The most recent U.S. Census data shows Vermont still spends more on education than nearly every other state in the nation. The state ranks fifth in terms of spending per pupil.
That finding doesn’t come as a surprise, but state’s education stakeholders have different opinions about whether it’s something to take pride in.
The newest data, released Tuesday, looks at public school spending for elementary and secondary schools during Fiscal Year 2011. The complete report can be found here.
The national average for per pupil spending in 2011 was $10,560 while Vermont spends $15 925. New York, the District of Columbia, Alaska and New Jersey were the only states that ranked higher than Vermont.
Nationwide, per-pupil spending decreased by 0.4 percent from 2010. It’s the first decrease in per-student spending since the U.S. Census Bureau started collecting this information in 1977. In Vermont, it increased by 4.3 percent.
According to the report, Vermont also ranks third for school spending in relation to personal income. Residents pay roughly $36 for education costs for every $1,000 of personal income.
Bill Talbott, chief financial officer and deputy commissioner of the Agency of Education, said there is a simple explanation for why Vermont outpaces most other states with its spending: the state has small school districts and declining enrollment, and yet spending continues to rise.
The number of students has waned since 1998, and it has dropped by about 20,000 children during the past decade, according to Talbott. “We are losing quite a few kids and yet the costs have not dropped. Our staffing levels haven’t dropped. They are staying at their peak levels.”
Vermont also receives the third-lowest amount of federal funding. Only 7.1 percent of the state’s total school revenue comes from the federal government. That’s largely due to the state’s small population and comparatively low poverty levels, according to Talbott.
Sen. Kevin Mullin, R-Rutland, who sits on the Senate Finance Committee, pushed for changes in the education funding system to reduce spending this legislative session. Many of the lawmaker’s reform plans didn’t come to fruition, but the Legislature did pass a bill that lowers the excess spending threshold for schools. (Schools have to pay a penalty if they exceed the average per-pupil spending by a certain amount.)
Mullin said the latest census numbers “confirm my belief that when you take a look at our outcomes in relation to our spending, we could be much more efficient if we designed an education system for the current century rather than something that’s based on the 19th century.”
Small schools and too many supervisory districts are two of the “inefficiencies” Mullin pointed to. He also mentioned Vermont’s staff-to-student ratios, which he described as “staggeringly low”— it hovers around one staff member for every five students, whereas the national average is about one to eight.
The one thing that keeps Vermont from creeping to the top of the charts is that teacher salaries are comparatively low, Mullin said.
Darren Allen is the spokesperson for the Vermont NEA, the state’s largest teachers union. Allen said the state’s high level of spending simply reflects taxpayer priorities.
“There is a disconnect between lawmakers and policymakers in the halls of the buildings in Montpelier and the taxpayers and parents in the rest of Vermont. Contrary to popular belief, Vermonters have one of the simplest ways to keep a check on their school spending. They get to vote on it every year and year after year, voters approve of the budgets despite the hues and cries in Montpelier.”
And, Allen, added, taxpayers are getting what they are shelling out for.
“The trend of Vermonters generously supporting public school is one that is born out by the achievement of students. It’s something that Vermonters have invested in for centuries … Vermonters are getting way they pay for.”
