|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
What Would Real Teacher Appreciation Look Like?
There are a few ways a district could show appreciation for its teachers. The first would be to follow Education Code EDC §41372 and spend 60% of the general budget on teacher salaries. To achieve this goal, there are three solid ways to appreciate teachers (and one cheap one):
- A) hire fewer teachers, pay them way above average, but have larger classrooms (25-30)
- B) hire more teachers, pay them around or slightly above average, but have smaller classrooms (15-20)
- C) hire even more teachers, pay them below average, but have the smallest classrooms possible (10-15)
- D) violate the Education Code and just go with flowers and chocolate
Let’s investigate how various school districts treat their most essential educational resource – their educators and instructors- but also look if they have the necessary funding.
How much education funding does the world need?
Let’s zoom out a little and compare countries. Earlier, we looked at data provided by the California Department of Education. Today, we are asking the National Center of Education Statistics (NCES) for their input.
This is how much OECD countries spent on educating their children in 2019:
- $25,600: Luxembourg
- $18,000: Norway
- $15,900: Austria and South Korea
- $15,500: United States of America
- $14,000 – $15,500—If RCSD were a country, it would still fit into this tier of countries, along with Iceland, Belgium and Australia.
- $12,000-$14,000: In this category, we find countries like Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, Denmark, Canada, France, Finland, and BRSSD if it were a country.
All these countries (and Redwood City) spent above the OECD average ($11,300) in 2019; the rest spent below. There are still many countries in that group that have solid educational systems with far less per-student spending, e.g., Japan, Poland, or Estonia.
Source: Education Expenditures by Country
Worldwide, many countries provide outstanding education with $6,000-$8,000 in classroom spending (aka Education) and $10,000-$12,000 to cover all administrative expenses and more. With $14,000 per student funding, an education system (or school district) can get sidetracked and often start focusing on unnecessary and damaging luxuries.
Public Education Funding per State
Which states spent most on education? For this section, we have data from 2023/24.
- New York: $25K per-student-funding
- DC: $23K per-student-funding
- RCSD: at $21K (tied with New Jersey, Vermont, and Connecticut)
- Massachusetts: $19K
Further down, somewhere between Maryland and Washington, but above California, we would find BRSSD with $14,500.
If Redwood City School District (RCSD) were a State, it would deserve a Bronze Medal for funding. But plenty of states have far less per-student funding and far better educational outcomes. This means these states and schools have far better and more successful per-student spending than RCSD has.
Despite outstanding funding, nobody would accuse New York City or Washington, D.C. of having great school districts. So again, it doesn’t look like size—or, in this case, money—would matter too much in the decision to run a good or failing school district.
Source: Per Pupil Spending by State 2024
Public Education Funding in San Mateo County
We already compared our two Redwood City Elementary School Districts. How about we bring our neighbors to the North and South? In terms of per-student funding, we have the following order:
- Menlo Park City School District (MPCSD)
- Redwood City School District (RCSD)
- San Carlos School District (SCSD)
- Belmont-Redwood Shores School District (BRSSD)
| School District | RCSD | BRSSD | SCSD | MPCSD |
| Total Revenue | $148M | $65M | $55M | $71M |
| Revenue per Student | $21,914 | $15,775 | $19,255 | $25,673 |
| Total Expenditures | $194M | $57M | $45M | $66M |
| Deficit/Surplus | -$46M | +$8M | +$10M | +$5M |
RCSD has the most overall total revenue, the second most per-student funding, and the biggest total expenditures. In fact, RCSD is spending so much that it is the only district with a deficit here. The story goes that RCSD is so poor because they have the most amount of English Learners and Title I schools – schools with a high percentage of low-income students. So, let’s give the district the benefit of the doubt about this deficit for two or three more paragraphs (or however long I can pretend that that story was true).
Teacher Appreciation Type A – Higher Salary but bigger Class Size
RCSD does have the largest classrooms—at least in its low-income schools with English Learners (EL). But do teachers get a higher salary package in return?
| School District | RCSD | BRSSD | SCSD | MPCSD |
| Revenue per Student | $21,914 | $15,775 | $19,255 | $25,673 |
| Succeeding in Math and ELA | 37% and 46% | 77% and 81% | 78% and 80% | 78% and 80% |
| Percent of Budget for Teacher Salaries | 28% | 39% | 34% | 37% |
| Average Teacher Salary | $87,469 | $96,143 | $94,397 | $124.226 |
MPCSD seems to win this round. They pay the highest salaries. Despite lower funding, BRSSD and SCSD pay more than RCSD. RCSD overall does not look very appreciative in comparison – they only spend 28% of their budget on teacher salaries – this number should be closer to 50%-60%. Despite telling the community for years that they have to adjust teacher salaries because of Bay Area prices, they only pay the state average. The other three districts pay above the state average – so do many other districts along the Peninsula. And paying below the Bay Area average might be the main reason RCSD has complained about “Teacher Shortage” in the past – a made-up crisis well-paying districts never seem to have.
