quote:

---

2000-2001 spending per student by Québec school boards was estimated at $6 761, compared with the Atlantic Provinces at $5 723, Ontario at $6 637, and Western Canada at $6 608. In the United States, per-student spending was estimated at $8 686

---

www.meq.gouv.qc. ca PDF File. They don't have any interest in exaggerating Ontario's numbers.

Comparison of Canada/US education expenditure

quote:

---

Of all 63 education jurisdictions in North America — 50 states, the Distict of
Columbia, 10 provinces, 2 terriories (before Nunavut) — Ontario ranks 55 in perstudent
spending in education; Ontario is just 8th from the bottom. In 1995, when the Harris Government was elected, Ontario ranked 49 out of 63.

---

Jurisdiction	Per Pupil Exp. (CDN$)	Rank
New York	10,521	1
New Jersey	10,194	2
Alaska	10,066	3
Connecticut	9,545	4
Delaware	8,781	5
Michigan	8,658	6
Wisconsin	8,511	7
Minnesota	8,466	8
Pennsylvania	8,460	9
Yukon	8,364	10
Rhode Island	8,304	11
New Mexico	7,951	12
Massachusetts	7,944	13
Maryland	7,910	14
Vermont	7,893	15
NWT	7,859	16
Illinois	7,565	17
Maine	7,484	18
Ohio	7,470	19
West Virginia	7,400	20
Indiana	7,369	21
New Hampshire	7,324	22
Oregon	7,270	23
Hawaii	7,208	24
Kansas	7,124	25
Washington	7,096	26
Wyoming	7,062	27
Florida	7,016	28
Georgia	6,954	29
South Carolina	6,921	30
Missouri	6,905	31
Nevada	6,866	32
Texas	6,772	33
Iowa	6,762	34
Colorado	6,730	35
D.C.	6,239	36
California	6,238	37
Montana	6,181	38
Louisiana	6,142	39
North Carolina	6,130	40
Kentucky	6,126	41
Virginia	6,052	42
Arizona	5,907	43
North Dakota	5,873	44
Nebraska	5,842	45
South Dakota	5,794	46
Idaho	5,755	47
Alabama	5,579	48
Oklahoma	5,373	49
Arkansas	5,366	50
Tennessee	5,214	51
Mississippi	5,171	52
British Columbia	5,065	53
Manitoba	5,053	54
Ontario	4,709	55
Utah	4,696	56
Quebec	4,585	57
Alberta	4,290	58
New Brunswick	4,234	59
Saskatchewan	4,125	60
Newfoundland	3,716	61
Nova Scotia	3,671	62
P.E.I.	3,542	63
U.S. Average	7,254
Canadian Average	4,934

http://www.osstf.on.ca/www/issues/edfi/underfunding.html

The Americans are putting almost 50% more money into their education systems than the Canadian provinces according to that data.

According to the TIMSS study, US student performance is on par or slightly worse than Canadian. "[US] eighth-grade science scores are in the same range as those of Germany, England, Canada, and Russia."

Canada was also slightly ahead of the US with 4th and 8th grade students according to same study (different chart in PDF)

Thirdly, this document from the Government of Canada website lists data from the "International Student Assessment" which basically says that on every front measured Canada is just swell and near the top of the world. It's biased.

It appears that Ontario's education spending is low by US standards but par-for-the-course in Canadian terms. (only the territories significantly out-spend Ontario). However, there doesn't appear to be any evidence that this low spending is having any effect on student learning as evinced by the scores.

Having just completed high school it is my experience that there is room for improvement in school funding. From my experience, spending in the classroom is satisfactory. Instead, it is extras like sports teams or janitorial services that are the suffering. The janitors are now doing the job that two used to do. And the quality of extra-curricular activities was curtailed, leading to lower student participation. (perhaps there's a connection with youth obesity?)

Can anyone explain the disparity of education spending between Canada and the US?

[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: prowsej ]

In the USA the spending is probably not distributed as evenly and is likely skewed by the disparities of funding within states.

Oregon, for example, is a state which I think most of us would agree is pretty decently off in terms of educational infrastructure, yet they're in the middle of the pack in the USA.

quote:

---

Why can this not be allowed for the future?

---

Because the Tories and their corporate masters need compliant drones to work in the manufactories and to slavishly adhere to the right wing agenda of enriching the few for the benefit of the few. Thus, their war against public education continues, and the drooling masses believe their lies about education funding and the necessity for ever more cuts.

quote:

---

Instead, it is extras like sports teams or janitorial services that are the suffering.

---

Janitorial services should not be referred to as an 'extra', unless the reference is to a non-classroom expenditure. If you could only see the sorry state our school is in, on a day to day basis. Apparently sanitation is no longer a government priority.

quote:

---

New York's spending is extremely high, yet I think most of the excess is due to the
extremely inflated cost of living in New York City and therefore backing out the inflationary gain
to teacher salaries would show the "true" per capita level.

