Google Find us on Google+

STATES’ TAXPAYERS CANNOT AFFORD COMMON CORE STANDARDS

Sep 6, 2013 by

CommonCore205x300by Henry W. Burke

(Original Report — 10.15.12)

 

09.05.13 (Updated Links)

INTRODUCTION

 

 

The total nationwide cost for 7 years of the Common Core Standards Initiative is $15.8 billion.  This includes the cost to states of CCS Testing, Professional Development, Textbooks, and Technology.  (Other costs not shown in this report would be the cost to set up and administer a nationalized teacher evaluation system and a national student/educator database.)

 

 

The taxpayers in each of the 45 states (and D. C.) that have committed to the Common Core Standards Initiative (CCSI) will be left “holding the bag” because our federal government with a national debt of $16 trillion cannot come in and alleviate the cost to the states.

 

 

Because it will cost California $2.2 billion to implement the Common Core Standards but California only received $104 million ($0.1 billion) from the federal government for competitive Stimulus awards, the taxpayers of California will have to come up with $2.1 billion out of their state coffers.

 

 

 

With California on the brink of bankruptcy, where would their taxpayers come up with $2.1 billion?  (Please see Table 1 at the end of this report for a complete listing of CCS losses per state.)

 

 

 

Where would other states such as the ones listed below find the extra funding to implement the Common Core Standards?

 

 

Illinois  — $733 million

 

Pennsylvania  — $647 million

 

Michigan — $569 million

 

 

 

The cost for CCS does not suddenly end at Year 7.  The ongoing cost for Year 8 and after will be $801 million per year.

 

 

 

The up-front, one-time cost for CCS implementation is two-thirds (67%) of the Total Cost for 7 years.

 

 

 

This report will focus primarily on the cost of implementing the Common Core Standards in each of the 46 states (45 states plus D.C.).

 

 

*A very helpful compilation of Anti-CCSI Resources has recently been posted at:

http://educationviews.org/anti-common-core-standards-resources-list-4-15-13/

 

 

 

Background on Common Core Standards and RTTT

 

 

Picture this scenario: You are the CEO of a large company.  An outside company offered your company an incentive to persuade you to convert to their system.  Would you change the main system in your company if you knew it would cost more money to convert than the amount of the incentive?

 

 

 

That is what 45 states (and the District of Columbia) did in adopting the Common Core Standards Initiative (CCSI).  Under the U.S. Department of Education’s Race to the Top program (RTTT), states competed for $4.35 Billion in federal grants.

 

 

 

In exchange for the potential funds, states had to drop their own state education standards and adopt the Common Core Standards Initiative  (a.k.a., CCS) — nationalized curriculum standards, nationalized curriculum, nationalized assessments, a nationalized teacher evaluation system, and a nationalized database.

 

 

 

Under the $787 billion Stimulus measure, money was set aside for RTTT funding.  About $3.9 billion was awarded in Phase 1 and Phase 2 of RTTT in 2010; since then, an additional $1.5 billion has been granted.  This brings the total competitive awards to $5.4 billion.

 

 

Cost to Implement CCS

 

 

How about the costs?  One reliable estimate places the nationwide cost of implementing CCS at $15.8 billion.  Another estimate pegs the total CCS cost at $30 billion.

 

 

As a block, the states will spend $16 billion and get $5 billion in federal grants.  Why would the states change to a system that costs several times what they will receive in return?  That does not sound like a very good deal to me.

 

 

When the states were competing for those coveted federal dollars, they were not calculating realistic costs for the conversion.  Theodor Rebarber, CEO and founder of AccountabilityWorks, explained: “States did almost no costs analysis” when they signed on to adopt the Common Core standards.  They sorely needed the money and viewed CCS through the proverbial “rose-colored glasses.”

 

 

If the RTTT grant money were the chief reason that states adopted the Common Core Standards Initiative (the nationalization of the public schools), would they drop out of CCS if the conversion costs were significantly higher than the RTTT funds received from the federal government?  That is a good question.

 

 

This report will briefly cover the federal RTTT awards; however, the major emphasis will be on the cost side of the equation.  I think many states will “get off the national standards train” once the real costs are known.

 

 

When I was searching for reliable cost estimates on implementing the Common Core Standards, I found an excellent White Paper report published by the Pioneer Institute entitled National Cost of Aligning States and Localities to the Common Core Standards by AccountabilityWorks, No. 82 – February 2012.

