Some things in education return, year after year, like clockwork. So the dawn of 2021 produced the latest iteration of the Fraser Institute’s perennial report on “Education Spending in Public Schools in Canada.” Everyone in Canadian K-12 education attuned to public policy, from coast-to-coast, knows what to expect as regular fare from one of our most conservative, cost-conscious think-tanks.
Public spending, so the narrative goes, is invariably excessive, wasteful, and spread around without much focus on meeting targeted needs. Spending more on public education does not produce better student results and, in the case of the Maritimes, spending rises while student enrolments have declined over the past five years. Those regular monitoring reports also come complete with supporting statistics –in the form of data, bar graphs, and tables.
Flipping through Fraser Institute reports, you can almost hear provincial education ministers, superintendents, and educators muttering something to themselves: “Lies, damned lies and statistics.” That’s a rather snide comment about the persuasive power of statistics, and particularly the kind used to mount or defend weak claims and arguments. While often attributed to former British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli, Earl of Beaconsfield (1804-1881), the phrase originated much earlier and only came into popular usage from the 1890s onward.
That was the phrase that first popped into my mind when reading the recent Atlantic Canadian spinoff from the Fraser Institute report for 2021. “Spending on public schools in Maritime Canada on the rise, despite largest declines in enrolment nationwide.” So read the Nova Scotia media release produced by Tegan Hill and Alex Whelan. What, one might wonder, is new about that pattern?
A year ago, the Fraser Institute 2020 report on Education Spending was mostly a yawn because it did beat the same old drum. Spending on public schools was up by 9.2 per cent per student from 2012-13 to 2016-17, a five-year period, and student numbers had dipped a little, by from 2 to 3 per cent in the Maritime provinces. Looking closer at the numbers, however, those increases averaged 1.8 per cent a year overall, and, at most 2.4 per cent a year in Nova Scotia. Throughout the period, it might be added, Nova Scotia consistently ranked 7th among the provinces in per-student spending, reported at $13,135 per student in the final year, 2016-17. Student enrolment in N.S., over the final year, actually began to edge upward to 118,566, province-wide.
The most recent Fraser Institute report actually did say something new and that may get lost in the whole debate, waged – for the most part—by ideologues holding fast to fixed positions. Something began to happen in 2017-18 that changed the trajectory of education spending in Nova Scotia and, to a lesser extent, in New Brunswick.
Total spending on Nova Scotia public schools, the 2021 Fraser Institute Report found, increased from 2013-14 to-2017-18 by 19.0 per cent to $1.7 billion, an increase of $279 million. Student enrolment did drop slightly over the five years by 1.7 per cent, but that was not the big story. Instead of ranking 7th among the provinces in education spending per student, it now ranked fourth at $14,726 per student. That’s well above the national average of $13,798 in 2017-18.
More was being spent on Nova Scotia public education and student performance, measured on international, national, and provincial tests, has plateaued or slightly declined, like many other provinces. It’s difficult to be definitive because, since 2015-16, provincial tests have routinely been reformatted, postponed or cancelled altogether, making it difficult to reliably track student results. That’s a recurring pattern and one that renders problematic the usual claims of declining standards.
What’s really new in Nova Scotia is the recent cost drivers for education spending. Two major program initiatives with infrastructure costs, Inclusive Education ($15-million per year since 2017-18), and Pre-Primary Program expansion/completion (2016-17 onward), are factors and produce recurring expenditures, mainly in the form of new education sector jobs. From 2017-18 onward, some 449 new positions have been added in K-12 education.
Few question the wisdom of moving forward with Inclusive Education for learning challenged students and universal Junior Primary for 4-year-olds, and those cost pale in significance when considering the real cost drivers in the extraordinarily high recent Nova Scotia education spending increases, all in the pension, benefits, and contract services domains.
Human resources costs represent the largest share of total education expenses, but under the public sector wage restraints, salaries and wages remained at or below the cost-of-living. Supply and services costs, including contracted work, reached $394 million in 2017-18, representing 22,9 per cent of all expenditures. Together, the employer share of pensions and fringe benefits totaled $324 million, up significantly over the previous five years.
Pension and benefits costs incurred by the K-12 system are running well ahead of all other expenditures, averaging more than 10 per cent increases per year. Carrying a monumental provincial liability, defined benefit education pensions cost $91 million to sustain in 2017-18 (representing 5.9 per cent of all spending) and addressing the problem continually gets deferred by the government and the education unions. Back in 2017-18, employee fringe benefits, including retirement allowances, were 13.5 per cent of all expenditures, double the national average, and up 31 per cent over five years.
