Not exact matches
Urban school
districts spend significantly less per pupil on their high -
poverty schools
than their low -
poverty ones, a fact that is routinely masked by school budgets that use
average - salary figures rather
than actual ones, a new paper suggests.
The upshot, per the article, is that «children in the school
districts with the highest concentrations of
poverty score an
average of more
than four grade levels below children in the richest
districts.»
The study also compared charter performance to
average statewide performance — admittedly, a higher bar, as schools statewide had significantly lower levels of
poverty than the charters (and their urban
districts).
This means that although the
district, on
average, has a
poverty rate of 64 percent, more
than three - quarters of the
district's schools have a
poverty rate that is either 84 percent and higher, or 44 percent and lower.
Children in the school
districts with the highest concentrations of
poverty score an
average of more
than four grade levels below children in the richest
districts.
For example, in Trenton City school
district, 31 percent of children are living with families in
poverty — more
than twice the
average for New Jersey.
825 in the U.S. — meaning the highest
poverty districts received on
average $ 825 less per student
than the lowest
poverty districts.
Leading Educators Fellows stay in high -
poverty schools at rates between 10 and 29 percent higher
than the
district average.
Even after adjusting for cost of living and student
poverty variables, they found that
districts with lower productivity spent $ 950 more per student
than districts with above
average productivity, and the most inefficient
districts tended to devote an extra 3 percent of their budgets to administration and other nonteaching expenditures.
The 2011 — 12 data reported to NCES indicates that in 24 states, on
average the highest -
poverty districts spend less per student from state and local funding sources
than the lowest -
poverty districts spend.