>>>>>http://www.oecd.org/edu/educationataglance2012oecdindicators-chapterbfinancialandhumanresourcesinvestedineducation-indicators.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>In terms of proportion of national wealth the US only lags Iceland and Korea.
>>>>>
>>>>>If you're just referring to primary then the Ireland, New Zealand and the Swiss outpace as well but the US remains above average.
>>>>>
>>>>>Overall spending on education is not the issue, how it is spent is.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>True. It would be very interesting to see those numbers broken down by, say, parental income. Everything I see and read indicates that we're running two public school systems in this country, one for the haves and one for the have-nots.
>>>>
>>>>Not exactly what I asked, but relevant:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/02/states-education-spending_n_3375632.html
>>>>
>>>>"The states that spent the most per student appear to be the ones that can best afford it. Median household income in nine of the 10 top-spending states is higher than the U.S. median."
>>>>
>>>>"Generally, the states that spend the most on education get the best results. A majority of the top-spending states are in the top 15 in fourth- and eighth-grade math and reading proficiency exams. Among the 10 states that spent the least per pupil, only Colorado was in the top 10 in any of these proficiency tests."
>>>>
>>>>This is more on point, though still not exactly what I was looking for:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/more-40-low-income-schools-dont-get-fair-share-state-and-local-funds-department-
>>>>
>>>>"A new report from the U.S. Department of Education documents that schools serving low-income students are being shortchanged because school districts across the country are inequitably distributing their state and local funds."
>>>>
>>>>"The data reveal that more than 40 percent of schools that receive federal Title I money to serve disadvantaged students spent less state and local money on teachers and other personnel than schools that don't receive Title I money at the same grade level in the same district. "
>>>>
>>>>IOW, the state and locals see Title I funds as replacing their funds, rather than meant to remediate the poverty in those schools.
>>>>
>>>>Tamar
>>>
>>>This is simplified but still relevant : School funding is tied to property taxes and children are forced into schools based upon where they live. Doesn't seem like big news that the least funded schools are in the poorest neighborhoods.
>>>
>>>We've spent more money on education than most of the world over the last several decades and yet the world is kicking our ass in reading, writing, math, science, language, whathaveyou. I know there's an Einsteinism in here somewhere, I wonder if we can find it.
>>
>>It's right in front of us, Jake.
>>Way back at the end of the 18th century the great Horace Mann preached that universal education was a necessity.
>>Fortunately, people listened and universal, free education became the law of the land.
>>Somewhere- I don't where - someone decided that universal, free education meant compulsory education.
>>That was a huge mistake.
>>Our primary and secondary schools now contain kids who don't want to be there and whose parents don't care whether they go or not.
>>Let the kids who don't want to be in school stay away. In fact, we should force them to stay away.
>>Attending public school should be a privilege- like voting- not a right- and certainly not a duty.
>>If you don't want to use it or if you abuse it- you lose it.
>>(Hey, the late Johnny Cochran would have liked that one!)
>>
>>What will we do with them? I don't know.. that's a thorny issue- but it should have nothing to do with schools.
>>
>>One thing is certain.. they shouldn't be in our schools with kids who want to be there and want to perform.
>>
>>Private schools (I went to parochial schools and saw this first hand) have one huge weapon that public schools don't- they can select students- and that's why most of them are more successful than their public counterparts.
>>All the kids in private schools want to be there and if they don't perform, they're out.
>>
>>The reason that the kids in Asian and Indian schools are wiping up the floor with our kids is that they have to fight and claw their way into the schools there.
>>
>>Get rid of the kids who don't want to be there and don't want to perform and most of our primary and secondary school problems will disappear in a hurry and our school budgets will magically come into line.
>
>I don't agree with you at all, Bill. We are talking about kids whose judgment is not fully formed. Often they come from terrible home situations. Most kids need at least a bit of the stick, no matter what kind of home they come from. If the choice were in their hands I'm sure a lot would choose to just hang out and enjoy themselves. IMO education offers by far the best route out of miserable circumstances. You are suggesting discarding them from the educational system before they are mature enough to even know what is going on.
>
>The thorny issue to me is how to keep the troubled kids from being a disruptive influence on other students. But for god's sake let's not just chuck them onto the scrap heap.

I didn't expect you to agree with me, Mike.
Most people don't and that's why we have the mess that we have.
Most people have come to the conclusion that schools, which were once places where skills were transmitted, were also places that cure psychologically messed up kids, chase after kids who don't want to come to school, make up for dysfunctional families, teach sex education, encourage patriotism and community service, produce highly skilled athletes, etc., etc.
My grandsons' school district has almost as many counsellors, psychologists, health specialists, deans, truant officers, security guards, advisers, coaches, etc. as it does teachers, and those jobs often pay more than teachers make.
If all we had to do was pay teachers to teach kids who want to be there and buy books, we'd have more than enough money to have a small student-teacher ratio with world class teachers and our kids would be doing wonderful things.
It's upside down, Mike.