Sarah Cowgill: Education - Simply Spending More Money Doesn’t Fix the Problems

Schools get more funding now than ever before, but the students aren’t doing any better for it.

Most institutions, foundations, research centers, and statisticians involved in K-12 education will insist the size of the budget matters. One would be hard-pressed to find a differing opinion from administrators and teachers. However, a new study from the National Assessment of Educational Progress and the United States Census Bureau revealed that funding and student success don’t always grow together. Despite a massive influx of COVID-19 monies to school districts across the nation, the top spenders per pupil trailed their lower investing counterparts.

Where’s the Beef?

“Average US public school spending per pupil in elementary and secondary schools rose 8.9% to $15,633 in fiscal year (FY) 2022 from the previous year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent Annual Survey of School System Finances data,” the agency posted last spring. Why does the money greatly increase, but the test scores remain low?

New York topped the list of big spenders with an estimated $29,873 per pupil. The District of Columbia was second ($27,425), followed by New Jersey ($25,099), Vermont ($24,608), and Connecticut ($24,453). Kids coming out of these states must be geniuses for sure.

The Census Bureau also listed the lowest spenders: Utah at $9,552 per pupil, Idaho ($9,670), Arizona ($10,315), Oklahoma ($10,890), and Mississippi ($10,984).

But the dollar amounts and success rates are not lining up.

Students in New York ranked lower than 38 other states and districts in fourth-grade math scores and behind 12 states in eighth-grade math scores. Reading scores were not as bad, but they were still far behind, especially considering the state’s budget size.

And in DC, well, those stats are even worse. As Chalkboard News reports: “48 jurisdictions scored significantly higher on the 2022 NAEP assessment for fourth-grade math, and 49 scored higher than D.C. on the eighth-grade assessment.”

The study seems to suggest that students aren’t gaining much from increases in per-pupil spending, mostly because the extra funds are not being distributed where they would best serve the student. Imagine that.

The Real Culprit of Poor Academic Achievement

Americans have been conditioned to equate good education with wealthy school districts. Just look at Critical Race Theory (CRT). Schools in wealthier, whiter areas get more money than poorer districts with more people of color, so they have higher success rates than their poorer counterparts. The problem, of course, is that it isn’t true.

Recall the video that went viral on social media, showing a group of students at Carmel High School outside Indianapolis, IN: With more than 34 million views, this footage has sparked national outrage over school funding and performance.

The students in the video are giving a tour, showing off the large and well-kept campus, complete with a fancy auditorium, an auto shop, and even a state-of-the-art planetarium. The video brought out the internet loons, commenting without facts.

But, according to the Indiana Department of Education, Carmel High School spends significantly less per pupil ($3,500 to $6,000) than the other four public high schools in Indianapolis and still outperforms them: 71 % of students are proficient in math, and 89 % are proficient in reading. Conversely, and for double the money, in Indianapolis Public Schools, only 6% and 26% are adept in math and reading.

“More money can help schools succeed, but not if they fritter those extra resources in unproductive ways,” Jay Greene, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told Reason. “There is no one formula for how to spend money correctly in schools. But there are many common ways that schools blow resources. Wasteful schools tend to hire more non-instructional staff while raising the pay and benefit costs for all staff regardless of their contribution to student outcomes.” So, it’s the school’s fault?

Not so fast. Let’s go back to the home and how kids are raised nowadays.

DOGE co-chair Vivek Ramaswamy has weighed in on the lackadaisical learning in the US, focusing the debate on cultural and parental influences. Ramaswamy points a finger at the education administration and the seemingly indifferent parents of children who haven’t learned that hard work can equal great accomplishments. He ranted recently on X: “Most normal American parents look skeptically at ‘those kinds of parents.’ More normal American kids view such ‘those kinds of kids’ with scorn. If you grow up aspiring normalcy, normalcy is what you will achieve. … That’s the work we have cut out for us, rather than wallowing in victimhood & just wishing (or legislating) alternative hiring practices into existence.”

It’s Complicated

In 1907, a couple of nostalgic guys penned the song “School Days,” idealizing a young couple’s elementary years. It had the lyrics, “reading and writing and arithmetic, taught to the tune of a hickory stick.” It was a simple time, and not everyone had access to an education. Most kids were lucky to get a solid eighth-grade education at the time. However, that was enough for women like Ella Alexander to run and manage a million-dollar farming enterprise. Now, Americans squabble over per-pupil financing of education without really understanding how to spend the money it receives.

Low-income families still have disadvantages, and a big one is School choice. If all parents had the option to remove a child and pay tuition for a charter or private school, the balance of educational power might change.

National Columnist at LibertyNation.com. Sarah has been a writer in the political and corporate worlds for over 30 years. As a sought-after speech writer, her clients included CEOs, U.S. Senators, Congressmen, Governors, and even a Vice President. This article was first published HERE