Fact!

According to many studies, the relationship between money and student achievement is actually weak.  In a recently published book The Money Myth: School Resources, Outcomes, and Equity, UC Berkeley professor of higher education, W. Norton Grubb, explores the link between public school funding and educational outcomes.  Among the weakest predictors of educational outcomes are those that can be bought simply by more money: higher teacher salaries and smaller class sizes.  Grubb identifies resources that cannot simply be bought, such as tracking policies, as among the strongest predictors.

A closer look at the statistics shows that lower ranking school districts tend to spend considerably more per pupil than higher ranking districts.  One example is the low-performing District of Columbia Public Schools in Washington, DC where last year, per-pupil spending was close to $16,000.

A comparison of PUSD's per pupil spending with nearby districts also clearly demonstrates this fact.  Last year, Pleasanton spent almost 7% more than San Ramon.  Yet PUSD's quality ratings (API Targets, Math and Language Proficiency) are slightly lower than San Ramon's.  The similarity is due to the two communities' socio-economic alikeness.  By contrast, compared to Dublin schools, PUSD's spending is very close (2% less) yet Pleasanton's quality ratings are considerably higher.