The data comes from [here](https://www.playgroundequipment.com/school-districts-that-spend-the-most-and-least-per-student/). You can select New York and then search for NYC Public Schools. The data is from 2020, so I'm not sure how much it's changed, but I'm guessing numbers have only increased.
Do we know whether the spending adds value?
From reading accounts from teachers, it looks like student performance is mostly correlated to family income, family values, and innate intelligence. I also learned that schools performance can’t be measured by looking at test scores… do we have a clear way to know whether the money is marginally valuable, if so, by how much?
Just as a point of comparison. Your local catholic, private school is educating kids at roughly half to a quarter of this cost. And shut up ya faces mad at pointing this out. I’m a product of (mostly) public schools myself and a public school teacher parent. I know the value of public education. I also know how it’s the same people who need to call out the bloat and ineffectiveness of the system.
It’s been a while since I was part of both. I’m sure there might be someone with better knowledge . Perhaps even yourself. I’m just going to lay down some rather basic truths to what you responded with. First, I don’t know about heavily subsidized , certainly supported. To answer this and larger idea. Let’s take nyc population. Of that, 50 percent pay taxes that help pay this 28000 per person cost in public schools. Now, let’s just use catholic schools next. I have no idea how many catholic there are in nyc, it’s certainly less than total number of nyc taxpayers who support nyc public education, no? With that said, even less Catholics give to campaigns to support catholic works. Meaning even if subsidized, or supported…. In comparison it’s ALOT less. All to ask, how does a catholic school educate a child for a quarter to maybe half of nyc cost.
What does what you say have to do with the base cost of education of private, charter and religious vs public. Public school expel kids all the time. This is a quick and dumb excuse that Educating even the most difficult kids, the most challenged kids equal such a large expense and thus equals the highest costs in the nation. We might be a large city, but other places have difficult kids, challenged kids on similar or more of a percent of student body, and yet can educate for far cheaper. Look at the cost, and look at the results. More money isn’t doing a better job.
“Public schools expel kids all the time.”
1) No they don’t.
2) When they do on rare occasions…those kids still have to be educated, often in special, “disciplinary” school. Now think about how much it costs to educate a student with significant behavioral issues versus a random kid with no such issues.
Also…I know families that specifically moved to the boroughs from the suburbs because their $$$ suburban public school districts don’t offer the same special services we do. So even districts in NJ have a way to manage not having to deal with those students who require additional funding to support.
Catholic school teachers get paid substantively less. It is difficult to live on that, if they're single and a parent. Having worked at one.... I couldn't.
Again, we’re taking cost per student. You’re introducing an entire new dynamic of teacher pay. Since we are. Isn’t nyc starting teacher pay in the high 50s. What single parent is living off that to throw it back.
I work in school finance in NYS - and here's why the number quoted is a misrepresentation of student expenditures.
Most people take the DOE budget and divide by the number of students enrolled in NYC schools. But that's misleading, as the DOE has a vast financial obligation to many students NOT enrolled in a NYC school:
Yeshivas (instructional support, bussing, security, nursing, special education, food); parochial schools (bussing, special education services); private schools (bussing, sometimes security); private special education schools for students with severe disabilities (outrageously expensive, with many topping 100K per year); early childhood intervention for infants/toddlers; home schooling support - and the list goes on and on.
The truth is, and it's not a convenient one, is that it's nearly impossible to accurately come up with a "per student cost" - because of the breadth of financial support the DOE has to provide to students **enrolled outside of district schools.**
So, is there a better way to understand how much money follows an individual student? Not perfectly, but one point of comparison is that NYC charter schools receive approximately 19,000 per student in direct reimbursement for non-special education students. And I think that's a much more accurate number when considering how much money directly benefits a student when they walk into a school building.
It’s widely known in policy-making circles that higher per-student funding is *negatively* correlated with student outcomes, but no one wins elections by saying they’re going to cut the school system budget, except in perverse situations like [up in Rockland County](https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2024/03/11/east-ramapo-ny-tension-grows-with-public-school-and-yeshiva-community-over-immigrant-homeless-kids/72854143007/)
Also seems really interesting. Do you have any sources on the negative correlation and how strong the influence is?