Capital spending in K-12 education is hard to track because so much of the procurement and spending is financed over long-term financing arrangements. Some provinces simply report the annual costs paid in principal and interest on long-term contracts, disclosing only the annual carrying costs to the system. In the case of Nova Scotia, the provincial budget for 2020-21 will absorb $265.6 million in costs for capital projects. The deferred financing will cover the cost of renovating 16 schools and for the purchase of 16 Public-Private Partnership schools from developers at the conclusion of 30-year lease agreements.
Conservative business and public policy tanks are prone to “cry wolf” when wading into the regular waves of government spending, particularly in K-12 education. It would be tempting to dismiss the Fraser Institute’s 2021 Education Spending report on similar grounds. That would be a mistake, given the recent surge on Nova Scotia education spending, commencing before we were all hit with the pandemic.
Why are education policy reports from business-oriented think-tanks like the Fraser Institute routinely ignored or brushed aside in Canadian K-12 education? Why does so much education reporting and analysis focus almost exclusively on trumpeting new programs proposed to meet every conceivable need and boasting of dozens of new hires? Do human resource costs in K-12 education escape critical scrutiny? Who’s monitoring and overseeing rising human resource costs, particularly pensions and benefits? Should such dollars be focused more on meeting student needs in the classroom?
Educhatter 
Before we had reports from the Fraser Institute pointing out illogicalities in public education spending, we had earlier studies. But these others did not deal with contradictions of unjustified spending and call it “spending beyond”.
“Canada has increased education spending in public schools beyond what was required to account for enrolment and price changes. This means there was a real increase in per-student spending in public schools in Canada, which is contrary to the general perception that education spending in public schools has been cut.” (p 19, Full Report, FI)
No, these other reports call it “wastage”. Printed in 1971 we have Wastage in education – a world problem, produced as part of studies and surveys in comparative education by UNESCO.
Too bad people critiquing education today are s-o p-o-l-i-t-e ! Practically obsequious !
We need more people with a political science bent, commenting on power and politics and how decisions are really made in education. There are very few political scientists who comment on education — giving it a wide berth. Probably scared. Perhaps George Abbott, former Minister of Education for BC (2011-13) who recently obtained his PhD in Political Science will do some reveal. I look forward to reading his book: Big Promises, Small Government. Hope he details those years when the BC Ed Plan was hatched during his term.
I recall a CD Howe report that concluded overall that the jurisdictions that have the highest teacher compensation, had the best results. Other data has shown that the ROI for educational spending is 1: 1.5 meaning the more you spend, the better off society becomes. Of course it’s always possible to misspend in big institutions, but it’s actually hard to spend too much.
This info summarized by Annie Kidder gives the general progressive POV that education spending is the best investment a society can make.
https://peopleforeducation.ca/our-work/public-education-its-the-best-investment-we-can-make/
Education reform is a dud! Those involved might readily agree. Professor Seymour Sarason, himself at the forefront of education reform efforts, predicted in 1965 that all attempts to reform schools would fail. Wikipedia notes: “His prediction has an accuracy of 100%!”
Anyway, a Political Scientist in an online interview supports that view and said that only an “exogenous” — external — power could provide a jolt for needed reform.
The pandemic is certainly an external disruption to business as usual. With its effects, it’s foreseeable that government budgets will really feel the financial crunch, with education funding being squeezed. This is where Fraser Institute Reports will be useful in assessing return on investment and if increasing education costs, especially with dropping enrolments, are justified.
And let’s not forget that bulge of baby boomers just entering retirement — further impacting health budgets.
Don’t be surprised when people start talking about bare bones education.
Interesting, that in 2015, amidst BC Ed Plan’s trials, a sterling committee of representatives from stakeholder groups was charged with developing proposals on assessment. Their report stressed how proper assessment would help produce graduates who would be: 1) Literate; 2) Numerate; 3) Curious and critical thinkers; 4) Leading a healthy lifestyle; 5) Able to connect to society and community.
Great! But here’s the rub. Sarason again, dubious about reform, warned against the “intractability” — inflexibility — of public school systems. The World Bank in a recent report, “What Will It Take?” echoed the frustration re intransigence of education systems — chiefly noting that reading is “ a key foundational skill and a gateway to learning”, needing priority attention.
What’s to be done?
What is to be done, indeed?
One issue with the Fraser Institute is the role of numbers in describing reality. Numbers are a necessary but not sufficient condition for improving quality. And if quality in medicine (as we see today) is complex and prone to mistakes imagine quality learning and looking into the student mind.
