enough to cover the costs. Where do you think the rest of the money comes from? The general fund is where. So when you start looking at budgets and numbers of kids like Dr. Drumm McNaughton above, you need to be aware of what you are saying or it is simply misleading. And private schools that do a really good job, with a few exceptions, spend between 25,000 and 40,000 dollars per child, and much more for kids with special needs!

Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.