Sentences with phrase «spending per pupil by»

As shown in the table, simply increasing educational spending per pupil by $ 11,000 would be estimated to increase the present value of future earnings per student by a little more than half that spending increase.

The net cost of these transitional arrangements is around # 290 million in 2019 --- 20, which temporarily boosts spending per pupil by about 0.7 per cent in cash - terms.

The average amount of money spent per pupil by U.S. public schools has more than doubled in real terms since 1970, and the number of pupils per employed teacher has declined from 22 to 15.

Not exact matches

The education tax paid by homeowners depends on a variety of factors, including the per - pupil spending in their local schools, the type of property (residential homestead or other) and the state - determined common level of appraisal (CLA).

New York's public schools spent $ 21,206 per pupil in the 2014 - 15 school year, topping all states and exceeding the national average by 86 percent, according to U.S. Census Bureau data released today.

Public elementary and secondary school spending in New York reached an all - time high of $ 20,600 per - pupil in 2013 - 14 school year, topping all states and exceeding the $ 11,009 per - pupil national average by 87 percent, according to new U.S. Census Bureau data.

The legislative leaders and the governor made some progress yesterday, reportedly reaching a deal on education that adds $ 300 million in additional spending to the $ 807 million boost Cuomo proposed, spends $ 340 million on pre-K — most of which is going to NYC — and also hikes per - pupil state aid for charter schools, though they would have to agree to be audited by the state comptroller.

The thinktank calculates that the reality of the government's small real terms increase in schools spending coupled with rising classroom numbers meant that spending per pupil would fall by 2.25 % over the next four years.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott Milne has unveiled an ambitious plan to cut per - pupil public school spending in Vermont by a third, and use the savings to pay for the state's young people to attend a Vermont college.

By 2014/15 the government will be spending # 2.5 bn on the premium, but I would personally like to see funding in the next parliament grow towards # 5bn per year, to cover more pupils and to ensure that schools have the resources to match the very tough challenges.

More to the point, says the Empire Center, «School spending in New York [state] was driven primarily by instructional salaries and benefits — which, at $ 14,769 per pupil, were 114 percent above the national average of $ 6,903, the census data show.»

Here's the latest news, courtesy of the US Census Bureau and the Empire Center for Public Policy's E.J. McMahon: Per - pupil public - school spending in 2014 - 15 exceeded the national average by a breathtaking 86 percent.

Both schools spend about the same per pupil, have similar teacher - student ratios, similar numbers of guidance counselors, and well - qualified teachers (as measured by education and experience).

According to the models comparing high - scoring F schools with low - scoring D schools, to achieve the same 5 - point gain in math that the threat of vouchers accomplished, Florida schools would need to increase per - pupil spending by $ 3,484 at previously failing schools.

Massachusetts's progressive school - finance system, the product of reforms made in 1993, begins by establishing a minimum per - pupil spending figure - the foundation budget - that accords low - income children a premium of about 42 percent over that allotted other children.

By comparison, New York City spent $ 11,800 per pupil; Los Angeles, $ 9,600; and Chicago, $ 8,200.

To produce the same gain in writing scores, per - pupil spending would have to be increased by $ 2,805, more than a 50 percent increase.

Our analysis finds that for children from low - income families, increasing per - pupil spending by 10 percent in all 12 school - age years reduces the annual incidence of poverty in adulthood by 6.1 percentage points.

Coleman found that variation in school resources (as measured by per - pupil spending and student - to - teacher ratios) was unrelated to variation in student achievement on standardized tests.

We find that when a district increases per - pupil school spending by $ 100 due to reforms, spending on instruction increases by about $ 70, spending on support services increases by roughly $ 40, spending on capital increases by about $ 10, while there are reductions in other kinds of school spending, on average.

Our key finding is that increased per - pupil spending, induced by court - ordered SFRs, increased high school graduation rates, educational attainment, earnings, and family incomes for children who attended school after these reforms were implemented in affected districts.

Taking into account the relationship between predicted and actual spending increases, we find that increasing per - pupil spending by 10 percent in all 12 school - age years increases educational attainment by 0.3 years on average among all children.

Importantly, as our results show, predicted increases in per - pupil spending induced by SFRs are correlated not only with actual spending increases, but with improved outcomes for students as well.

On average, those who support increasing spending on their local schools underestimated per - pupil spending by nearly $ 6,000 (see Figure 2).

