Is Academic Performance Correlated With

Per Pupil Spending?

You Decide!

Dr. Charles Ormsby

Updated May 2007

The $64,000 QuestionIs Academic Performance Correlated With

Per Pupil Spending?• The argument for increasing taxes presupposes that spending

more matters and that it will lead to better educational outcomes for our children. Can we assume this?

• If there is no correlation between greater spending and better academic results … doesn’t the entire campaign to raise taxes and increase spending fall apart at the seams?

• The remaining charts examines the big spender’s core assumption that spending more improves academics

• It starts with a quick illustration of what correlated data and uncorrelated data looks like and then examines if spending more will help raise academic outcomes

Correlation• What Does “Correlated” data look like?

• A students Math vs. their Verbal SAT Scores

• MCAS scores vs. Per Capita Income

• What does “Uncorrelated” data look like?• SAT scores vs. Soc Sec numbers

• Math performance vs. Country Spending Per Pupil

• SAT Scores vs. State Spending Per Pupil

• Picking similar towns (no cherry picking)

• Finally: Education Spending vs. Academic Outcomes … You decide

SAT V vs. SAT M

375

425

475

525

575

625

375 425 475 525 575 625

SAT M

SAT

V

CORRELATED DATA

SAT Verbal vs. SAT Math Scores

SAT Math Score

SA

T V

erb

al S

core

CORRELATED DATA

SAT SCORE VS SSN

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

0 20 40 60 80 100

MIDDLE TWO DIGITS OF SSN

SA

T S

CO

RE

UNCORRELATED DATASAT Score vs. Soc Sec #

Middle Two Digits of Soc Sec Number

UNCORRELATED DATA

Need More Proof?Let’s Look at State-By-State Data

• Do states that spend more have better academic results?

• The next chart shows the Combined SAT scores for all states with 49% participation or higher plotted with their per-pupil spending*

• What little correlation there is, is negative driven primarily by the District of Columbia. (Without DC, the data is almost exactly uncorrelated.)

• Note: The conclusion using all states is unchanged but, since SAT scores can be affected by participation rates and some states (like Utah) have very low participation rates, only high-participation rate states were included. A cutoff of 49% instead of 50% was used to include California (the only state below 50% included). As can be seen from the plot, including CA had no effect on the conclusion. SAT data is from the College Board for 2004 and per-pupil spending is from the NEA for 2004.

Combined SAT Scores Vs. Per-Pupil Spending

960

980

1000

1020

1040

1060

$6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 $14,000

Per Pupil Spending

Comb

ined S

AT S

core

s

DC

MA

CA

NH

WA

OR

NY

CT

FL

VA

DE

GA

NJ

RIME

UNCORRELATED DATA

Let’s look at Town Data

• First, all Massachusetts communities regardless of size or per capita income

• Next, we’ll objectively pick the communities most similar to North Andover based on– Population– Per Capita Income

DATA IS UNCORRELATED

All MA Communities Plotted

Picking Towns Similar to North Andover

• Combined metric:

* Population

* Per Capita Income

• Closest 25 communities chosen

Popul (Est 2004)

Per Capita Income (1999) $/Pupil

Total SAT

Avg Verbal

Avg Math

WESTFORD 21,475 37,979 7643 1147 562 585ANDOVER 32,141 41,133 9268 1143 558 585READING 23,362 32,888 7704 1110 545 565SHREWSBURY 33,161 31,570 7626 1097 543 554NORTH ATTLEBOROUGH 28,176 25,974 7648 1094 552 542CANTON 21,505 33,510 9033 1094 530 564MANSFIELD 22,998 27,441 7274 1093 535 558CHELMSFORD 33,769 30,465 7486 1089 542 547WALPOLE 22,518 32,117 8222 1087 541 546NORTH ANDOVER 27,979 34,335 7923 1081 537 544FRANKLIN 30,192 27,849 7800 1076 541 535TEWKSBURY 29,130 27,031 7136 1075 528 547NATICK 32,113 36,358 9105 1069 537 532MELROSE 26,533 30,347 7142 1065 534 531EASTON 23,061 30,732 7143 1057 521 536WAKEFIELD 24,562 30,369 8457 1054 529 525BURLINGTON* 23,223 30,732 10306 1053 511 542MILTON 25,855 37,138 8378 1052 526 526BRAINTREE 33,873 28,683 7847 1050 519 531DEDHAM* 23,225 28,199 10308 1050 518 532MARSHFIELD 24,817 28,768 8089 1043 520 523NORWOOD 28,548 27,720 8899 1040 513 527DANVERS 25,659 26,852 8351 1036 516 520STOUGHTON 26,902 25,480 7852 1009 502 507WATERTOWN* 32,603 33,262 12237 996 487 509SAUGUS 26,762 25,524 8187 994 498 496AVERAGEs (w/o N. Andover) = 26,958 30,984 8,371 1,067 528 539

School Yr: 2004/05SIMILAR TOWNS RANKED BY

TOTAL SAT SCORES

Here It Is – The Answer To the $64,000 Question

Is Academic Performance Correlated With Increased Per Pupil Spending?

And the answer is ….

North Andover

Watertown

Dedham

Burlington

Saugus

Stoughton

Westford Andover

NO

All data: 2004/05

One Last Plot

• We’re told we need to pay teachers more to improve teacher quality and therefore improve academic results

• So let’s look at SAT scores vs. average teacher salaries for North Andover and our 25 most similar communities

• Surprise, surprise … No correlation!!

UNCORRELATED DATA

Conclusion

• Shouldn’t spending advocates start focusing on what matters, and stop trying to raise your taxes in a FUTILE attempt to buy academic achievement?

• Until our schools seriously focus on raising standards and expectations, eliminating education fads, encouraging greater parental involvement, controlling spiraling labor costs, and prioritizing our available resources in the classroom (where it matters most), tax increases should not even be considered