‘Dysfunctional’ education funding hampers student learning while bloating systems with bureaucracy, commentary argues

Would you pay more for an educational system that yields lower test scores, diminished civics awareness, and a greater likelihood of divorce among graduates?

Hardly – yet this is exactly what taxpayers are doing when funding public schools over private ones, argues one recent commentator. 

“Nationally, the average private school costs $12,790 per student annually. That’s nearly $4,500 less than the average public school spends per pupil,” writes Jordan Jantz, assistant editor at IW Features. 

“Yet, despite the lower cost, many studies suggest that student outcomes in private schools are superior: private schools produce students who score higher on national exams, possess greater civics knowledge, and are even less likely to end up divorced.” 

Not all these results can be attributed to the type of families choosing private schools, according to Jantz. 

“Even while criticizing private education, the (National Education Association) has said that private schools offer similar educational outcomes to public schools when adjusted for socio-economic factors,” she observes. “This is despite the funding gap between public and private institutions. Clearly, educational outcomes are not entirely dependent on funding.” 

‘An entirely different set of priorities’ 

Jantz blames teachers’ unions as part of the reasons why public-education spending has increased without producing significant academic progress. 

“When the bureaucrats and union executives – not hands-on educators – have the loudest voices, it’s no wonder that education funding has become dysfunctional,” she writes. 

“The traditional argument is that for student outcomes to improve, schools need improved funding. However, when spending has increased by 50% and test scores have remained stagnant or declined, it’s clear that factors other than funding are at play.” 

Instead of using the increased revenue “to raise teacher salaries and reduce class sizes,” districts are lavishing support on “an entirely different set of priorities,” according to Jantz. 

“According to Department of Education data, as the U.S. student body increased by 0.27% from 2010 to 2022, the number of teachers increased by 4.2%. But the number of district administrators increased by a whopping 29%, and support staff grew 10%.” 

This additional staffing “often creates a burden for educators, hamstringing classroom teachers with red tape, radical politics, and bureaucracy,” Jantz explains from teacher testimonials to the magazine. 

“Taxpayers should know that their hard-earned money is funding lackluster projects and bureaucracy that often hampers educators, not funding classroom teachers themselves.” 

Jantz also questions the massive “billions of dollars on hardware, software, and network support” spent by public schools. 

“While proficiency in modern technology is certainly an important element of society today, the evidence is mixed on the benefits of classroom technology for learners,” she argues. 

“Of course, older students need familiarity with the technology they will use in their future jobs and educational pursuits, but for elementary school students, do the foundations of education – the reading, writing, math, and science skills children have learned for decades – necessitate new technology to teach?” 

When compared with private-school tuition, families are getting more value for their money even without the latest technological gadgets favored by public schools, Jantz notes. 

“More money spent does not equal a better education, and more funding does not necessarily fund teachers’ salaries. Schools are using tax dollars on projects that do not meaningfully contribute to student success.”