 

http://pioneerinstitute.org/download/national-cost-of-aligning-states-and-localities-to-the-common-core-standards/

 

 

My report is based almost entirely on this outstanding Pioneer Institute White Paper.

 

 

Quality of the Standards

 

 

I think it is obvious that money was the chief reason that the states gave up their own state standards and adopted the Common Core Standards (CCS).

 

 

People might try to argue that the national standards are an improvement over the states’ standards.  Numerous education experts certainly do not think the Common Core Standards are an improvement over the state standards.

 

 

Two of these experts are Dr. Sandra Stotsky and Ze’ev Wurman.  The Pioneer Institute included these statements on page 4 of the report:

 

 

Pioneer Institute retained experts with knowledge of the subject matter to develop a series of white papers that provided specific recommendations for improvement and, ultimately, questioned whether states with highly regarded standards (e.g., Massachusetts and California) would benefit from replacing their current standards with the new Common Core standards.

 

          Ze’ev Wurman and Sandra Stotsky questioned the academic rigor, as well as a perceived lack of transparency and the accelerated nature of the development process, charging that it didn’t permit sufficient time for public or other expert review and comment.

 

http://pioneerinstitute.org/download/national-cost-of-aligning-states-and-localities-to-the-common-core-standards/

 

On 5.20.10, The Pacific Research Institute released its report on the national standards:

 

 

‘These proposed national standards are vague and lack the academic rigor of the standards in Massachusetts and a number of other states,’ said Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios. ‘The new report shows that these weak standards will result in weak assessments.  After so much progress and the investment of billions of tax dollars, it amounts to snatching mediocrity from the jaws of excellence.’

 

 

http://pioneerinstitute.org/download/the-emperors-new-clothes/

 

Dr. R. James Milgram and Dr. Sandra Stotsky issued another report on the national standards for math and English.  The title best captures their overall sentiments: Fair to Middling: A National Standards Progress Report.  Stotsky determined that the elements were too broadly worded, and explicit goals were not established.  Also the literature standards were deemed to be very weak.  Dr. Milgram made these comments about the Mathematics standards:

The proposed standards are, however, very uneven in quality and do not match up well either with the best state standards or with international expectations.

 

http://pioneerinstitute.org/education/fair-to-middling-high-standards-states-far-exceed-national-standards/

 

 

Texas wisely shunned the national standards movement and devoted considerable energy into writing its own standards.  The Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) adopted excellent standards documents during the last four years for English / Language Arts / Reading (ELAR), Science, Social Studies, and Mathematics.  Many experts deem these four standards documents to be the best in the country!

 

 

Pioneer Institute White Paper Report

 

 

National Cost of Aligning States and Localities to the Common Core Standards, A Pioneer Institute and American Principles Project White Paper, No. 82 – February 2012.

 

http://pioneerinstitute.org/download/national-cost-of-aligning-states-and-localities-to-the-common-core-standards/

 

The Pioneer white paper provides a thorough analysis of the cost of implementing the Common Core Standards.  The report states:

 

          The goal of this analysis  was to develop a ‘middle of the road’ estimate of the ‘incremental’ (i.e., additional) cost of implementing the Common Core standards based, as much as possible, on actual state or local experience implementing similar initiatives.

 

 

Please note that the Pioneer Institute report gives the incremental or additional expenses borne by the states for implementing CCS during the 7-year period.

 

 

I strongly urge the readers to study the Pioneer Institute report.  Also, a wealth of information is included in the Appendices to the Pioneer white paper.  The Appendices provide enrollment numbers and detailed cost breakdowns for every state.

 

 

http://www.accountabilityworks.org/photos/Appendices.Common_Core_Cost.AW.pdf

 

 

Analysis of the Pioneer CCS Information

 

 

My goal has been to utilize the research done by the Pioneer Institute but to go one step further by calculating (1) the cost for each CCS category in each state, and (2) the total CCS cost for each state.

 

 

The Pioneer Institute white paper includes costs for four categories: Testing, Professional Development, Textbooks, and Technology.  The Appendices to the Pioneer Institute report provide dollar figures for Textbooks and Technology for each state.  I derived the Testing costs and Professional Development costs for each state from the Pioneer white paper Figure 2B (Table 5) and the Pioneer report’s assumptions.

 

 

http://www.accountabilityworks.org/photos/Appendices.Common_Core_Cost.AW.pdf

 

 

 

Highlights from CCS Tables

 

 

CCS Loss Per State  (Please refer to Table 1)

 

 

1.  California will lose $2,084 million ($2.084 billion) on CCS implementation.  (Translation: California taxpayers will have to take $2.1 billion from their state coffers to pay for CCS.)

 

2.  Illinois will lose $733 million on CCS implementation.

(Translation: Illinois taxpayers will have to take $733 million out of their state coffers to pay for CCS.)

 

3.  Pennsylvania will lose $647 million on CCS implementation.

 

4.  Michigan will lose $569 million on CCS implementation.

 

5.  New Jersey will lose $564 million on CCS implementation.

 

6.  Indiana will lose $387 million on CCS implementation.

 

7.  Arizona will lose $349 million on CCS implementation.

 

8.  Missouri will lose $336 million on CCS implementation.

 

9.  Washington will lose $331 million on CCS implementation.

 

10.  Wisconsin will lose $313 million on CCS implementation.

 

11.  Six states show a gain (the federal awards are more than the expenditures for CCS implementation and administration).

 

12.  Tennessee has the largest CCS gain, with $145 million; the District of Columbia has the second largest gain, at $76 million.

 

13.  Maryland has the smallest gain, with $7 million.

 

 

CCS Cost Per Student  (Please refer to Table 2)

 

 

1.  In Vermont, the cost per student to implement and administer CCS will be $433.

 

2.  In the District of Columbia, the CCS Cost per Student will be $425.

 

3.  In North Dakota, the CCS Cost per Student will be $424.

 

4.  In New Jersey, the CCS Cost per Student will be $419.

 

5.  In Maine, the CCS Cost per Student will be $418.

 

6.  In New York, the CCS Cost per Student will be $411.

 

7.  In Wyoming, the CCS Cost per Student will be $410.

 

8.  In Rhode Island, the CCS Cost per Student will be $406.

 

9.  In New Hampshire, the CCS Cost per Student will be $404.

 

10.  In Arkansas, the CCS Cost per Student will be $403.

 

11.  The CCS Cost per Student varies from $337 (in Utah) to $433 (in Vermont); the average CCS Cost per Student for the 46 states is $379.

 

 

Nationwide CCS Costs and Percentages  (Please refer to Table 4)

 

 

1.  The largest category is Technology, at $6.9 billion; this is 43% of the $15.8 billion Total Cost.

 

2.  The second largest category is Professional Development, at $5.3 billion; this is 33% of the Total Cost.

 

3.  The third largest category is Textbooks, at $2.5 billion; this is 16% of the Total Cost.

 

4. The smallest category is Testing, at $1.2 billion; this is 8% of the Total Cost.

 

 

 

Nationwide CCS Cost  (Please refer to Table 5)

 

 

1.  The Total Nationwide Cost for 7 years of CCS implementation is $15.835 billion.

 

2.  The up-front, one-time cost for CCS implementation is $10.5 billion; this is two-thirds (67%) of the Total Cost of $15.8 billion for 7 years.

 

3.  The cost for Year 1 operations is $503 million.

 

4.  The ongoing annual operational costs for Years 2-7 are $801.5 million.  [$801.5 million  x  6 years = $4.809 billion]

 

5.  The cost for CCS does not suddenly end at Year 7.  The ongoing cost for Year 8 and after will be $801 million per year.

 

 

 

Competitive Stimulus Awards  (Please refer to Table 8)

 

1.  Average Grant per State (51 States) = $105,430,332

2.  Average Grant per State (First 41 States) = $131,145,047

3.  Average Grant per Student (51 States) = $109

4.  Average Grant per Student (First 41 States) = $121

5.  Median Grant per Student (51 States) = $24

6.  Median Grant per Student (First 41 States) = $33

 

Description                             Total Awarded            Enrollment      Grant Per Student

Total for 51 States                 $5,376,946,918           49,181,237                  $109

Total for First 41 States        $5,376,946,918           44,522,237                  $121

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

 

The main reason that the states gave up their standards and adopted the Common Core Standards was the potential money offered under the Race to the Top program.  Unfortunately, that federal ploy of the “carrot and stick” has worked wonderfully; 45 states (plus D. C.) have signed on to the national standards.

 

 

The quality of the national standards is questionable and unproven.  The Common Core Standards have not been piloted under controlled research standards and have not been internationally benchmarked.  No one knows whether or not students will actually increase their academic achievement by being taught the CCS.

 

 

The 45 states (and D. C.) committed to adopt the CCS before the standards documents (English and Math) were even completed and made public.  Several states blindly dropped their stellar standards in favor of the mediocre national standards.

 

 

The Pioneer Institute published a commendable breakdown of the cost to implement CCS.

 

 

I expanded upon Pioneer’s work to produce detailed CCS costs for every state.

 

 

Most states will lose money when they fully implement the national standards in their state.  California stands to lose a whopping $2 billion on CCS!  Illinois will lose $733 million; and Pennsylvania will lose $647 million.  Those states’ taxpayers will have to make up for the differences from their state coffers.

 

 

The average cost per student for the implementation of CCS in the 45 CCS states (plus D. C.) is $379.  The costs varied from a low of $337 to a high of $433 per student.

 

 

However, the average amount of federal funding granted to the states was $109 per student.

 

 

The decision by these 45 states (and D. C.) to adopt CCS will be terribly expensive indeed!

 

 

The Conclusion to the Pioneer Institute white paper provides these insights:

 

While a handful of states have begun to analyze these costs, most states have signed on to the initiative without a thorough, public vetting of the costs and benefits.

 

          In particular, there has been very little attention to the potential technology infrastructure costs that currently cash-strapped districts may face in order to implement the Common Core assessments within a reasonable testing window.

 

 

I believe that when the states become aware of the high cost of implementing the Common Core Standards, they will seriously want to consider their options.  If a state is truly concerned about protecting the taxpayers, the state will opt out of the costly national standards.

 

 

===========================================

 

TABLES

 

 

Table No.             Description

 

Table 1                CCS Loss Per State

Table 2                CCS Cost Per Student

Table 3                Total CCS Cost

Table 4                Nationwide CCS Costs and Percentages

Table 5                Nationwide CCS Cost (Pioneer Figure 2B)

Table 6                Students and Teachers (CCS States)

Table 7                Students and Teachers (Non-CCS States)

Table 8                Competitive Stimulus Awards

 

 

Table 1– CCS Loss Per State

($ Millions)

 

 

The following table (in millions of dollars) shows the difference between the amount of RTTT grant funds a state received and the total cost of implementation of CCS.  The states with the plus signs have a “gain” on cost minus awards.  All of the other states have a loss and will have to make up the difference out of their state coffers.

 

 

 

State

Abr.

State

Total

Cost

Federal

Competitive

Awards

State Loss

(Cost – Awards)

(+ = Gain)

AL Alabama      281.693        0      281.693
AZ Arizona      374.704      25.263      349.441
AR Arkansas      193.529        9.833      183.696
CA California   2,188.494    104.208   2,084.286
CO Colorado      304.494      73.779      230.715
CT Connecticut      226.215        4.473      221.742
DE Delaware        48.892    119.122     + 70.230
DC District of Columbia        29.331    105.253     + 75.922
FL Florida   1,024.163    905.838      118.325
GA Georgia      646.622    404.691      241.931
HI Hawaii        67.556      74.935       + 7.379
ID Idaho        99.246        3.700        95.546
IL Illinois      799.021      65.610      733.411
IN Indiana      386.623        0      386.623
IA Iowa      192.565        9.035      183.530
KS Kansas      185.515      11.180      174.335
KY Kentucky      256.754        4.999      251.755
LA Louisiana      270.086      30.072      240.014
ME Maine        79.189        7.315        71.874
MD Maryland      327.234    334.284       + 7.050
MA Massachusetts      377.294    310.588        66.706
MI Michigan      591.593      22.730      568.863
MS Mississippi      187.300        7.570      179.730
MO Missouri      362.058      26.531      335.527
MT Montana        56.208        0.520        55.688
NV Nevada      151.051        0      151.051
NH New Hampshire        79.715        0        79.715
NJ New Jersey      563.657        0      563.657
NM New Mexico      128.751      10.727      118.024
NY New York   1,088.436    845.659      242.777
NC North Carolina      576.903    427.081      149.822
ND North Dakota        40.281        0        40.281
OH Ohio      662.048    468.320      193.728
OK Oklahoma      246.387      15.466      230.921
OR Oregon      201.964      19.937      182.027
PA Pennsylvania      705.985      58.840      647.145
RI Rhode Island        58.883      75.000     + 16.117
SC South Carolina      273.045      22.122      250.923
SD South Dakota        49.301      19.684        29.617
TN Tennessee      373.326    518.492   + 145.166
UT Utah      196.306      24.900      171.406
VT Vermont        39.995        0        39.995
WA Washington      365.092      34.330      330.762
WV West Virginia      109.957        0      109.957
WI Wisconsin      331.092      17.952      313.140
WY Wyoming        36.163        0        36.163
  Totals 15,834.717 5,220.039 10,614.678

 

 

Table 2 — CCS Cost Per Student

(Total Cost in $ Millions)  [Cost per Student in dollars as shown]

 

 

State

Abr.

