As you can see in this chart, Arizona's overall average inflation-adjusted per-pupil spending is still significantly higher than it was in the 2000-2001 school year:

http://static.taxcutsforall.com/files/k12azperpupil04-02-2010.pdf

You can also see that non-capital spending is higher than it was in the 2005-2006 school year (the earliest year for which we have consistent reporting from state superintendent).

Note also that Arizona's test scores have been nearly flat this whole time, with no discernable improvement due to higher spending since the last time we raised taxes (Prop 301) with the ostensible goal of improving education:

http://static.taxcutsforall.com/files/azvsfl2009naep.pdf

The SY 2011 points in the first chart are hypothetical, and suggest worst-case scenarios (from the point of view of persons in the education establishment) if: A) the Prop 100 sales tax hike fails on the May 18 ballot; B) K-12 education gets the full $429 million reduction that has been conditionally enacted on top of the roughly $400 million in enacted spending reductions.

In that case, overall K-12 spending and non-capital spending would drop ten percent. If that happened, per-pupil average school district funding would be $6,900--equal to current per-pupil amounts for charter schools.

Let's do the math. $6,900 per child, multiplied by 25 kids in the average classroom, equals $172,500 of potential non-capital resources in that average classroom--after the hypothetical ten-percent spending cut due to the failure of Prop 100.

Of course, every school needs some administrative overhead, and for resources to be allocated for non-classroom activities and functions. Let's say that districts divert 25 percent of the resources out of the classroom. There would still be $129,000 left in our classroom. If we pay teachers $90,000 a year in salary and benefits (a good pay increase for most!), that still leaves $39,000 a year to allocate toward a special ed instructor to handle the IEPs in that class. (If one special ed teacher covered the IEPs in two classes, he or she could be compensated at $78,000.)

The upshot: under the worst-case scenario, there would be enough potential resources in Arizona school districts to pay teachers VERY GOOD salary/benefit packages.

Of course, those are average figures. Some districts will have more resources than that, and some will have less. Further, and most importantly, average figures say nothing about how much money actually gets into the classroom, or how schools are actually managed. As it is, even with current resources, Arizona school districts routinely fail to pay high-performing classroom teachers enough.

As we have said before, the problem with Arizona education is not a lack of money. The problem is mismanagement of resources.

We are highly skeptical about the notion that more money will lead to increased student performance. There is no evidence whatsoever to support that notion. If you give more money to Arizona school districts, they will very likely continue to waste that money.

America’s government schools have sucked up more and more money for decades. Since 1970 we have more than doubled per-pupil spending, in constant dollars. Sadly, we have very little (if anything) to show for those investments when it comes to student performance:

http://www.heritage.org/research/Education/images/b2179_chart4.gif
The state’s charter schools received $6,946 per child in 2009 (not counting capital costs). That’s 11 percent less, per student, than what the average unified district school got. When you add in the capital costs, the difference is 15 percent. And yet, charter schools have proven to do a better job of educating kids, including disadvantaged student populations:

http://www.nber.org/~schools/charterschoolseval/

For a brief outline of how to use the charter model to reform Arizona education, check out the latest blog post by Republic columnist Bob Robb:

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/RobertRobb/64748

Further, many Arizona private schools provide an excellent education for tuition of less than $5,000 per year:

http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/article/1851

There are proven ways to improve school performance, but they do NOT involve giving lots of money to mismanaged school districts. For ideas, start in Florida:

http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/article/2577

The bottom line is that we need more education for our tax dollars, not more tax dollars for education.

Arizona districts need to put schools under independent management that has the power to immediately pay good teachers what they’re worth, fire clock-punchers and excess administrators, and streamline overhead. Arizona public schools need to be exposed to real competition, meaning that students and their parents should be able to take their per-student resources to the schools of their choice.

Your NO vote on May 18 will help to put pressure on districts to begin implementing reforms.

For Liberty,

--Tom

Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity