Study Finds No Relationship Between Ed Spending and Results

A new study from State Budget Solutions finds that the approach that many have long considered a panacea to academic ills – more spending and increased financial resources – doesn’t actually translate to improvements in student achievement as measured by standardized test scores. Analysis of spending by the states between the years of 2009 and [...]

A new study from State Budget Solutions finds that the approach that many have long considered a panacea to academic ills – more spending and increased financial resources – doesn’t actually translate to improvements in student achievement as measured by standardized test scores.

Analysis of spending by the states between the years of 2009 and 2011 showed that states that spend the most on education as a portion of their total budget didn’t graduate students at a higher rate, nor did their students score better on the ACT than their peers.

Bob Williams, President of the SBS, said that the United States spent more than $800 billion on education during 2010, which exceeds the totals spend by several European and North American countries combined. In return for that expenditure the country isn’t seeing the results demanded by both the taxpayers and parents, which is a certain indication that raising spending without a clear understanding about how to spend most effectively won’t solve America’s academic woes.

State Budget Solutions researchers analyzed the national trends in education from 2009 to 2011 by conducting a state-by-state analysis of education spending as a percentage of total state spending, and a comparison of average graduation rates and average ACT scores per state. The study focused on the percentage of total spending that each state allocates towards education. Education spending includes the funding that state and local governments generate, as well as additional federal contributions.

Although the overall spending on education as part of the total budget fell by .7% — from 30% to 29.3% — the top three educational spenders, Texas, Vermont and Arkansas, each spent 4% more than the national average on various education initiatives. The states that rounded out the bottom five were Alaska, New York, Hawaii, Tennessee and Massachusetts.

For states that spent the most, only Vermont saw significant results from 2009 to 2011.  In fact, four out of the five states spending the most on education failed to produce correspondingly high graduation rates or ACT scores. Arkansas remained in the top five states in spending for all three years, yet Arkansas’ average ACT scores consistently fell below the national average, and continue to decline annually. In 2010 and 2011, Texas ranked first in the nation in spending, 36.9 percent each year, but fell below the national average in graduation and ACT scores.

States that have spent the least didn’t show any performance degradation over the years studied. Although 45 states allocated a higher percentage of their budget for education compared to Massachusetts, the state topped the academic performance tables in almost every subject area covered and had the highest average ACT scores in the country.

Comments


  1. Doug

    Try not spending and see what happens. The USA does not “spend too little” it misallocates its spending by spending far too much in the suburbs and far too little in the inner city, the south and the low achievement areas.

    The USA spends far more per capita than say Canada and yet boths teachers wages and educational results are far higher in Canada.


    • Engineer-Poet

      Doug, you contradict yourself. You say “try not spending” as if the problem is underfunding or mis-funding, when the “neediest” parts of the USA (like Trenton NJ, Kansas City and Washington DC) have the highest spending and still dismal results.

      Who is being taught matters more than dollars spent, but examination of that topic is taboo.

      http://www.csinj.org/schoolspending/


  2. Sandy

    Do we really expect spending to yield better returns in just one or two years? When students have been underserved for a long time, increased spending on interventions that work needs to be sustained over time in order to really see gains.


  3. Ronald Glymph / Math Maze USA

    In most districts, school administrators have focused their spending on beautiful facilities and fancy gadgets. Students need more hands on resources that can be utilize in and out of the classroom. I believe money should be spent on cooperative programs and resources that directly impact students learning.


  4. Jannelle

    The poverty rate must be considered in any state comparisons of educational spending results. MA is able to produce better scores with less spending than Texas or Arkansas because their poverty rate is lower. Higher poverty rates equate to higher costs in education.

    States must begin to focus more of their spending on PREVENTION. Emerging adults (middle and high school students) must be educated in the literacy areas of finance and family. This must include that most critical component of readying children for school, starting with healthy prenatal care. It is not an overnight fix but I believe it is the only way to make the difference needed.

Leave a comment

Friday

September 14th, 2012

Recent News

Career Index

Plan your career as an educator using our free online datacase of useful information.

View All