> School spending did not decline from 2012 to 2022. In fact, it increased significantly, even after adjusting for inflation, from $14,000 a student to more than $16,000.
Is this average spending per student? If so, then that is just a cover for inequality. Spending a vast amount on educating elite students, and spending hardly enough on the majority.
Other countries with much better education than the US spend less than $16,000 per student, but I imagine they are spending much more equitably. They don’t have one school that is incredible and then another school so broke that teachers and parents have to foot the bill for supplies.
The top elite kids aren't in public schools, so they don't even factor into the equation. Whether there is inequality in spending will depend on the state and whether the funding is local, or redistributive. But if you take California as an example, they do try to make sure money goes to poor students, and it has had no positive effect. California sends mor to Black, Latino, and low income students than white or high income students.
Actually this isn't the whole picture. Because a lot of funding for schools comes from local property taxes, affluent areas tend to have more resources for education than poorer areas, regardless of how they school their kids. And if a lot of higher income students aren't utilizing public school, that's less students to spend the increased money on, which would exacerbate the view when looked at as a national per-student average.
Still, poor students in california do dramatically worse than poor students in mississippi, despite california spending much more. I dove into the data a while back and adjusted for income and race, California schooling is much worse and only looks good because its students are rich
Mississippi cooks the stats by holding the poorest students back. You can probably adjust for this if you have the raw data, but it's something you need to adjust for.
If you didn't let students into the 4th grade until they were 40 inches tall, you'd have taller than average 4th graders, but only because of survivorship bias.
Almost every state will spend the most on inner city kids. You have a ton of commercial tax base for relatively few kids. For example Atlanta Public Schools spends the most per pupil in GA outside of a handful of tiny districts.
most spending-per-student goes to the poorest or most-disabled students, not to the elite students. By definition, elite students are a tiny fraction, so evern if they get overspending, it won't move the average unless they are getting absurd multiples of the median, which they are noy getting.
Is this average spending per student? If so, then that is just a cover for inequality. Spending a vast amount on educating elite students, and spending hardly enough on the majority.
Other countries with much better education than the US spend less than $16,000 per student, but I imagine they are spending much more equitably. They don’t have one school that is incredible and then another school so broke that teachers and parents have to foot the bill for supplies.