State

Total Cost

Students

Cost per

Student

AL Alabama       281.693       748,889       $376
AZ Arizona       374.704    1,077,660         348
AR Arkansas       193.529       480,088         403
CA California    2,188.494    6,257,082         350
CO Colorado       304.494       832,368         366
CT Connecticut       226.215       563,985         401
DE Delaware         48.892       126,801         386
DC District of Columbia         29.331         68,984         425
FL Florida    1,024.163    2,634,522         389
GA Georgia       646.622    1,667,685         388
HI Hawaii         67.556       180,008         375
ID Idaho         99.246       276,299         359
IL Illinois       799.021    2,104,175         380
IN Indiana       386.623    1,046,661         369
IA Iowa       192.565       491,842         392
KS Kansas       185.515       470,057         395
KY Kentucky       256.754       679,717         378
LA Louisiana       270.086       690,915         391
ME Maine         79.189       189,225         418
MD Maryland       327.234       848,412         386
MA Massachusetts       377.294       956,231         395
MI Michigan       591.593    1,634,151         362
MS Mississippi       187.300       484,467         387
MO Missouri       362.058       917,982         394
MT Montana         56.208       141,807         396
NV Nevada       151.051       428,469         353
NH New Hampshire         79.715       197,140         404
NJ New Jersey       563.657    1,344,785         419
NM New Mexico       128.751       334,419         385
NY New York    1,088.436    2,650,201         411
NC North Carolina       576.903    1,482,859         389
ND North Dakota         40.281         95,073         424
OH Ohio       662.048    1,764,297         375
OK Oklahoma       246.387       653,118         377
OR Oregon       201.964       582,839         347
PA Pennsylvania       705.985    1,783,502         396
RI Rhode Island         58.883       145,118         406
SC South Carolina       273.045       723,143         378
SD South Dakota         49.301       123,713         399
TN Tennessee       373.326       972,549         384
UT Utah       196.306       582,793         337
VT Vermont         39.995         92,431         433
WA Washington       365.092    1,035,347         353
WV West Virginia       109.957       282,662         389
WI Wisconsin       331.092       872,436         380
WY Wyoming         36.163         88,155         410
  Totals  15,834.717  41,805,062       $379

 

 

Table 3 — Total CCS Cost

($ Millions)

 

The column that is particularly significant is the far-right column — Total Cost. This is the Total Cost (in millions of dollars) that each state will have to bear to implement the CCS.

 

 

 

State

Abr.

Testing

Cost

Prof. Dev.

Cost

Textbook

Cost

Technology

Cost

Total

Cost

AL      22.225       91.707       44.643     123.118      281.693
AZ      31.982     100.310       64.482     177.930      374.704
AR      14.247       71.910       28.151       79.221      193.529
CA    185.690     605.938     374.295  1,022.571   2,188.494
CO      24.702       94.735       48.476     136.581      304.494
CT      16.737       84.178       33.132       92.168      226.215
DE        3.763       16.684         7.608       20.837        48.892
DC        2.047       12.300         3.647       11.337        29.331
FL      78.184     354.970     155.810     435.199   1,024.163
GA      49.492     223.838       97.932     275.360      646.622
HI        5.342       22.021       10.784       29.409        67.556
ID        8.200       29.353       16.515       45.178        99.246
IL      62.445     267.411     121.910     347.255      799.021
IN      31.062     120.220       62.427     172.914      386.623
IA      14.596       69.211       28.483       80.275      192.565
KS      13.950       67.006       27.758       76.801      185.515
KY      20.172       85.680       39.328     111.574      256.754
LA      20.504       95.866       39.771     113.945      270.086
ME        5.616       31.427       11.221       30.925        79.189
MD      25.178     112.452       49.594     140.010      327.234
MA      28.378     134.994       56.056     157.866      377.294
MI      48.496     178.986       97.181     266.930      591.593
MS      14.377       63.922       28.961       80.040      187.300
MO      27.243     130.914       53.930     149.971      362.058
MT        4.208       20.316         8.502       23.182        56.208
NV      12.716       42.683       25.557       70.095      151.051
NH        5.850       29.913       11.717       32.235        79.715
NJ      39.909     222.544       79.168     222.036      563.657
NM        9.924       43.880       19.729       55.218      128.751
NY      78.650     414.787     157.198     437.801   1,088.436
NC      44.007     202.844       87.607     242.445      576.903
ND        2.821       16.155         5.689       15.616        40.281
OH      52.359     215.071     104.702     289.916      662.048
OK      19.382       82.411       37.024     107.570      246.387
OR      17.297       55.518       33.932       95.217      201.964
PA      52.929     252.930     106.979     293.147      705.985
RI        4.307       21.946         8.655       23.975        58.883
SC      21.461       90.718       42.110     118.756      273.045
SD        3.671       18.009         7.409       20.212        49.301
TN      28.862     126.212       57.696     160.556      373.326
UT      17.295       49.190       34.563       95.258      196.306
VT        2.743       16.865         5.302       15.085        39.995
WA      30.726     103.208       61.909     169.249      365.092
WV        8.389       39.197       16.233       46.138      109.957
WI      25.891     112.821       50.023     142.357      331.092
WY        2.616       13.838         5.299       14.410        36.163
Totals 1,240.641  5,257.089  2,469.098  6,867.889 15,834.717

