I am really bad at economics. I know this, but I still like it and think it’s important—so I choose to trust those brave souls who actually study it day in and day out. Dr. Eric Hanushek, a fellow at Stanford University, recently spoke at St. Louis University School of Business about the economics of improving urban education. He said some things that resonated with me, but first I’d like to mention a story from Janese Heavin at the Columbia Daily Tribune about per-pupil expenditures, because I think it sets the stage well. Within Columbia public school district, there is a disparity of spending of more than a hundred percent.
“CPS spent $15,136 per student at West Boulevard last year, but only $6,675 per child at Two Mile Prairie. So what's going on?”
This range is about a definition of spending equality—which does not mean that every student receives the same amount, but rather that every student receives an amount consistent with their needs. It is interesting to note that there is that range within a district. The average per pupil expenditure at CPS, then, does not accurately reflect the situation at either of those schools. There has been a lot of talk about spending differences between districts and how it’s not fair, but what per-pupil spending figures are being used?
This brings us to an interesting fork in the road, though: in Missouri, if we look at urban areas we find that they are in a crisis and that they outspend most other districts in the state. One of the reasons for this is a pervasive thought that failing schools need all the help they can get, so the state continues to allocate more money and resources to them.
Dr. Hanushek said this, however, during his talk:
"Now this is where most of the economists in the room start getting a little bit squeamish, at the idea that you develop and incentive system that says: If you fail you get more, and the more you fail the more you get. And if you succeed, you get less."
Is that true of West Boulevard and Two Mile Prairie?
Most people would say well, that’s just the way it has to be, because these are children’s lives we’re talking about, and we can’t punish them for the mistakes of their teachers and administration. That’s true! But it’s time we stopped equating our duty as Missourians to educate a child with a duty to support a public school. They are not one in the same. What kind of wake-up call do we need to realize that supporting a system that is chronically failing children means that we are NOT supporting our children? There is no evidence that we are “on the right track”, and even if there was, long-term reform does not help the current generation of students.
A little more food for though from Dr. Hanushek:
"You try to put…more choice in the system so that the parents get to choose which schools are effective and which aren't, and to vote with their feet, and vote with their money if it follows the kids…There is this huge linkage between location, residence, and the schools. And you have to break that because you can't have people that are stuck in a residential location, that are stuck with ineffective schools. You have to give them some way to get away from that."
No comments:
Post a Comment