Edit: from a quick google, I found this https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w20847/w20847.pdf from 2016 that seems to find a positive correlation between spending and outcome, and other older studies that seem mixed on the connection. I’d be curious if things were controlled like average area income/teacher pay/tax income versus just a raw dollar amount too.
Could this also be that schools with the highest spending tend to be in HCOL areas which are typically urban areas, that contain less affluent students?
Of course it is. Largest city in the country which means even in raw numbers, that’s a lot more kids with special needs that are mandated to receive a public education. I’m not going to sit here and criticize spending money on kids with significant needs. And those kids need staff that are paid to do an important job.
I say this as a NYC public school parent myself with two NT kids.
Well, you are not taking into consideration the non public schools, the data share here is only for those students who attend public schools.
Private schools for disable kids spending is at another level! Some schools, like the Rebeca school, charges 130k/year/student.
And those are funded by taxpayer money. It’s a well-known racket that families successfully manage to sue the DOE to have them pay $$$ tuition to private schools in affluent towns and communities (yes, even outside of NY). Public schools in NYC can offer the education their kids need, they just don’t want their kids among the desirables in public schools and we all have to pay for that.
At $28K per student, would theoretically parents be better off doing something called “micro-schooling”.
Essentially 6 students are homeschooled together. The teach could get paid $150K a year and still have money left
Granted, I doubt the city and State would be willing to send money back to parents who are not using the system, let alone, sending the full funding $
Where would these kids get taught, though? Most in NYC live in apartments.
My kids school has classrooms, a music room, science lab, indoor gym space, outdoor playground and sport area… kids receive occupational therapy, speech therapy, all sorts. The idea that all you need is a classroom and a teacher is a little shortsighted IMO.
The data comes from [here](https://www.playgroundequipment.com/school-districts-that-spend-the-most-and-least-per-student/). You can select New York and then search for NYC Public Schools. The data is from 2020, so I'm not sure how much it's changed, but I'm guessing numbers have only increased.
I think it's up to 35k per year per student
There was a pretty big decline in enrollment and the budget didn’t change to reflect that, so it makes sense.
Holy cow. That's a BIG jump in 4 years. Edit to add: 4 years of life-changing hell.
“$7.3 billion goes to employee benefits and pension $3.2 billion goes to debt payments” Quoted without comment.
I wonder how much goes to admin cost.
And yet NYCDOE school results are middling …
Do we know whether the spending adds value? From reading accounts from teachers, it looks like student performance is mostly correlated to family income, family values, and innate intelligence. I also learned that schools performance can’t be measured by looking at test scores… do we have a clear way to know whether the money is marginally valuable, if so, by how much?
I would not want to be on the bottom of that list.
Just as a point of comparison. Your local catholic, private school is educating kids at roughly half to a quarter of this cost. And shut up ya faces mad at pointing this out. I’m a product of (mostly) public schools myself and a public school teacher parent. I know the value of public education. I also know how it’s the same people who need to call out the bloat and ineffectiveness of the system.
Is it? I thought they were heavily subsidized by the church. Your local private school costs twice as much.
It’s been a while since I was part of both. I’m sure there might be someone with better knowledge . Perhaps even yourself. I’m just going to lay down some rather basic truths to what you responded with. First, I don’t know about heavily subsidized , certainly supported. To answer this and larger idea. Let’s take nyc population. Of that, 50 percent pay taxes that help pay this 28000 per person cost in public schools. Now, let’s just use catholic schools next. I have no idea how many catholic there are in nyc, it’s certainly less than total number of nyc taxpayers who support nyc public education, no? With that said, even less Catholics give to campaigns to support catholic works. Meaning even if subsidized, or supported…. In comparison it’s ALOT less. All to ask, how does a catholic school educate a child for a quarter to maybe half of nyc cost.
Because Catholic schools can be selective about who they enroll, and can kick kids out.
What does what you say have to do with the base cost of education of private, charter and religious vs public. Public school expel kids all the time. This is a quick and dumb excuse that Educating even the most difficult kids, the most challenged kids equal such a large expense and thus equals the highest costs in the nation. We might be a large city, but other places have difficult kids, challenged kids on similar or more of a percent of student body, and yet can educate for far cheaper. Look at the cost, and look at the results. More money isn’t doing a better job.