 

 

Notes on Table 3:

 

 

1.  Testing — The Testing cost for each state was determined by multiplying the number of students in the state by $29.6768 per student.  My total Testing cost of $1,240.641 million is identical to Table 5 (Pioneer’s Figure 2B).

 

 

2.  Professional Development — The Professional Development cost for each state was determined by multiplying the number of teachers in the state by $1,931 per teacher.  My total cost for Professional Development is consistent with the total number of teachers in the 46 CCS states (2,722,470 teachers).  My total Professional Development cost of $5,257.089 million is slightly under the Table 5 amount (Pioneer Figure 2B).

 

 

 

3.  Textbooks — The Textbook costs for each state were taken directly from the Pioneer report Appendix.  My total Textbook cost of $2,469.098 million is identical to Table 5 (Pioneer Figure 2B).

 

 

 

4.  Technology — The Technology costs for each state were obtained directly from the Pioneer Appendix.  My total Technology cost of $6,867.889 million is identical to Table 5 (Pioneer Figure 2B).

 

 

Table 4 — Nationwide CCS Costs and Percentages

 

 

Cost Category

Cost

($ Millions)

Percentage

Testing      $1,240.641       8 %
Professional Development      $5,257.089     33 %
Textbooks      $2,469.098     16 %
Technology      $6,867.889     43 %
    Totals    $15,834.717   100 %

 

 

Table 5 — Nationwide CCS Cost (Pioneer Figure 2B)

Overview of Projected Costs to Implement Common Core Standards

 

 

Cost

Category

One-Time

Year 1

Operations

Years 2-7 Ongoing Operations

(Annual)

Total of

One-Time &

7 Operational

Years

Testing                       $0   $177,234,471   $177,234,471   $1,240,641,297
Profess. Dev.   $5,257,492,417                     $0                    $0   $5,257,492,417
Textbooks   $2,469,098,464                     $0                    $0   $2,469,098,464
Technology   $2,796,294,147   $326,042,312   $624,258,785   $6,867,889,169
    Total Costs $10,522,885,028   $503,276,783   $801,493,256 $15,835,121,347

 

 

 

Source:  Pioneer Institute report (page 2)

 

 

 

Table 6– Students and Teachers  (CCS States)

 

 

 

State

Abr.