Slogans like “sage on the stage” and “guide on the side” are easy to remember but they are both distortions of what actually happens in real classrooms.
Sarason noted the role of context and societal influences on achievement. Math scores are easy pickings. Critical thinking and looking seriously on how we adapt to social media are also important as events in the US sadly show.
If we focus just on numbers and assume that increases in spending are unjustified, what are the implications of reducing salaries and benefits for teachers? Do we really want schools like in those US states that spend much less money? We can see the consequence of underfunding long term care facilities.
Public education is as complex as it is important. Our world was very different 150+ years ago when public ed was created. I truly wish discussions about education caught up to current realities.
I second that emotion.
It’s heartwarming to read American news about school choice. With the pandemic showing that health costs are going to be a priority for many years to come, other social spending costs are being probed for belt-tightening. Education is being examined — not only for efficiencies, but because alternative models of delivery are popping up and gaining favor at the legislative level.
And the question is being asked: Should the government be the provider, in near-monopoly terms, of education to children? In such a top-down, bureaucratic system, each layer creams off their share before the beneficiary, the child, gets any benefit from the ed dollar.
This latest article from Education Week notes progress on the school choice front.
https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/covid-19-may-energize-push-for-school-choice-in-states-where-that-leads-is-unclear/2021/01
In the first weeks of 2021 one-third of American state legislatures are considering such moves as:
– tax-credit scholarships
– education savings accounts (ESAs)
– increasing public charter schools
– support for microschools (learning pods, pandemic pods . . .)
– Covid special relief funds to assist families with computers, etc. for online learning
In political science language we can see legislatures shifting to “governance” of education, which is funding, regulating, overseeing and auditing education providers. Through family choice provisions all kinds of new innovations can develop, good programs will thrive and poor programs will be defunded.
Of course, there are detractors, including the militant Badass Teachers Association, not a union, but active in all states, with organizational capacity and reach. They oppose choice, accountability and testing.
In Canada, we need more information on family choice in education and not be detracted by those who may rise in fervent, self-interested opposition.
It is NOT heartwarming to read American news on this. Standards in the 50 states vary so much. Students who have high school qualifications in some states go to universities in other states woefully unprepared, according to teachers and university instructors at universities with whom I collaborate. American society is terribly polarized and Doug’s following comments are sadly accurate. My final piece of evidence on the health of American education consist of two words- Donald Trump.
Actually I believe the tide is going out on school choice. It has proven to be no better tan public school and widens class and race divisions. Some red states may continue carry on to save money but America will continue its decline if it goes this route. Confronted with the evidence that vouchers and charters do not improve results Betsy DeVos said “there are other reasons to support choice (religion). Every country that goes the choice route (Sweden, Chile) actually declines in PISA rankings.
Pandemic effects will certainly hit government budgets hard. Health costs, while always a priority, will balloon out of all proportion compared to all previous models. It’s certain that education budgets will be closely scrutinized — along with other files — for cost-cutting.
It’s important for the education public to be conscious of changes that might be considered. And, it’s also critical for the public to be involved. Families, of course, are highly impacted by education decisions. But taxpayers are also nervous — about tax matters and accountability questions. Statistical reports about bloated, top-heavy education bureaucracies certainly do not engender confidence in the future.
Studying how education decisions have been made in BC in the last half century, I’m struck by how amateurish it all seems. We’ve had more Ministers of Education, more snake-oil salespersons, and more utopian experiments than anywhere else in Canada.
In all these years, however, a constant does stick out: Somehow it’s come to be, those in the system swear they have a “social license” to do the things they do. The public is kept unaware, or exhausted by “pro forma” exercises. The BC Ed Plan, apparently now “mothballed”, is an example of stealthy back-room planning with never any real evidence-based justification for new directions or any pent-up demand.
And now a New York Times article — Make Schools More Human by Jal Mehta — highlights BC as a “leading international jurisdiction”! https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/23/opinion/covid-schools-vaccine.html
What if we did get hordes of edu-tourists — like Finland used to get — coming here? What have we got to show? Heaven help us!
What I’m getting at is this — that education decision-making must be based on good evidence-based practices, on trustworthy surveys and authentic consultation with the public. The U S has many examples of surveys being used to bring forth reform programs and legislation. It’s a little bit encouraging that in one recent paper about BC there was mention of the Overton Window feature. That is, there is an understanding, a consciousness, of the political possibilities from a range of policies. Regarding education, scenarios may range somewhat like this:
– All students must attend government schools
– Private schools prohibited
– Independent schools allowed, no public funding
– Independent schools, charters, state schools, choice programs — public funding
– Homeschooling, learning pods certified, public funding
– No government schools or public funding of education
It might be a good idea to get going some solid surveys and some structured discussions about alternatives regarding the education dollar. It might very well become a scarce resource!
