In Illinois, how much money a school has — and whether it can offer extras like foreign languages and AP classes, or even pay for basic facilities — depends mostly on where that school is. The difference in annual spending between the wealthiest district and the poorest has grown to $19,361 per pupil, according to the most recent school-spending data and a Chicago Tribune analysis.
It’s a staggering figure even in a state known for wide funding gaps, and Illinois is starting to give the kind of attention to the issue that courts have forced in a handful of other states. Still, even as education reformers call for higher taxes and increased funds for the poorest districts, others point out that more money often doesn’t lead to better schools.
The factors that improve student performance often seem a fuzzy list of hard-to-define assets like good teachers, effective principals, smaller classes, and the right curricula, only some of which are directly related to dollars. But it’s also hard, reports Amanda Paulson, to get away from at least a few cash-related questions. “Just giving more money doesn’t solve the problems of achievement,” says Kevin Carey, director of policy research for the Education Trust. “But in order to run an effective school, you have to have enough money and you have to spend it well. It’s not an either-or situation.”
Read more here