Home » Business » School Spending Doesn’t Improve Student Achievement

School Spending Doesn’t Improve Student Achievement

by Priya Shah – Business Editor

National⁢ Test Score Declines Spotlight​ Bloated School Administration

WASHINGTON D.C. ⁢- Recent analysis of national⁣ test scores‌ and school spending reveals a troubling trend: as student achievement declines in many states,a‌ significant​ portion of increased education ​funding is ⁤being ⁢allocated to administrative positions that experts say ‍may actively‌ hinder‍ learning. Data from the National Assessment of‌ Educational Progress (NAEP)​ shows widespread⁤ stagnation or ​drops in reading‌ and math​ scores, even as ⁢school budgets⁢ swell.

the declines aren’t ⁣simply a result of the pandemic, as changes in state rankings demonstrate gains‌ and losses relative to one another. A report by Open the Books highlights a surge in non-teaching​ personnel costs, raising questions about⁢ where education dollars are truly being spent. New‍ York State, for example, spends more per⁤ student ⁣- exceeding $42,000 ⁢this school year ‍- than any other state, yet student test scores‌ remain ​only mediocre.

Open the Books’ data doesn’t differentiate between teacher and administrator pay, but researchers suspect the latter is ⁤a key​ factor. While some⁣ studies suggest increased teacher pay, especially when tied to performance, can ⁤improve​ outcomes, the proliferation ⁢of​ administrative roles is drawing scrutiny.

Maine saw a 19% increase in school ⁤payrolls coupled with the largest drop in NAEP test scores. In Portland,​ Maine’s largest district, the number of⁤ employees ​earning ​six-figure salaries more‍ than quadrupled​ – jumping from 30 to 137, primarily consisting of principals and administrators. maryland implemented a $30 billion,10-year ⁣education ⁤plan⁢ but saw no corresponding ​gains ‍in test ⁤scores,with funds allocated to programs focused on concepts like “fat pride” and “eating⁣ without‌ guilt.”

baltimore schools exemplify the issue, where teachers comprise less than ‍half of the staff. The remainder includes a multitude of high-paid administrators, including a senior executive director ‌of equity, a director of equity, a⁢ director of equity-centered principal ‍development, five ⁤additional equity ⁣specialists, and a staff ⁤associate for equity.

The⁢ focus on⁢ administrative expansion comes at a potential cost to ‌core instruction. ⁢Experts​ suggest re-evaluating the necessity of these roles and redirecting funds⁢ towards proven methods of improving student outcomes. Schools are ‌urged to prioritize foundational skills and ensure‌ taxpayer dollars are used ⁤effectively to support quality teaching and learning.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.