manixFan said said:
Not true, at least as far as money goes. We spend more than any other country in the world:
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/020915/what-country-spends-most-education.asp
But, as people referenced above, how much of that education budget actually makes it to the classroom?
Most of it.
I don't have nationwide data, but based on our school district's public records, out of $43.0M annual budget, the expenditures are as follows ($$, M):
Payroll for instructors (regular, remedial, special, athletics): 17.9
Support services (tuition transfer, health, guidance, library, etc): 9.5
Employee benefits: 7.1
Maintenance & Plant: 2.5
Student transportation: 1.4
Gen. Admin: 0.8
School Admin: 1.5
Capital Equipment: 0.3
Debt service: 2.0
Thus, employee payroll and benefits (top 3 lines) add up to 80.2% of annual budget.
Our school district's average teacher's salary is in high 5- / low 6-figures (elementary vs. specialist), plus benefits.
I would argue that funding for education, or its allocation, is NOT the problem.
To back that up, below is the list of the top-50 spending NJ school districts, we are not on it.
Nor is any of the other school districts ranked in top-10 in NJ, year after year.
The WORST school districts spend the MOST:
https://www.nj.com/education/2018/09/the_50_nj_school_districts_spending_the_most_per_s.html
The vast majority of the funds are being spent on SG&A + benefits.
Somehow, the return on that investment in K-12 education, in the US, is mediocre.
Somehow, the ROI on college/university education, is stellar.
I don't know why the wide gap in outcomes.
However, I can't find any evidence that throwing more money at K-12 teachers is producing positive results.
This is just data. I have personal stories to back this up as well (even in top-1% school district, far too many teachers just plain suck, bigly).
a