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has counselled that spending per pupil in schools in England is likely to fall by eight per cent in real terms over the next five years.

Specifically, increasing per - pupil spending by 10 percent in all 12 school - age years increases the probability of high school graduation by 7 percentage points for all students, by roughly 10 percentage points for low - income children, and by 2.5 percentage points for nonpoor children.

For children from low - income families, increasing per - pupil spending by 10 percent in all 12 school - age years increases family income by 17.1 percent.

Even homeowners, for example, were off by more than $ 5,000 on average for per - pupil spending and by more than $ 11,000 for teacher salaries.

Since the War on Poverty, the average gap in per - pupil spending between two states grew by 256 percent, an Education Week analysis finds.

Investigating the causal effect of school spending increases generated by the passage of SFRs, we conclude that increasing per - pupil spending yields large improvements in educational attainment, wages, and family income, and reductions in the annual incidence of adult poverty for children from low - income families.

For children from low - income families, increasing per - pupil spending by 10 percent in all 12 school - age years increases educational attainment by 0.5 years.

In contrast, for nonpoor children, a 10 percent increase in per - pupil spending throughout the school - age years increases educational attainment by less than 0.1 years, and this estimate is not statistically significant.

On average, the estimates of per - pupil spending offered by homeowners were $ 427 higher than those of non-homeowners, a difference that is not statistically significant.

In Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston, the coefficients of variation were nearly always more than 0.15, meaning that one - third of the schools in these districts had spending levels that deviated from their district's average by 15 percent (or $ 225,000 for a school of 500 when average spending is $ 3,000 per pupil).

Poll respondents underestimated by half how much money is spent per pupil in their local schools.

Second, though states have shouldered some responsibility for financing public education, usually by decreeing a minimum or «foundation» level of per - pupil spending, sizable portions of education revenue are locally generated through property taxes, bond levies, and such.

For the nation as a whole, overall support for higher spending levels dropped by 8 percentage points (from 46 to 38 percent) when respondents were informed of actual per - pupil expenditures in their own district.

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.

According to school choice supporters, such as Marquette University professor and former Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) superintendent Howard Fuller, MPCP saves the taxpayers considerable cash, as the voucher is smaller than per - pupil spending by MPS.

Increased school spending per pupil does not necessarily result in higher student achievement, as measured by «the nation's report card,» concludes a report from the American Legislative Council.

Spending: Oklahoma boosted education funding by 3.5 percent from 2000 - 01 to 2001 - 02, but still remains well below the national average, spending $ 6,908 peSpending: Oklahoma boosted education funding by 3.5 percent from 2000 - 01 to 2001 - 02, but still remains well below the national average, spending $ 6,908 pespending $ 6,908 per pupil.

By Education Week «s measure, only 11 states have average spending levels below our benchmark for adequacy (in other words, 80 percent of Massachusetts» per - pupil average).

A simple cost calculation gives the improvements in student achievement (measured again in standard deviations) that could, by the Picus and Odden estimates of benefits, be expected for a $ 100 addition to spending per pupil from each of the separate programs.

The Education Next research article «Stuck in the Middle,» featured in the Fall 2010 issue of Education Next, finds that the steep drop - off in middle - school students» academic achievement may be linked to the larger number of students in each grade level but can not be explained by differences in per - pupil spending or class size, which were similar in middle and K - 8 schools.

The data shows the funding for nursery schools fell by # 232 per pupil last year and local authority spending on education and young people's services is down # 0.7 billion from 2015 - 16.

The poorest fifth schools, as defined by the number of pupils eligible for free school meals, spent on average 31 per cent more per pupil than the richest fifth.

School spending per pupil across England is expected to fall by at least seven per cent in real - terms between 2015 - 16 and 2019 - 20, according to a new report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).

The research by IFS associate director Luke Sibieta shows that an extra # 1 billion would result in a freeze to per - pupil spending in real terms in 2019 - 2020.

The survey also found that one in five teachers did not know what the main priorities for their pupil premium funding was, with early intervention schemes cited as the most common priority for spending, identified by 28 per cent of respondents.

The National Benchmarking Overview Report 2016 - 17 which is compiled by local authorities shows that, since 2010 - 11, real - terms spending per primary and secondary pupil has fallen by 9.6 per cent and 2.9 per cent respectively, which translates as # 513 less per primary pupil and # 205 less per secondary pupil.