New Jersey Schools Face Scrutiny Over High Spending and Low Outcomes
New Jersey’s public school system is under examination as recent reports highlight a significant disconnect between spending and student performance. In 2022, the state allocated an average of $23,496 per pupil, ranking as the third highest in the United States. This figure exceeds the national average by $6,851. Nevertheless, experts argue that this investment does not correlate strongly with positive educational outcomes.
According to a report from the Education Law Center, the relationship between school spending and student achievement is weaker than many might expect. Analyst Chad Aldeman illustrated this point by comparing New Jersey’s spending with student performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for fourth graders. Despite New Jersey’s high expenditure, states like Mississippi, Texas, and Florida—spending approximately half as much—are achieving better student outcomes. For instance, Mississippi’s investment of $12,252 per pupil resulted in significantly higher math scores for fourth graders when adjusted for demographics.
What accounts for New Jersey’s high spending with seemingly inadequate results? Multiple factors contribute to this inefficiency. A report from the National Council on Teacher Quality identifies that many states, including New Jersey, follow a practice of rewarding teachers with higher salaries for obtaining master’s degrees. However, research indicates that teachers with advanced degrees do not necessarily produce better student outcomes. A 2007 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that holding a master’s degree has minimal impact on student achievement.
The NCTQ report further notes that approximately 90% of large school districts provide salary premiums for teachers with master’s degrees, with nearly one-third of states mandating this practice. This trend persists despite evidence suggesting that such policies do not enhance educational results. In Newark Public Schools, for example, the district allocates nearly $3 million annually to cover salary increases linked to advanced degrees.
This entrenched practice poses challenges. Efforts to reform teacher compensation in collaboration with teacher unions and colleges of education have proven difficult. Instead, there may be merit in exploring alternative compensation models that prioritize factors impacting student success. For instance, rewarding teachers based on their effectiveness in fostering academic growth or incentivizing those willing to work in low-income districts could lead to improved educational outcomes.
The NCTQ advocates for a re-evaluation of current spending patterns, suggesting that districts should adopt strategies that align compensation with proven effectiveness. By breaking away from outdated models that reward credentials without improving student performance, New Jersey could potentially enhance the educational landscape for its students.
As discussions surrounding educational funding continue, it is crucial to consider how financial resources can be optimized to ensure that every student receives the quality education they deserve. The pressing question remains: will New Jersey take the necessary steps to transform its approach to funding and teacher compensation to achieve better results?
