FPG News

More Money Spent on Regular High School Instruction Directly Related To Student Achievement; Teacher Compensation has Largest Effect on Student Performance

The amount of money a high school spends on regular classroom instruction is directly related to the achievement level of its students—the more money, the greater the achievement. Of regular classroom spending, higher teacher compensation expenditures has the largest effect on student performance. The findings were presented on April 2nd to the North Carolina State Board of Education by Gary Henry from the Department of Public Policy and FPG Child Development Institute (FPG) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Charles Thompson from the College of Education at East Carolina University.

The researchers found that the amount that high schools spend on regular classroom instruction has a sizable impact on student learning outcomes. All other things being equal, an increase of $500 per pupil spent on regular classroom instruction in a school is associated with an increase of nearly half a point on students’ average scores on End of Course examinations. The differences in spending on regular classroom instruction between high schools serving high-poverty populations and those with the fewest low-income students are about $300 per pupil.

“Our findings strongly suggest that more resources targeted to the low performing schools and more effective use of existing resources will be needed to offset the effects of lower levels of student’s prior performance and, ultimately to improve performance in chronically low-performing high schools,” said the study’s lead researcher and FPG Fellow, Dr. Gary Henry.

It is not just about how much money you spend, but where you spend it. Schools receive a certain amount of money per student, known as the total per pupil expenditure. They then decide how to spend that money on everything from special education to supplemental programs to regular classroom instruction. It is how the money was allocated that proved important as the total per pupil expenditures had little effect. So even though the high schools with the largest percentage of low-income students spent on average about $1,500 more total per student than high schools serving the lowest percentage, they allocated only $300 more per pupil to regular instruction.

Expenditures for regular instruction include teachers’ salaries, supplementary pay, benefits, and bonuses; salaries for teachers’ assistants, tutors, and substitutes; instructional supplies and textbooks; and library or media services. More detailed analysis indicates that higher teacher compensation expenditures had the largest effect on student performance.

“The higher teacher salaries may allow the schools to hire and retain teachers that have important but unmeasured strengths, or the additional salary may motivate those who receive it to perform at higher levels than similarly qualified teachers who do not receive the extra pay,” according to Henry. Expenditures for supplies and media services do have a positive effect, albeit smaller. The findings indicate that materials and supplies make a difference when measures of teacher quality such as experience and education are taken into account.

Perhaps surprisingly, higher levels of expenditures on supplementary instruction (outside the normal school day and week) and student services (guidance, psychological, health, speech, and related services) are actually associated with lower student test scores.

Charles Thompson, professor of educational leadership at East Carolina University, discussed the distinctly different leadership in schools with high concentrations of poverty who were “beating the odds” and those labeled as chronically low performing. “In the high schools that are ‘beating the odds’, we observed principals who instilled a strong sense of commitment to student performance and educators who held each other responsible for students’ success on the End-Of-Course exams. In these schools, the educators found creative ways to offer students multiple opportunities to learn the material within a caring and orderly environment.”

The study was commissioned in 2006 by North Carolina Governor Mike Easley to examine if low-performing schools were using existing resources in the most effective manner.

Read the full report.