Re:I simulated California housing and learned about simulators
by forgotmysn on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @06:51PM
(#18019999)
it really varies, its not fair to say that all schools are well or poorly funded. in california, it is dependent on local taxes for example. so palo alto has incredible schools, and LA and Oakland have some of the worst in the country
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:I simulated California housing and learned about simulators
by dnautics on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @09:28PM
(#18020929)
That's not true at all. You should look up the top spending per capita (large)[0] public school districts and you will find NYPS, LAUSD, CPS, and Baltimore school districts among them.
[0] there are lots of high-spending small outliers serving areas with total (adult+child) populations in the < 100k range
Re:I simulated California housing and learned about simulators
by xyzzyz on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @07:25PM
(#18020217)
Palo Alto spends only 10% more than Oakland per student, which itself spends more than both national and state average. If Oakland schools are worst in the country, the funding has minor, if any, impact on it.
Re:I simulated California housing and learned about simulators
by ultrasounder on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @09:33PM
(#18020943)
The difference is "PiE" Partners in education, which is a non-profit voluntary parent-led organization which supports "All" the extracurricular activities plus for in-class aides for all classes.
Re:I simulated California housing and learned about simulators
by aidenn0 on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @07:10PM
(#18020110)
For most of california it is not at all dependent on local taxes. Local taxes only significantly affect "Basic Aid" (i.e. wealthy) school districts, 40% of which are in the Bay Area.
For the rest of the state, the funding is nearly identical on a per-student basis.