State

Student

Enrollment

Total

Teachers

Students per

Teacher

AL Alabama      748,889      47,492       15.8
AZ Arizona   1,077,660      51,947       20.7
AR Arkansas      480,088      37,240       12.9
CA California   6,257,082    313,795       19.9
CO Colorado      832,368      49,060       17.0
CT Connecticut      563,985      43,593       12.9
DE Delaware      126,801        8,640       14.7
DC District of Columbia        68,984        6,370       10.8
FL Florida   2,634,522    183,827       14.3
GA Georgia   1,667,685    115,918       14.4
HI Hawaii      180,008      11,404       15.8
ID Idaho      276,299      15,201       18.2
IL Illinois   2,104,175    138,483       15.2
IN Indiana   1,046,661      62,258       16.8
IA Iowa      491,842      35,842       13.7
KS Kansas      470,057      34,700       13.5
KY Kentucky      679,717      44,371       15.3
LA Louisiana      690,915      49,646       13.9
ME Maine      189,225      16,275       11.6
MD Maryland      848,412      58,235       14.6
MA Massachusetts      956,231      69,909       13.7
MI Michigan   1,634,151      92,691       17.6
MS Mississippi      484,467      33,103       14.6
MO Missouri      917,982      67,796       13.5
MT Montana      141,807      10,521       13.5
NV Nevada      428,469      22,104       19.4
NH New Hampshire      197,140      15,491       12.7
NJ New Jersey   1,344,785    115,248       11.7
NM New Mexico      334,419      22,724       14.7
NY New York   2,650,201    214,804       12.3
NC North Carolina   1,482,859    105,046       14.1
ND North Dakota        95,073        8,366       11.4
OH Ohio   1,764,297    111,378       15.8
OK Oklahoma      653,118      42,678       15.3
OR Oregon      582,839      28,751       20.3
PA Pennsylvania   1,783,502    130,984       13.6
RI Rhode Island      145,118      11,365       12.8
SC South Carolina      723,143      46,980       15.4
SD South Dakota      123,713        9,326       13.3
TN Tennessee      972,549      65,361       14.9
UT Utah      582,793      25,474       22.9
VT Vermont        92,431        8,734       10.6
WA Washington   1,035,347      53,448       19.4
WV West Virginia      282,662      20,299       13.9
WI Wisconsin      872,436      58,426       14.9
WY Wyoming        88,155        7,166       12.3
  Totals 41,805,062 2,722,470       15.4

 

 

 

Notes on Table 6:

 

 

1.  The Pioneer Institute report Appendix includes a table on student enrollment in each state.  The information was obtained from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES); figures are for the 2009 – 2010 School Year.

 

 

 

2.  The figures in Table 6 were taken from the Pioneer Appendix.  The Appendix lists the Student enrollment for each grade and the total for all grades.  The Appendix table also shows the number of teachers and the students-per-teacher ratio for each state.

 

 

Table 7– Students and Teachers  (Non-CCS States)

 

 

To date, 45 states plus the District of Columbia have officially committed to follow the CCSI.  The following states have not committed to the CCSI: Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia.

 

 

 

State

Abr.

State

Student

Enrollment

Teachers

Students

per Teacher

AK Alaska      131,661       8,083     16.3
MN Minnesota      837,053     52,839     15.8
NE Nebraska      295,368     22,256     13.3
TX Texas   4,850,210   333,164     14.6
VA Virginia   1,245,340     70,827     17.6
  Totals   7,359,632   487,169     15.1

 

 

Table 8 — Competitive Stimulus Awards

(States Ranked by Total Grants Awarded, Per Student)

 

Table 8 emphasizes the Grant per Student.  Please notice how few dollars the states actually received per student; yet to receive the money, states completely aligned their education policies in accordance with the U. S. Department of Education’s requirements.  In other words, for a pittance per student, states gave up control of their schools and put that control into the hands of the federal government.

 

 

Rank

No.