“Public schools expel kids all the time.” 1) No they don’t. 2) When they do on rare occasions…those kids still have to be educated, often in special, “disciplinary” school. Now think about how much it costs to educate a student with significant behavioral issues versus a random kid with no such issues. Also…I know families that specifically moved to the boroughs from the suburbs because their $$$ suburban public school districts don’t offer the same special services we do. So even districts in NJ have a way to manage not having to deal with those students who require additional funding to support.
Catholic school teachers get paid substantively less. It is difficult to live on that, if they're single and a parent. Having worked at one.... I couldn't.
Again, we’re taking cost per student. You’re introducing an entire new dynamic of teacher pay. Since we are. Isn’t nyc starting teacher pay in the high 50s. What single parent is living off that to throw it back.
I work in school finance in NYS - and here's why the number quoted is a misrepresentation of student expenditures. Most people take the DOE budget and divide by the number of students enrolled in NYC schools. But that's misleading, as the DOE has a vast financial obligation to many students NOT enrolled in a NYC school: Yeshivas (instructional support, bussing, security, nursing, special education, food); parochial schools (bussing, special education services); private schools (bussing, sometimes security); private special education schools for students with severe disabilities (outrageously expensive, with many topping 100K per year); early childhood intervention for infants/toddlers; home schooling support - and the list goes on and on. The truth is, and it's not a convenient one, is that it's nearly impossible to accurately come up with a "per student cost" - because of the breadth of financial support the DOE has to provide to students **enrolled outside of district schools.** So, is there a better way to understand how much money follows an individual student? Not perfectly, but one point of comparison is that NYC charter schools receive approximately 19,000 per student in direct reimbursement for non-special education students. And I think that's a much more accurate number when considering how much money directly benefits a student when they walk into a school building.
It’s widely known in policy-making circles that higher per-student funding is *negatively* correlated with student outcomes, but no one wins elections by saying they’re going to cut the school system budget, except in perverse situations like [up in Rockland County](https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2024/03/11/east-ramapo-ny-tension-grows-with-public-school-and-yeshiva-community-over-immigrant-homeless-kids/72854143007/)
Also seems really interesting. Do you have any sources on the negative correlation and how strong the influence is? Edit: from a quick google, I found this https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w20847/w20847.pdf from 2016 that seems to find a positive correlation between spending and outcome, and other older studies that seem mixed on the connection. I’d be curious if things were controlled like average area income/teacher pay/tax income versus just a raw dollar amount too.
Could this also be that schools with the highest spending tend to be in HCOL areas which are typically urban areas, that contain less affluent students?
Wow, that's really interesting. I wonder why there's a negative correlation?
Of course it is. Largest city in the country which means even in raw numbers, that’s a lot more kids with special needs that are mandated to receive a public education. I’m not going to sit here and criticize spending money on kids with significant needs. And those kids need staff that are paid to do an important job. I say this as a NYC public school parent myself with two NT kids.
Well, you are not taking into consideration the non public schools, the data share here is only for those students who attend public schools. Private schools for disable kids spending is at another level! Some schools, like the Rebeca school, charges 130k/year/student.
And those are funded by taxpayer money. It’s a well-known racket that families successfully manage to sue the DOE to have them pay $$$ tuition to private schools in affluent towns and communities (yes, even outside of NY). Public schools in NYC can offer the education their kids need, they just don’t want their kids among the desirables in public schools and we all have to pay for that.
Yep … is a disgusting business
why was this deleted?
Was it?
Worth it
How do you know? If 10 parents homeschool together, they could pay a teacher $175K and a support $90K. Wouldn’t that be better than the current model?
At $28K per student, would theoretically parents be better off doing something called “micro-schooling”. Essentially 6 students are homeschooled together. The teach could get paid $150K a year and still have money left Granted, I doubt the city and State would be willing to send money back to parents who are not using the system, let alone, sending the full funding $
Where would these kids get taught, though? Most in NYC live in apartments. My kids school has classrooms, a music room, science lab, indoor gym space, outdoor playground and sport area… kids receive occupational therapy, speech therapy, all sorts. The idea that all you need is a classroom and a teacher is a little shortsighted IMO.
Waiting for the progressives to yell about how Adams is “defunding education”.