Does More Educational Money Equal Better Education for K-12 Students

Tim Ihms Current Affairs, Education, Education Policy

SHARE THIS STORY: Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on Google+

IMG_0552Does More Educational Money Equal Better Education for K-12 Students

No matter what graph or chart you look at, Arizona is near the bottom in money for its schools compared to the rest of the country.

I looked at the updated report from Concordia University-Portland dated January 2018. Its report gave the rankings of how each state compared in the amount spent per pupil. Arizona ranked in the bottom five above only Utah, Idaho, Oklahoma, and Mississippi in spending. New York spent the most per pupil at $21,206. Utah was at the bottom at $6,575. Arizona was at $7,489, well below the national average of $11,392. Those are big differences in what is spent per pupil across these United States.

My question for this blog is “What does more money buy when it comes to an education for our K-12 students?”

Is money or the lack of, keeping our student scores in Arizona below the other states? Well, first let’s take a look at Arizona’s scores. I chose the scores for the three states I am comparing from 2017 because those were the latest scores I could find for all three.

Arizona’s scores for 2017 from the AZ merit tests were: MP (minimally proficient), PP (partially proficient), P (proficient), HP (highly proficient)
3rd grade: math-MP24%, PP29%, P28%, HP19%; ELA-MP45%, PP12%, P30%, HP13%
8th grade: math-MP49%, PP23%, P18%, HP10%; ELA-MP46%, PP21%, P25%, HP9%
11th grade (algebra 1) math-MP39%, PP22%, P28%, HP11%; ELA-MP52%, PP23%, P17%, HP9%

My first state chosen at random was Michigan at $11,482 per pupil. NP (not proficient), PP(partially proficient), P(proficient), A(advanced)
3rd grade: Math-NP26.8%, PP26.4%, P29.1%, 17.7%; ELA-NP30.4%, PP25.5%, P22%, A22.1%
8th grade: Math-NP39.9%, PP26.6%, P16.4%, A17.1%; ELA- NP23.4%, PP28.6%, P34.9%, A13.1%
11th grade: I could only find science scores posted.

The second randomly chosen state was California at $10,467 per pupil. NM (not met), N(nearly met), M(met), SE(standard exceeded)
3rd grade: math-NM28.27%, N24.99%, M27.56%, SE19.27%; ELA-NM32%, N24%, M21.1%, SE22.8%
8th grade: math- NM40.28%, N23.42%, M16.27%, SE20.03%; ELA-NM25.42%, N25.97%, M33.14%, SE15.47%
11th grade: math- NM44.22%, N23.64%, M19.22%, SE12.92%; ELA-NM18.91%, N21.34%, M32.04%, SE27.72%

Comparing the three states, two of which the per-pupil spending is below the national average, are some interesting stats.

Take the passing rates for the three states. Arizona’s third-grade students had only 47% pass math and 43% pass ELA. Michigan’s 3rd-grade students 46.8% passed math and 44.1% passed ELA. California had 46.83% pass math and 43.9% pass ELA. The scores are not too different. Let’s take a look at 8th grade.

Arizona’s 8th-grade student’s had 28% pass math and 34% pass the ELA portion. Michigan had 8th-grade scores of 33.5% passing in math and 48% passing ELA. And California had 8th-grade scores of 36.30% for math and 48.61% for ELA.

And for the 11th-grade students for Arizona and California, the scores were 39% for math and 26% for ELA in Arizona and 32.14% in math and 59.76% in ELA for California.

The scores are really not that different from each other. Even though Arizona spent less than $4,000 less per pupil than the other two states.

The drawback to comparing scores from different states is each state develops its own tests. So, I thought I would look at NAEP scores. What are the NAEP scores? Here is the description of NAEP from its own website.

“The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the only assessment that measures what U.S. students know and can do in various subjects across the nation, states, and in some urban districts. Also known as The Nation’s Report Card, NAEP has provided important information about how students are performing academically since 1969.”

Again from 2017, the NAEP scores were not that different for the three states.