State

Total Grants

Awarded

Student

Enrollment

Grant

Per Student

  1. District of Colum. $105,253,403      68,681 $1,533
  2. Delaware $119,122,128    125,430    $950
  3. Tennessee $518,492,264    971,950    $533
  4. Rhode Island   $75,000,000    145,342    $516
  5. Hawaii   $74,934,761    179,478    $418
  6. Maryland $334,284,329    843,781    $396
  7. Florida $905,838,204 2,631,020    $344
  8. Massachusetts $310,588,393    958,910    $324
  9. New York $845,659,232 2,740,805    $309
10. North Carolina $427,081,423 1,488,645    $287
11. Ohio $468,320,080 1,817,163    $258
12. Georgia $404,690,965 1,655,792    $244
13. South Dakota   $19,683,676    126,624    $155
14. Colorado   $73,778,692    818,443      $90
15. Virginia   $81,070,962 1,235,795      $66
16. Utah   $24,900,456    559,778      $44
17. Louisiana   $30,072,268    684,873      $44
18. Maine     $7,315,000    192,563      $38
19. Oregon   $19,936,755    563,295      $35
20. Pennsylvania   $58,840,473 1,769,789      $33
21. Washington   $34,329,658 1,037,018      $33
22. New Mexico   $10,727,264    330,245      $32
23. Illinois   $65,609,983 2,119,707      $31
24. South Carolina   $22,121,832    718,113      $31
25. Missouri   $26,530,835    917,871      $29
26. Oklahoma   $15,465,616    645,108      $24
27. Kansas   $11,180,442    471,060      $24
28. Arizona   $25,262,809 1,087,631      $23
29. Minnesota   $17,411,488    836,048      $21
30. Wisconsin   $17,952,005    873,750      $21
31. Arkansas     $9,832,689    478,965      $21
32. Iowa     $9,035,380    487,559      $19
33. California $104,207,642 6,252,031      $17
34. Mississippi     $7,569,716    491,962      $15
35. Michigan   $22,730,464 1,659,921      $14
36. Idaho     $3,699,882    275,154      $13
37. Texas   $57,586,897 4,752,148      $12
38. Connecticut     $4,473,481    567,198        $8
39. Kentucky     $4,999,458    670,030        $7
40. Alaska        $835,470    130,662        $6
41. Montana        $520,443    141,899        $4
42. Wyoming                   $0      91,000        $0
43. West Virginia                   $0    282,000        $0
44. Vermont                   $0      89,000        $0
45. North Dakota                   $0      93,000        $0
46. New Jersey                   $0 1,373,000        $0
47. New Hampshire                   $0    190,000        $0
48. Nevada                   $0    458,000        $0
49. Nebraska                   $0    298,000        $0
50. Indiana                   $0 1,044,000        $0
51. Alabama                   $0    741,000        $0

 

 

Sources for this table:  Education Week, “Competitive Stimulus Grants: Winners and Losers,” September 21, 2012; and U.S. Department of Education.

 

http://www.edweek.org/ew/section/infographics/stimulus_competitive.html

 

 

Table taken from “Do Not Let the DOE Nationalize the Schools in Your State,” by Henry W. Burke and Donna Garner, 9.23.12.

 

http://educationviews.org/do-not-let-the-doe-nationalize-the-schools-in-your-state-2/

 

===========================

Bio for Henry W. Burke

 

Henry Burke is a Civil Engineer  with a B.S.C.E. and M.S.C.E.  He has been a Registered Professional Engineer (P.E.) for 37 years and has worked as a Civil Engineer in construction for over 40 years. 

Mr. Burke had a successful 27-year career with a large construction contractor. 

Henry Burke serves as a full-time volunteer to oversee various construction projects. He has written numerous articles on education, engineering, construction, politics, taxes, and the economy.

 

 

Henry W. Burke

E-mail:  hwburke@cox.net

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponPrint this pageEmail this to someone

Related Posts

Tags

Share This

1 Comment

  1. I am a teacher. I was speaking with a wonderful old lady I met about the Common Core. I explained to her how the government planned to have NCLB collapse on purpose, and how they planned from the beginning to take over education. I explained that I had researched the system for the past six years and had learned what the future will bring if we allow the Common core to continue. I explained that it is a smaller scale of Obamacare, used as a trial to see if they could get away with it. She asked me “get away with what?” I answered with passing laws without congressional approval. They did it you know. And they got away with it. Now on a much larger scale they are repeating it again with Obamacare. Glenn Beck commented that bypassing congress had never happened before. It actually has – through Common Core. Nobody voted for it, legislation went past congress and was directed by dictation from the White House. There was no democratic process, just an imperialistic takeover of education that was stolen from the states. She then asked me if I was educating people like her about it. What was I doing to let people know. I told her that that’s why I wrote my book…
    I’m having a promo free download for 48 hours on kindle; It’s not about the money, it is about letting people know about the travesty and dishonesty that is taking place in our country. It is about preserving our rights and our freedoms, and our constitution. It is about letting people know what the Common Core is, why the education system is failing, why so many parents are frustrated, and what we can do to repealthecommoncore.com. Please tell everyone to pick up my book for free on ebook kindle in the next 48 hours. Please think of anyone that can benefit from being educated without the hype.
    It is a free promo for people like you.
    Feel free to share the link with whomever you like.
    But do your part to stop the Common Core from becoming the World Core
    Have a great day
    Mr. Noriega
    (paperback also available at Amazon.com)
    Free ebook 48 hours: http://www.amazon.com/Its-Broken-Dont-Fix-ebook/dp/B00GAP6FHG/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1383253845&sr=1-1&keywords=mr+noriega

    http://www.readersandbooks.com/
    http://www.repealthecommoncore.com/
    “Prisoner of Paradise” http://www.synergebooks.com/ebook_prisonerofparadise.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

UA-24036587-1