A few of the highlights. All data is for the 2010-2011 school year.
- There are 50 million students enrolled in primary and secondary schools in the U.S.
- 48% are considered "low income" and qualify for either free or reduced-price lunches.
- Only 52% of students are white. 24% are Hispanics, 16% Black and 5% are Asian.
- In Texas, 50% of all students are now Hispanic. Only 31% of Texas students are white.
- In California, 51% of all students are now Hispanic. Only 26% of California students are white.
- There are 92,699 schools but only 47,832 (51.6%) are considered to be making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) by meeting all of their performance goals.
- Only 77% of students nationally who begin the 9th grade graduate four years later.
- Iowa has the best record of graduating students with 88% receiving their diploma. In the District of Columbia a mere 59% graduate. I thought it was interesting that Texas tied for third with a 86% graduation rate. Other states of interest-California (76%), Massachusetts (83%), New York (77%). Low tax Texas has a much better graduation rate than these high tax states.
- On reading achievement, only 32% of all students nationally in the 8th grade were considered proficient. The breakdown by demographics-whites (41%), blacks (14%), hispanics (18%), low income (18%).
- Math achievement is slightly better overall with 34% of 8th graders considered proficient. The breakdown by demographics-whites (43%), blacks (13%), hispanics (20%), low income (19%).
How much are we paying for all of this? Another data set from the National Center for Education Statistics provides those answers. This data is from the 2008-2009 school year.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics- School districts had total expenditures of $610 billion. $519 billion of this was for current expenditures for public elementary and secondary education. Of the remaining expenditures, the bulk of it ($74 million) was for capital outlays and interest on debt.
- To put this in perspective, total costs for Social Security and Medicare were $1.1 trillion in 2009. Therefore, we are spending roughly twice as much on these programs for seniors as we do for public elementary and secondary education for the young.
- Current expenditures for public elementary and secondary education amounted to $10,591 per pupil. In constant 2010 dollars, this is equivalent to $10,694.
- Since 1971, spending on education has increased almost 1,200%. In constant dollars, spending has increased 133%.
| Current expenditures per pupil in fall enrollment in public elementary and secondary schools: Selected years, 1961-62 through 2008-09 | ||
| School year |
Current expenditures in unadjusted dollars
|
Current expenditures in constant 2009-10 dollars1
|
| 1961-62 | $393 | $2,835 |
| 1970-71 | 842 | 4,596 |
| 1980-81 | 2,307 | 5,773 |
| 1986-87 | 3,682 | 7,174 |
| 1990-91 | 4,902 | 7,933 |
| 1995-96 | 5,689 | 7,981 |
| 1996-97 | 5,923 | 8,079 |
| 1997-98 | 6,189 | 8,293 |
| 1998-99 | 6,508 | 8,572 |
| 1999-2000 | 6,912 | 8,849 |
| 2000-01 | 7,380 | 9,135 |
| 2001-02 | 7,727 | 9,399 |
| 2002-03 | 8,044 | 9,574 |
| 2003-04 | 8,310 | 9,679 |
| 2004-05 | 8,711 | 9,849 |
| 2005-06 | 9,145 | 9,960 |
| 2006-07 | 9,679 | 10,276 |
| 2007-082 | 10,298 | 10,543 |
| 2008-09 | 10,591 | 10,694 |
One of the data points that I found interesting was the excellent performance of Texas in graduating its students. The liberal mantra is that a state like Texas is shortchanging its education system with its low tax philosophy compared to other states. Let's look at spending compared to results in D.C., California and Texas. All of these states have large minority populations. However, D.C and California have high tax, liberal philosophies and Texas has a more conservative, low tax outlook. What type of results are they getting in the classroom?
- The District of Columbia spent $19,698 per pupil ( 89% higher than the national average) despite the fact that only 59% of its students graduate from high school. California spent $9,503 per pupil and graduated 71%. Texas spent $8,562 per pupil (19% below the national average) and graduated 86% of its students.
- The District of Columbia had a pupil/teacher ratio of 12.03 compared to 14.73 in Texas. California had the worst pupil/teacher ratio in the country at 24.12. The second worst is Utah at 22.80.
- Only 10.5% (average of reading and math scores) of low income students in the 8th grade (this seems to be a more objective standard of measuring school performance as it cuts across race elements in the data) in D.C. were proficient in reading and math achievement. In California, the comparable score is 13.5%. In Texas, 22% of low income students are proficient.
30 years ago I did extensive analysis on what factors had the biggest influence on academic performance in primary and secondary schools. After looking at a lot of data I came to the conclusion that children living in two parent households seemed to have the highest correlation with academic performance in the classroom. It appears that this fundamental fact still holds true. There is a limited ability to affect the educational outcome of a student in the classroom if a good foundation is lacking in the home.
In Washington, D.C. only 36% of children live in two-parent households. By comparison, 79% of children in Utah live in two-parent households. Therefore, even though D.C spends nearly $20,000 per pupil and has only a 12/1 pupil/teacher ratio, its student performance is abysmal. Utah spends only 6,612 per student (1/3 of D.C.) and has a 22.8/1 pupil/ student ratio (almost double that of D.C.). Utah does have the advantage of having far fewer low income students than D.C, however, 20% of its low income students are performing at a proficient level of achievement compared to 10.5% in D.C.
Last year, 41% of all births in the United States were to unmarried women. For blacks, 72% of all births are to unwed mothers. 53% of Hispanic births are to unwed mothers. This compares to 29% for whites and only 17% for Asians. In 1960, before the War on Poverty, blacks had a lower percentage of illegitimate births (22%) than whites. What has happened and why is it important?
The Brookings Institution sponsored a study in 2009 that found that if an individual does just one of two things--graduates from high school or marries before they have children--the chances that they will end up in poverty are only 1 in 4. However, if they do neither, the chances that they will end up in poverty is 3 out of 4. If an individual graduates from high school, marries before they have children and gets a full-time job, the chances they will end in poverty is only 1 in 50! More importantly, if an individual adheres to all three of these social norms, the chances they will end up in the middle class or above is 3 in 4.
I have long thought that we have been way too lenient when it comes to high school drop-outs. We spend billions of dollars to provide a free education in our public schools. In doing so we are also providing real opportunity to everyone. If someone chooses not to take advantage of this opportunity, we know from the data cited above that the individual will most likely end up in poverty. This means that society will most likely need to continue supporting that individual for most of their lifetime. And there is a good chance that the cycle will continue into the next generation. Is this right? Does this make sense? Are the incentives in our system aligned properly to get the right results?
What if it was our policy to provide notice to every 9th grader entering high school with something like this?
The taxpayers are providing you with a free public school education. In the world today, a high school diploma is essential to your future economic well-being. It is the bare minimum if you are to become a productive citizen in our country. We are delighted to be able to provide you this opportunity.
Please be advised that should you not avail yourself of this opportunity and choose to not graduate from high school, you will be permanently prohibited from access to any government benefits in the future. This is not something we want to do, but if you are unwilling to assume the responsibility for preparing yourself for the future, the taxpayers are not willing to support you if you cannot support yourself.
As a society we stand ready to assist anyone who is willing to take responsibility for themselves. However, we will not provide public assistance to anyone in the future who does not take advantage of this most basic educational opportunity that is being provided to you.
Good luck on your next four years! You are on the right path to soon assume your place as one of the taxpayers who can return this favor to the next generation of Americans as it has been provided to you.It would be interesting to see what the high school drop out would be if this policy was in place. This would be my own version of what I call the American Dream Act! I can still dream, right?
No comments:
Post a Comment