Giving Compass' Take:

• A  panel of California teachers and administrators found that a 32 percent increase in funding for California schools is necessary to provide all students in the state with high-quality academic opportunities. 

• The difference in funding would be approximately $4000 more per student than in the 2016-17 school year to pay for adequate teachers and resources for students. If schools did receive more funding, what is the first resource the money would go toward?

• Read more about the funding needed in California to maintain positive trends. 

Two separate panels of experienced California teachers and administrators were given background information and three days together to help answer a longer version of this question: How much would it cost to provide all California students the academic knowledge, skills and opportunities they’ll need to successfully pursue their plans after high school and participate in civic life?

After the educators determined the necessary staffing and resources and researchers crunched the numbers, the answer — the price of adequately funding California’s schools — was $91.8 billion per year, $22.1 billion more than districts spent in 2016-17. The 32 percent increase would include providing preschool to all 4-year-olds and hiring more counselors, nurses, specialized teachers and administrators to reduce one of the nation’s highest ratios of students to school staff. (The panelists first learned the final spending total when the study was published.)

“What Does It Cost to Educate California’s Students? A Professional Judgment Approach” details how the panels determined the amount of the funding increase and the reasoning behind it.

The cost of adequate funding would average $16,800 per student. That compares with $12,750 per student, the actual average per-student spending two years ago, and includes federal, state and local funding, including parcel taxes. The difference, about $4,000 per student — and more for the highest-poverty districts under the panels’ formula — would require a larger investment than the Legislature and voters probably would be willing to make all at once.

But will providing the dollars cited in the study actually result in higher student achievement and more students ready for college and the workplace? Under local control, there would be no requirement for districts to spend dollars in the way the panels recommend or reverse the pattern of placing the least experienced teachers and principals in the lowest-performing schools.

Read the full article about funding for California schools by John Fensterwald at EdSource