Arizona: 4th math-significantly lower; 8th math-no significant difference; 4th reading-significantly lower; 8th reading significantly lower

California: 4th math-significantly lower; 8th math-significantly lower; 4th reading-significantly lower; 8th reading-significantly lower

Michigan: 4th math-significantly lower; 8th math-not significantly different; 4th reading- significantly lower; 8th reading-no significant difference.

Why am I presenting all these state test scores and NAEP scores? I wanted to see if there was any hint from other states spending more money per pupil if their higher money produced better-educated students.

When comparing state scores, if you look at the third-grade scores, the difference is minimal. The eighth-grade scores are higher for both the other two states compared to Arizona’s scores, but still below 50% of the students passing each state’s expectations.

Arizona scored higher in math and much lower compared to California students in ELA.

The NAEP scores had all three states achieving significantly lower in fourth-grade math and reading. In eighth grade math, Michigan and Arizona students scored higher than California students in math. Michigan students scored higher in reading than the Arizona and California students.

You can easily question the validity of comparing test scores across states because the state tests are all different. My point with the tests is all three states are falling far, far below their own expectations in the education of their students. I was hoping for 85% to 90% of their students meeting or exceeding expectations not less than 50% like Arizona. What are California and Michigan getting for their $4,000 dollar more in per-pupil spending? Not much, at least according to their scores.

With the NAEP scores, I am comparing apples to apples. Compared to neighboring California, we are looking like we are the same or better at $4,000 less. Michigan is better sometimes. Is that all $4,000 gets you towards the education of your students is better, maybe or maybe not

This blog is not meant to search for answers on how to better educate the students of Arizona. When compared to two other states, money does not look like it makes much of a difference.

 

I grew up in Silver City, New Mexico and went the University of New Mexico, earning a Bachelor of Science degree in Geology. After working for the U.S. Geological Survey in remote regions of western New Mexico, I moved to Tucson to attend graduate school at the University of Arizona, earning a Master of Science degree in Hydrogeology. While working as an intern hydrologist for a local county agency, I started doing volunteer work that involved making presentations in schools. At that moment I knew teaching was the path to follow. It must have been a good decision because I’m still on the path after 31 years. My teaching certificates are in math and science and I am a National Board Certified Teacher in Career and Technical Education. I’ve been teaching engineering, science, and math at the same school in downtown Tucson my whole career. I also sponsored my school’s MESA program, which prepares members to enter college and major in a STEM career, for twenty-one years. In addition to full time teaching, I am actively involved in the teacher leadership movement by facilitating National Board candidates, blogging for Stories from School Arizona, serving on the Arizona K12 Center’s TeacherSolutions team, and serving on my school’s literacy council. In January 2017, Raytheon Missile System named me a Leader in Education. During the 2017–18 school year I also served as an Arizona Hope Street Fellow.

  • Amy Casaldi

    I understand and appreciate that you compared not only the state scores but also the NAEP results. Interestingly, I wonder what this exercise would look like for each state if we compared some of the harder to measure qualities of an education, such as student engagement, student critical thinking skills, exposure to Social Studies and Science curriculum, or exposure to the Arts.

  • Mrs_Buzan

    It’s one thing to Google test scores and another thing to experience a school that is fully funded. What do you get? You get professional teachers who are experts in their fields, who produce highly enriching lessons, who have time to extensively interact with their students and their products. This is the exact blog politicians want to read. Aside from the fact that these tests are unreliable, you’re overlooking the extreme differences between these states, regionally, sociologically, and economically.

    Furthermore, the NAEP scores cannot be glanced at. When you compare those scores to other countries, filtering out ELL and special education student test-takers (programs that do not exist in many school systems in the world), you start to see that the US is still highly competitive in the educational stage.

  • Mrs_Buzan

    Tim, see what you think after reading this report.

    https://nces.ed.gov/pubs/96258-2.pdf

    Thanks for stirring the pot. I love a good debate.

  • Yolanda Wheelington

    Thank you for this article. I appreciate your bottom line approach. It stirred my curiosity to do a selected comparison between high, average, and low funded schools using your sources.