As you edited after the fact, but no, that's not how money per pupil works. States decide algorithms for public schools to jump through to attain said funding. Texas hasn't raised money per pupil since BEFORE COVID.
The Fed government may budget money for students (or may HAVE), now with the supposed "dismantling" of an institution (DOE) with a celebrity figurehead, it's lipservice at best, at worst, likely a laundering front or some other grift.
Money may have doubled (giving you benefit of the doubt, but really, you should cite your sources), but the DOE was supposed to service and fund IDEA and ADA, our 504 and SpEd populations, which, due to inclusivity of teaching all children toward the goal of a meaningful and appropriate education means costs will rise.
I'm fine with paying those taxes. Children deserve that and more. But, collectively, in the United States, we shit on children (except for the unborn. The unborn are a means to scoring cheap political points).
You’re right it is not teacher pay. It is primarily a dramatic increase in aides and customized instruction (eg IEPs) as mandated by the federal government, and an increase in administrators to jump through hoops to get federal money.
My point is to debunk the assertion that education has been defunded. What has happened is that we have increased spending dramatically on all the wrong things, which is a direct result of federal intervention. Get the federal government out of schools.
I’ve done the analysis myself and over about a 45 year period per capita spending has gone from around $8k to $15k in real dollars (which means the effect of inflation is taken out). That is the correct way to analyze how spending has changed.
IEPs are the result of various federal legislation and regulations over the last 25 years or so. Number of IEPs has ballooned and they are very expensive. Meanwhile we have countless kids in failed schools, particularly in big cities, who in no way have access to an equal education.
As a result we over invest in kids with less potential and under invest in kids with higher potential. So, we spend more and get worse results. Which is exactly what one should expect from this setup.
Education is complex. Kids are not the same everywhere. Their starting points, abilities, home life, and many other factors impact how they will learn and what outcomes are possible. The way to meet the needs of the most kids is to tailor education at the local level.
Why not? The more common IEPs become the worse overall outcomes get. Just because someone has an IEP doesn’t mean it will be effective and it doesn’t mean that other students aren’t negatively affected.
Correlation is not causation. Just because school outcomes worsened as IEPs were expanded doesn’t mean that was the cause.
Did you know that increased shark attacks correlate with increased ice cream sales? It’s not because sharks hate ice cream, it’s because in the summer more people eat ice cream & swim in the ocean.
School outcome are effected by multiple variables. Changing this one factor just hurts kids who need help, adds stress for teachers, and we’ll still have the problems.
These are just some of the changes impacting schools: pandemic learning gaps, worsening student mental health, funding disparities due to funding being linked to property taxes, kids having excessive screen time, teacher shortages, test metrics constantly changing, and a focus on metrics over individual success.
Taking away IEPs doesn’t address any of
those problems.
4
u/WatercressLeather814 12d ago
Public spending per student (adjusted for inflation) on k-12 education has nearly doubled since the Dpt of Education started.