• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Spending More on Education Doesn't Spell Achievement

    Kids are back in school across America and education is the topic du jour on the presidential campaign trail. But cut through the rhetoric and the data paint a clear picture about education spending and academic performance.

    Heritage’s Dan Lips says there are three things voters should remember when listening to politicians debate education reform:

    [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xxHqXiHJpw[/youtube]

    To help parents grasp this issue, Heritage this week published “A Parent’s Guide to Education Reform,” which covers these topics:

    • What has gone wrong in today’s public school system.
    • What Americans like you can do to bring real improvements.
    • What specific educational opportunities are available in your state.
    • Where you can learn more about education reform in America.
    Posted in Education, Scribe [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to Spending More on Education Doesn't Spell Achievement

    1. Kelly, Castle Rock C says:

      The only thing that will save the government run schools of this country is to privatize them. The proper role of government is to protect rights, that's it. It is not the job of government to be educating our children. In fact, I can think of no one worse to be doing that job.

    2. Jon, Boyds MD says:

      If one looks at the people who are historically considered the greatest geniuses (Einstein, Edison, Nobel, Newton, da Vinci, etc.) they good see that these people were largely taught by private tutors, who tailored curriculum to the individual's needs, instead of shoving everyone into the same mold. Individually tailored studies worked for hundreds (and really thousands) of years, and still work today, as evidenced by homeschoolers consistently scoring higher than students in public schools.

    3. nan alex says:

      One of the best ways to improve schools is to improve the social environment. home schooling may work for those who have families with the resources to do it. what about those inner cities? I am a teacher and it has been consistently shown in my classrooms that the family within which the child grows has the biggest impact on learning.

      try teaching a 7th grader who comes into school drinking blue soda and eating skittles candy for breakfast. try teaching a child in a private school who should be in a small setting because they can not sit still. that child came from a family where the mother left the home, taking the baby sister with her, but not her young son. The father had to deal with the constant negative reports about his son, but had no idea how to help him.

      ask the individual teachers what goes on. forget the unions, ask the individuals.

      the problem with education goes beyond the systemic issues of funding, teachers and unions. it is a social problem.

      teacher, participant observer, sociologist,

      nanex.

    4. Karen California says:

      I have read opinions on this site regarding Head Start and No Child Left Behind. I am a teacher. Let me be more specific, I am that teacher that really helps to make these programs work. However, you, the people who make the rules and provide the funding do not seem to realize what you are doing.

      You seem to think that if you thow some money at educating the children under five that suddenly when they get to kindergarten their socioeconomic status will suddenly change. They will no longer be poor! Like magic!

      Or maybe you think that the schools will find free teachers and resources to help them through the No Child Left Behind craziness, whatever that means.

      I work as a teacher in a public school program that serves Head Start children and others. When I first became employed in this program approximately 10 years ago we served children up to age 15. Now we are being forced to refuse services to children over 8 years of age due to budget cuts.

      I find this appalling as 8 to 15 year olds are the ones that are most in need of supervision and these services. This is one of the main reasons they lose their way in school. They do not have a middle class family that is home and can provide for them the tools and direction they need to become responsible adults. That is why these programs are necessary and why they must serve children until they reach an age where they can actively be responsible. I believe that most children by the age of 16 are capable of making decisions for themselves, if they have the previous 15 years of supervision and guidance to teach them.

      That is my opinion,

      Karen Davis

    5. G. Leon, Townsend, G says:

      the lottery, now in most states, is suppose to benefit education and school improvements. The millions of dollars taken in are being misappropiated or this portion of the bill is more pork. It appears congess is only concerned with making themselves richer at the public's

      expense. Stimulous does not mean spending.

      It means to stimulate or incite. Barak and Pelosi need to be EDUCATED again.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×