Jason Kuznicki produces a pretty damning chart comparing federal expenditures to educational achievement. Looking at the numbers, I can’t think of a more eloquent case for thorough-going reform.
Will
Will writes from Washington, D.C. (well, Arlington, Virginia). You can reach him at willblogcorrespondence at gmail dot com.
Devcat is watching over, but if you notice any problems contact the editors and Devcat will be notified and deployed immediately.
on TrumpedI went carless for 10 years (and lived mostly as though I didn't have a car for a few years before t…
on TrumpedHeh I know who Hawley is. And if they changed it back me and something like 98% of the fans would ch…
on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?4) There is going to be “Unfair competition for jobs”, the lowering of wages/working conditions, and…
on TrumpedI'm hoping the cars I have now (2003 and 2011) are the last cars I ever had to buy but that's probab… on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?This person has no interest in good governance. on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?Guess how many request to reopen the shut down part of the refineries were approved by Biden’s peopl… on TrumpedI have dogged Biden on most of his people’s policies, but he definitely has Trump beat in showing cl… on TrumpedAnd talking about a problem the President can't solve does what exactly?
on TrumpedJosh Hawley is one. Missouri. One of the most "conservative" senators in the senate. Oh, god. This m… on TrumpedIt happened waaaaay back in 2019. Biden was floating the idea of announcing Abrams as his VP however…
November 7, 2024
The End of the Political Parade
November 6, 2024
No Matter which Candidates You Bet on, You’ll Get a Shock or Two
November 5, 2024
November 4, 2024
on Trumped on Trumped on Open Mic for the week of 11/4/2024 on Trumped on The Shepherds have a Credibility Problem on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?
on Trumped
on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?
on The Shepherds have a Credibility Problem on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What? on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?
on Trumped
on The Shepherds have a Credibility Problem on History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What? on The Shepherds have a Credibility Problem
Interesting up to a point. Most ed spending is state based, it would be interesting to see that in the chart. I believe, although i reserve the right to be wrong and i will check this tomorrow at work, there are ed programs to help homeless kids that are funded by the feds. and those programs kick butt but would not have a big enough affect to show up on that chart.
There are some good comments on his post at his site. He doesn’t show actual dollars so it is impossible to know how much money this is and what percentage of real spending it is. Also it doesn’t say what the money is spent on. If it goes to school lunches, it does a world of good without having much affect on scores. Ditto for head start spending if that is included in his numbers. Head Start is a great program but wouldn’t likely have a huge affect on the numbers he presents.
I’m not sure it shows as much as partisans want it to show , but that doesn’t change the need for some change in how we ed kids.Report
Perhaps the percentage numbers on the left side of the chart just need a few more zeroes tacked on. Seriously.Report
Why, it’s almost as if there are certain realities about student achievement that are beyond our capacity to change. But to a man with only a hammer…..Report
Ugh, the chart abuse here is unbelievable.
” It mixes factors on a single scale that have no business being represented on a single scale.
Namely, federal spending is only around a tenth (roughly – I’m having trouble putting my hands on good data this morning) of total education spending, so a 100% change in federal input would yield only a 10% change in total spending. The graph makes those changes look far more dramatic than they really are.
Conversely, as the previous example showed, a 5% change in raw scores could easily represent the difference between class cohorts, which is fairly dramatic. The result is that a 10% increase in education spending is made to look 20 times larger than a class-grade improvement in test results would. I can’t see that as a fair way to present data.”Report
Incidentally, what that chart lacks, and what it desperately needs, is to present how much of that increase is due to special education, which is massively expensive and has gone through a revolution in funding in the last several decades.Report
I agree that the graph is lacking and doesn’t make much of a case to demonstrate the lack of correlation between spending and outcomes (although it does seem to reinforce the notion that NCLB, which is the clear source of the huge increase in the last few years, has been a failure).
I wonder, though, whether maybe it does make at least something of a case against increased federal involvement in education.Report
What I really wonder is how much of that money is going to special education, which is funded federally at a far higher rate than regular education, which is primarily locally funded. I’d like to know that before I could really say what the consequences of that kind of information is.Report
I suspect that, over the last few decades, there have been more requirements for certain kinds of paperwork and record-keeping, which require certain kinds of training and expertise, which would require certain kinds of hiring. The money coming from the feds probably didn’t go to education at all (special or otherwise). It probably went to pay for hours (and eventually positions) that just didn’t exist in years past.
That’s probably not true for all of the money, but I’d wager it’s true for a plurality of it.Report
My 2 cents: most of the criticism are on point.
Federal spending makes up between 8-10% of school funding nationwide. That percentage tends to increase in urban districts which rely more on federal grants for particular programs and other funding obligations. Federal spending has risen but so has state funding, as a reference point, when I looked at the data in spring of 08, we were on track to pass half a trillion dollars/yr on public education funding.
The whole picture is complicated. gregniak mentions Head Start (a program with mixed reviews) whose funding comes out of HHS so it’s usually not counted as spending on public education, though it does effect scores. I would doubt that chart includes HS.
So, I’m with Freddie here when he says, “It mixes factors on a single scale that have no business being represented on a single scale.” In particular, his point about the cost and spending for special education is important (and surprisingly overlooked).
Where I get off the, “this is useless train” is that for all the flaws with the graph, if the overall point is that more money doesn’t equal better scores, then he’s right. The spectrum spanning consensus that throwing money at schools isn’t effective isn’t new.Report