If the voters approve Proposition 123, it will provide $3.5 billion to K-12 schools over ten years. Our schools need additional targeted funds but the Arizona Education Complex has consistently failed in its responsibilities. All the Arizona Education Complex can do is complain that Arizona is near the bottom in per pupil spending. Looking at per-pupil spending without accompanying qualitative data is a favorite ploy of the educational complex.
First, a dated study completed by the Department of Education and Christopher B. Swanson showed no correlation between per-pupil funding and student achievement. For example, in the study Boston schools spent $16,879 (in 2005 dollars) per-pupil yet graduated only 57% of its students. New York City Schools spent $15,455 per-pupil, yet graduated only 45% of its students. Boston and New York were first and second, respectively, in spending.
Tucson spent $7, 941 and graduated 72% of its students, while Mesa, last in per-pupil funding in this study, spent $6,558 and graduated 77% of its students. Of the fifty-one cities and principal school districts looked at in the study, ranked in order of per-student funding, only two school districts in the top twenty-five exceeded a graduation rate of 70% or higher: San Jose, CA. and San Francisco, CA. Of the bottom twenty-six school districts, only four had graduation rates of 70% or higher. Arizona had two of the four. The take-home message is there is no correlation between per-pupil funding and student achievement.
I think that all K-12 should be subject to metrics that evaluate how the Arizona Education Complex improves its performance with the $3.5 infusion of funds. For example, one metric is “graduation rate divided by per-pupil funding.” This metric creates an index that tells us how effective and efficient Arizona schools are in comparison to each other and out of state schools.
Another metric is “SAT reading scores divided by per-pupil expenditure,” “SAT Math scores divided by per-pupil expenditure,” and/or “combined SAT reading and math scores divided by per-pupil,” creates an index that allows us to measure how effective and efficient Arizona schools are in comparison to other schools and states.
Let’s look at average ACT scores divided by expenditures per pupil. This metric provides a gauge showing “educational bang for your buck.” Arizona ranks second in the nation. This metric looks at not only how much we spend on a per pupil basis but also how well the money is used.
Another metric is “SAT (individual or combined) scores divided by graduation rates.” This metric provides a measure of teacher effectiveness. Teachers directly influence both SAT scores and graduation rates. This metric is an indicator of how well school dollars were used.
School achievement, another teacher effectiveness metric, takes the high school graduation rate multiplied by the combined SAT reading and math scores. The greater the graduation rate and combined SAT score, the greater the result.
Just as there is no correlation between graduation rates and per-pupil spending, there is also no correlation between teacher certification and quality teaching (John E. Chubb, author of The Best Teachers in the World – Why we don’t have them and how we could, Hoover Institute). Quality teaching is where the focus should be, not per-pupil funding. Unfortunately, the Arizona Education Complex, so focused on money instead of students, disagrees.