The notion that education funding should follow the child has been around before. Taxpayers know school funds are for the “public good”. As long as the public believes students are becoming educated to be good democratic citizens, they’re not too fussy how that happens.
During these pandemic times we have seen more interest in choice programs. The experience of online learning has opened a whole new field of education delivery. As well, parents have been looking more closely into homeschooling and forming cooperative groups.
In the United States the issues are becoming more focused as frustrations grow due to teacher union problems and system unresponsiveness. A recent article in Forbes mentions the growing school choice movement https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertpondiscio/2021/01/31/a-new-reform-coalition/?sh=276716f06f4f
Mention is made of the Overton Window concept. This is one way in which education policies are widened to entertain a broad range of political possibilities. These discussions may be enabled by media opinion pieces, think tanks or surveys. Such a process would bring forth popular — and not so popular — ideas such as vouchers, tuition tax credits, private tutoring refunds, distributed learning, special payments to enable all to access online learning, etc., etc.
In case the idea of payments per student seems like a foreign idea, let’s remember the two instances, in recent memory, where per day payments were at issue. In BC, in 2014, families were paid $40/day during a teacher strike. They were paid $520 and at that rate if the strike continued, a yearly sum of $7,200 would probably be sufficient for parents to start organizing schools. Something considerably less costly than funding the usual ed bureaucracies! In Ontario last year the government proposed $60/day during an imminent teacher strike.
Yes, it’s about time to consider school choice possibilities in Canada.
I don’t see the same thing. We have just had the second confirmation study that when public school students move to voucher schools their test scores actually go down.
The war over whether vouchers and charters raise education standards is over. They don’t, but as Betsy DeVos said in her fallback position, ” there are other reasons people want choice”. BDV means religious schools or in a broader context, values
The war over two curriculum background documents the 1619 curriculum widely circulated by the NYT centers USA history on slavery and the post slavery struggle for equality. The conservative counter argument the 1776 curriculum literally white washed American history as a heroic republican story of achievement, onward and upward
The 1619 vs 1776 fight is central to the education wars. They have become a bitter, no compromise ” woke vs patriot” power struggle for the hearts and minds of the young.
This has become the new front in the privatization struggle.
Of course, the very act of choosing something is based on values. Example: What do we value in a car? Safety and reliability? Warm seats? Showy appearance? Whatever. The point is that we’re most likely to choose a car that fits with our lifestyle and values. The same approach should apply to education of children.
Betsy deVos, former US Secretary of Education, did work hard during her 4 years to promote more education choices from the angle of values — not necessarily for academic advantage.
But, we do know that there are actually very few choices concerning schools. Unless a family can afford a private school, the family has basically just two choices — the public schools or homeschooling.
The pandemic, as a wholly external force, has imposed unprecedented challenges both to the institution of public schooling and to the values people assign to education. One may wonder what the ratio is that defines “schooling” as opposed to “education”? Paul Bennett states in his essay that “Public spending . . . is invariably excessive, wasteful, and spread around without much focus on meeting targeted needs.” Richard Elmore, a noted professor of education who has just died, insisted that the institutional structure of schooling was totally wrong; that “current approaches do not match brain science and the newly emerging networked world”.
One complication concerning “values” is that politics rears its nasty head. It is said that “conservatives” value family choice as a way to get an education that fits their child, while “progressives” maintain that social cohesion is so vital that only universal public schools will ensure “the public good”. Yet, a recent article stresses that it is progressives themselves who need school choice. https://projectforeverfree.org/what-the-poet-taught-me-progressives-need-school-choice/?utm_source=PFF+Subscribers&utm_campaign=8822b7c3b8-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cd136f5352-8822b7c3b8-266613953
Unfortunately, we can go on and on with discussions like this. What I think we really need is some first-rate extensive surveys to probe parent and public views on priorities expected from the taxpayer-funded education dollar. I strongly believe that insiders in the game have appropriated far too much of the conversation about education.
Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump did incredible damage to the cause of “school choice” because up to Trumps election there was some bipartisan elements to choice. During 2016-20, almost all Democrats realized , if these two are for vouchers and charters, then I’m against them.
What role has education, public and private, had to creating the dystopian society (or societies) we have in the US, with Qanon and the like? I have no definitive answer, even with my US experiences. The tensions among 50 states and the federal government over centuries does not help. Canada, relatively speaking is one of the better educators, but not perfect. If I must choose, then I choose Canada.