[Winona Online Democracy]
Because the earlier versions of my response were garbled by the way I did
them, and because I have done some additional research, I am replying to
this posting again. I have inserted my comments below on lines without ">"
Glen Schumann
Winona, MN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
H: 507.454.3056 W: 507.453.3567 W FAX: 507.454.1440
Visit my Family Home Page: http://www.hbci.com/~gschuman/home.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul Double
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 6:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Winona] Educational Spending
>I think we do a good job in supporting education in Winona and in
>Minnesota. This is how we stack up against the rest of the country.
>Minnesota is ranked 17th in teacher salaries..
Yes, but according to the source provided, our teachers are still paid less
than the national average.
>Minnesota is ranked 20th in the cost of living index
Again, Minnesota is below average (but only very slightly).
>Minnesota is ranked 16th in expenditures per pupil
One of the problems with comparing these figures across states is the
question of whether they are really "comparable" numbers.
I don't know which chart Paul is using, but I found one on the NCES site
(Table 171) (the correct URL is www.nces.ed.gov ). It shows Minnesota
spending $6,371 per pupil in 1996-97. Just about average as the national
figure was $6,392 for that year. Michigan, where I lived for twelve years
is at $7,561. The Ann Arbor, Michigan school district (an excellent one)
was spending about $7,000 per pupil when I left Ann Arbor and returned to
Wisconsin in 1988. At a 3% rate of inflation that district would now be
spending about $10,000 per pupil. Wisconsin's figure for 1996-97 is $7,398.
The Tomah school district where my children attended public and private
schools from 1988 until 1993 was in the bottom 10% of Wisconsin school
districts when I moved to Winona. Tomah was spending about $4,500 per pupil
then. Three per cent inflation would put that district at $5217 now. My
youngest daughter now attends high school in one of the best school
districts in the nation, Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland.
Maryland is spending $7,543 per pupil in '96-'97. I am sure that MCPS is
much higher.
It would be more relevant to compare Winona's spending to that of the levels
of the best districts in the country rather than the average. In my
opinion, slightly below average is hardly an indicator of excellence. It
would also be helpful to know how we compare to the median spending level.
How much is Winona spending per pupil?
Well, I now have an answer to that question. I went to Minnesota Northstar
and under K-12 Education was able to find a report titled "District
Profiles". I downloaded an Excel spread sheet which shows 42 pieces of data
for all 374 of Minnesota's school districts for 1998-99.
Column 31 is Total PK-12 Operating Expenditures Excluding Capital
Expenditures per ADM (ADM = average daily membership), in other words, per
pupil.
The average for all school districts is $6,695 and the median is $6,407.
Winona is at $6,381. We are in the bottom half of a below national average
state. The '96/'97 national average adjusted for a 3% inflation rate would
be $6,781.
I think the case that Winona's public schools are under funded is a strong
one.
An increase of $1,000 in the per pupil spending would put Winona at $7,381
and add about $4.9 million to the district budget(based on the '98/'99
data). This would put us near the 85th percentile for Minnesota districts
and about 9% over the national average. Hardly extravagant.
>State spending as a percentage of local educational spending we are 20th
According to the report at
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/fiscal/files/00fined.pdf this will increase
to over 72% by the '01/'02 school year. I would prefer to take education off
the property tax and have it funded either 100% from state income taxes (if
we can retain local control) or have a local income tax. I do not know if
that is even possible in Minnesota.
>Minnesota spends 62.8 % of education dollars on instruction 15th in the
>country.
I have not bothered to track this one down. If the trend above were to hold
true, being at or just below average does not impress me.
>There is however, one area we do get short changed.
>Minnesota is 46th in the amount of money the Federal government provides
>our state as a percentage of our total educational expense.
In my opinion, education is primarily a state and local responsibility. The
less federal involvement we can get away with, the better. Less federal
spending on education would be preferable to Minnesota's congressional
delegation going after more dollars for Minnesota. It would be better if
less money were sent to Washington so that more would be available for state
and local spending.
----------------
This message was posted to the Winona Online Democracy Project.
Please visit http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Please sign all messages posted to this list with your actual name.
Posting of commercial solicitations is not allowed on this list.
Report problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
