By Andrew Pillow
School funding is, and will likely always be a controversial issue. Educators often argue about the need for more funding. Some have argued that more money doesn’t necessarily produce better results, others have argued that more money makes a huge difference in academic outcomes. A new study sides with the latter.
A study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, conducted by researchers at the University of California Berkeley and the University of Northwestern, found a positive relationship between increased spending and increased results.
The New York Times sums up the findings:
“They found a consistent pattern: In the long run, over comparable time frames, states that send additional money to their lowest-income school districts see more academic improvement in those districts than states that don’t. The size of the effect was significant. The changes bought at least twice as much achievement per dollar as a well-known experiment that decreased class sizes in early grades.”
According to the article, part of the problem with the debate is that people mean different things when they say “funding”.
Some people mean equity. "Are students in low income areas funded to the same extent as students in high income areas?"
Others hear the word funding and think adequacy. "Do students have the resources they need to achieve in general regardless of rather or not said resources are “equal”."
Read more here. (The New York Times)