Your thesis is that we are having poor educational outcomes due to poor funding of schools. Based on the latest numbers I could find, funding per pupil was $15,591 in 2022. Because of "cost disease", I would hypothesis that it makes sense to adjust for GDP per capita (a teacher in Poland might be just as good as a teacher in America but paid but be paid ~4x less and the primary cost in education is labor). GDP per capita in 2022 was $77,246. So per pupil we spend ~(15,591/77,246) people worth of labor on their education or .201 of a person.
I notice Norway is on the list ahead of us and I often see them being called out as a country with policies and outcomes that are more close to ideal (although to be honest Asian countries dominate the list!) so let's look at their ration..
In 2023 Norway spend $18,207 per pupil while gdp was 87,961 so the ratio there was (18,207/87,961) or .206 of a person. You might say this is higher and it's true but.. it's very close to us and if you use 2022 numbers Norway comes in dramatically below .201.
Right off the bat you will notice that Utah spends the least amount of money per pupil and has the second highest average score while New York has the highest spend and comes in 23rd place.
---
I recognize that the data I found is not in any way comprehensive, but do you have any data which indicate that I'm wrong and the issue really does have to do with underfunding?
I think it's possible that your numbers of amount spent per pupil don't take into account the total benefit to that pupil towards their education. If Norway say also helps comparatively more with housing, food, and medicine, then that might also factor into the educational outcome of their pupils, especially if it means parents can spend more time helping their children.
Anecdotally the smallish town I grew up in had good public schools, and many of my teachers lived in nice homes nearby the schools they taught at. The HCOL city I currently live in has (supposedly) poor public schools and one of the issues I hear is that teachers can't afford to live anywhere near them and don't want to commute hours to work, so they have high turnover. If housing weren't so expensive the public schools here might be better while appearing to spend the same amount on education.
Your thesis is that we are having poor educational outcomes due to poor funding of schools. Based on the latest numbers I could find, funding per pupil was $15,591 in 2022. Because of "cost disease", I would hypothesis that it makes sense to adjust for GDP per capita (a teacher in Poland might be just as good as a teacher in America but paid but be paid ~4x less and the primary cost in education is labor). GDP per capita in 2022 was $77,246. So per pupil we spend ~(15,591/77,246) people worth of labor on their education or .201 of a person.
I notice Norway is on the list ahead of us and I often see them being called out as a country with policies and outcomes that are more close to ideal (although to be honest Asian countries dominate the list!) so let's look at their ration..
In 2023 Norway spend $18,207 per pupil while gdp was 87,961 so the ratio there was (18,207/87,961) or .206 of a person. You might say this is higher and it's true but.. it's very close to us and if you use 2022 numbers Norway comes in dramatically below .201.
---
Another way to analyze things would be by US state while hoping that states would have more in common than countries and knowing that states have dramatically different spending budgets per pupil (see here https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/per-pupil-s... the difference is three fold from top to bottom). https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/education/p... shows math attainment by state.
Right off the bat you will notice that Utah spends the least amount of money per pupil and has the second highest average score while New York has the highest spend and comes in 23rd place.
---
I recognize that the data I found is not in any way comprehensive, but do you have any data which indicate that I'm wrong and the issue really does have to do with underfunding?