Gee...what a coincidence :>)
Also, in -69-70, per pupil costs were $400 above the national aveage, and by '99-Y2K, $600 below.
rand.org
Per-Pupil Expenditures
California has consistently fallen below the national average in per-pupil expenditures (unadjusted for regional cost differences), ranking 24th in 2006–07, according to the National Education Association's (NEA) Rankings and Estimates 2008–09. At $9,124 per pupil, California was at 95% of the national average of $9,565. The District of Columbia, which ranked at the top of all states, spent $16,540. Arizona, ranked last, spent $5,255.
edsource.org
.School Staffing
California ranked almost last in terms of the ratio of total school staff to students in 2005–06, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The state had only 72% as many school staff members as the average state. With respect to administrators, California had 274 students per administrator. That was significantly higher than the U.S. average of 174 and higher still than the average of 109 in Texas, another of the five most populous states. California had only 33% as many district officials/administrators as the national average and only 63% as many school principals and assistant principals as the national average.
With respect to teachers, California ranked 49th, with 75% as many as the national average. California ranked 51st—last—on guidance counselors and librarians. California had only 1.1 guidance counselors per 1,000 students, compared with an average of 2.1 nationally and only 0.2 librarians per 1,000 students, compared with 1.1 nationally.
edsource.org
And what, you may ax yer elf, does this have to do with the price of tea in China? Or the current state of the US economy?
Well, in yet another "what a coincidence", our Guv Raygun went on to become president, altho he was out B4 13 passed. |