---

[ September 02, 2002: Message edited by: Ed Weatherbee ]

quote:

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 4, 2002

School board budget struggles reflect provincial funding cuts
"The budget crises experienced by school boards across the province this year shouldn't surprise anyone", the author of a new CCPA study says. "The boards' budget struggles are in direct response to massive cuts in education funding by the Conservative Government since it took office in 1995."

The study, Cutting Classes: Elementary and Secondary Education Funding in Ontario 2002-03, finds that even with the increases announced in this year's provincial budget, between $2.2 and $2.5 billion has been cut from elementary and secondary education funding in Ontario since 1994, the year before the Harris Government took office.

The study's major findings include:

The Government's claim to have increased funding for education in Ontario is valid only if you ignore enrolment growth and cost increases. Adjusting for cost increases since 1994, funding per student has dropped by between $1,100 and $1,250.

Despite the Government's claim that its funding formula only addressed inequities in education funding under the previous system, the study finds that, since 1997, funding per student has dropped by $581, once cost increases are taken into account. The total shortfall for school boards which have lost funding comes to $1.28 billion, while the gain for previously-underfunded boards comes to $114 million.

In fact, what has happened under the funding formula is that funding for all boards has been brought down to a level that, in 1997, was generally recognized as inadequate. Smaller, separate school boards were the worst funded boards in 1997. Now all boards share that same degree of underfunding.

Even on its own terms, the funding formula has failed Ontario students. After allowing for enrolment changes and cost increases, funding allocated to school boards by the province under the formula has declined in every year since formula funding was introduced for the 1998-9 school year.

In the 2002-3 allocation, there was no allowance for cost increases in the foundation grant, which covers basic classroom functions or in the grant for school operations. Despite large and growing waiting lists for services, the special education grant was increased at only half the rate of growth of enrolment and made no allowance for cost increases.

---

The point is not only the objective factors however. What is it about the education system that is creating such negativity by governments?

To me it is a clear question of the Tory elites demanding fealty to the principle of "rule by wealth". They resent the fabulous teacher pensions, the excellent salaries, their upstanding but fundamentally egalitarian sense of what is right, there broad social vision.

They wish to guilt trip the rest of society and make scrambling after the buck the holy of holies.

Learning takes place in a positive "affective environment". You need to feel the love in the world to learn about it and yourself. Its not really the money and yet it is. It is the arrogance of the powerful who, like Mike Harris, hate teachers for petty personal reasons.

[ September 02, 2002: Message edited by: Boinker ]

quote:

---

Apartments in NYC rent for easily $2000 per month, and those are the rent-stabilized ones, never mind the rent-controlled ones.

---

First of all, New York and New York City are NOT the same thing. Are the stats in question broken out between the two (my expectation is that the breakout exists on some state website). If you've ever been in a NYC office building at about 5:00 pm you'll know not to be near the elevator since a tiny percentage of the people that work there actually live in the city.

DrC - my apologies but can you explain the difference between "rent controlled" and "rent stabilized"? Never heard the second term before.

quote:

---

There was really not a great deal of difference between the buying power of an American $1 and a Canadian dollar except in a very few cases i.e. electronics, a very few food items, gasoline.

---

While I'm not sure I agree about the purchasing power of the American vs Canadian dollar, I'll be the first to say that any comparison that applies exchange rates to Canadian and US dollars compensation levels is absolute crap. Spend enough time talking to expats (doesn't matter where they come from or where they live) and they'll all tell you that, at least where cost of living is under consideration, there are only two things that matter: (i) if you go into a grocery store with $100 (or £100 or whatever) what do you walk out with and (ii) how many of those currency units do you TAKE HOME each week (after tax).

By the way, NYC is a particularly screwy case. Not only does it have some of the highest prices in the US it definitely has the highest state and city taxes in the US [having said that the only time in my life that someone ever took issue with my expense account related to a visit to Toronto]. You cannot compare NYC to anyplace, full stop, end of discussion. However, recognizing that the charts quoted refer to New York NOT New York City if you want to make any sort of comparison you do have to break things out between the two.

rent-stabilized = rent is only permitted to increase a certain percent per year.
rent-controlled = rent is fixed for the duration of the tenant's lease/residency/whatever.

quote:

---

Yeah, but NYC has how much of the population of New York state within its perimeter?

---

Don't know. Don't have the slightest idea. Which is exactly why you need the breakdowns. NYC is the worst place I can think of to do any comparisons. Not only do you need to know who lives there and how many kids go to school there you actually have to look at who pays the bill (hence my note re per capita expenditures). Lot's of people from outside the city (or even the state for that matter) pay NYC income tax.