Also interesting is that despite different salaries and different per-student funding, the education outcomes in San Carlos, Belmont and Menlo Park are almost identical. RCSD’s educational results, however, are unacceptable.
Appreciation Type B – Average Salary and Average Class Size
Every single district in the Bay Area has enough funding to fit into this category. Every single elementary and high school district can afford to have classrooms for 15-20 children. And they could still afford to pay each and every teacher the average California salary and a nice Bay Area adjustment on top of that.
This graph does not look too good for RCSD. Despite having the highest percentage of UPC children, RCSD spends the least amount of Total Revenue on these children.
Adding up all the salaries of employees working on the education side, RCSD seems to be spending only 42% of Total Revenue on Education. The district that should have the highest spending on Education and the lowest on Administration has switched priorities.
| School District | RCSD | BRSSD | SCSD | MPCSD |
| Total Revenue | $148M | $65M | $55M | $71M |
| Revenue per Student | $21,914 | $15,775 | $19,255 | $25,673 |
| Instructional Expenditures(% of Revenue) | $62M (42%) | $33M (51%) | $41M (45%) | $42M (59%) |
| Administration, Support, Operations, others(% of Revenue) | $48M (32%) | $17M (26%) | $16M (29%) | $20M (28%) |
However, even the high spending on the Administration can’t explain the deficit of $46M. The district must have a few more “hobbies.” But what other hobbies can a “poor, cash-strapped” school district possibly have? And where does the additional education funding for low-income students really go?
Appreciation Type C – Average Salary but really small Class Size
A district like this would have plenty of new, young teachers still earning below-average salaries with no Bay Area adjustment. However, having an abundance of teachers would lead to very small classrooms (10-15 students). It would be easier for new teachers to start out in the profession. Educators could favor this option since it would allow them to switch the classroom from ‘Schooling’ and ‘Presentation’ to ‘Education’ and ‘Interaction’. It would be a less stressful environment, benefitting the mental health of students and teachers. Fewer teachers would burn out in a school district like this.
Unfortunately, we already know that RCSD is not going to win this round either. They have unnecessarily large class sizes and still pay their teachers just the California average. However, we still have to look at the numbers and compare RCSD to the other three districts.
Again, the graph does not look great for RCSD. Right from the start, the column for ‘Instructional’ is the smallest and the column for ‘All Others’ is the highest at RCSD. And a high ‘All Others’ is never, ever good news for your educational outcomes.
| School District | RCSD | BRSSD | SCSD | MPCSD |
| Student Enrollment | 6,346 | 3,945 | 2,700 | 2,705 |
| Employees | 686 | 242 | 248 | 338 |
| Classroom Teachers | 286 (42%) | 175 (73%) | 136 (55%) | 171 (51%) |
| Instructional Aides | 111 (16%) | 1 (0%) | 23 (9%) | 49 (14%) |
| Other Staff | 289 (42%) | 66 (27%) | 84 (34%) | 118 (35%) |
So, it looks like RCSD has a huge number of employees, which leads to a higher employee:student ratio than many other districts. RCSD has the highest percentage of instructional aides, which sounds good. But even when combining the numbers of classroom teachers and instructional aides, that basket is still the smallest compared to the other three districts.
The low number of teachers combined with the high number of instructional aides still results in the fewest number of employees working on the education side (per EDC §41372). Only 58% percent are instructional employees; if we look at classroom teachers only, the number shrinks to 42%, dwarfed by BRSSD’s 72%.
Education Budget
RCSD has chosen neither option A nor option B, and it doesn’t qualify for option C either. But it still has the largest Total Revenue and the second highest per-student funding and yet still spends the least on real classroom Education. So what Other hobbies could a “poor, cash-strapped” school district possibly have that leads to this huge deficit ($46M) and an enormous number of non-instructors?
And NCES also provides that answer.
| School District | RCSD | BRSSD | SCSD | MPCSD |
| Construction | $71M | $0.5M | $0.2M | $1.5M |
| Debt Interest | $11M | $4.6M | $3.6M | $1.7M |
RCSD’s budget compares more favorably to your typical Real Estate company than most educational institutions. When voters approved Measures S and T, they basically gave “Local Control” carte blanche to do all kinds of unnecessary real estate projects with little to no impact on education. Every employee working on the facilities side is taking away a position on the education side – hence the large classrooms and corresponding educational outcomes in Redwood City. Just recently, RCSD “had to” lay off more teachers because some real estate projects require more employees working in administration and finance. This is a situation where “Defunding the School District” would have been clearly the better choice for voters.
RCSD is overfunded and more money won’t fix those structural issues, they just enhance them. The huge Debt Interest is only growing with more bonds.
Post.Scriptum.
Is RCSD a poor school district? The answer is No. But is all that ‘bounty’ benefitting our teachers? And that seems to be an even bigger NO. Even if Teachers get flowers and chocolate this week, it’s more likely those are coming from parents. I’m not sure if this school district leadership would want to afford taking so much funding away from the real estate side of their business.
Editor’s Note: The views and opinions expressed in all blog posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Redwood City Pulse or its staff.
