Content area
Full Text
In "Beyond Spending Fetishes" (November 1995), Eric Hanushek argues that while the financial investment in education has doubled during the last 25 years, the returns have not been equal to those of previous eras. He asserts that dramatic increases in per pupil expenditures and the reasons for them (for example, smaller pupil/teacher ratios and more experienced, more educated, and better compensated teachers), have resulted in stable--not increased--student achievement levels.
While Hanushek concedes that certain changes in society may have a negative effect on student achievement, he maintains that the "net impact
of changes during the last two decades
on children may be favorable." We find it difficult to accept that the impact of smaller families and better educated parents offsets the decline in social capital (the human and financial resources available to children), especially for certain minority groups. Each day, educators are forced to confront the following realities:
* More than 20 percent of children today are living in poverty (Sternberg and Colman 1994), and the ratios are even higher in urban centers and minority populations.
* Approximately 25 percent of all children live in single-parent households.
* The percentage of mothers in the work force has more than doubled during the last generation.
These factors have forced schools to meet a greater variety of demands and to provide more services than ever before. Expenditures have increased to support this broader mission. However, the common perception of the magnitude of increases in real spending may be incorrect.
The Funding Debate
Hanushek argues that expenditures per pupil have "more than doubled in real terms" during the last 25 years. Another recent report (Rothstein and Miles 1995) argues that while total spending did increase during this period, the increase in real spending is only about two-thirds as large as Hanushek asserts. This study, which used a more appropriate means of...