Long Island schools: Ahead of a very mediocre pack

Long Island may be New York's strongest case that money matters in education — and also its strongest warning that, past a certain point, more money is not the answer.

Long Island is widely regarded as one of New York's better education regions, exceeding statewide averages across nearly every academic measure.

About 59% of Long Island public school students are proficient in grades 3-8 mathematics, compared with 57% statewide, while approximately 54% are proficient in reading, versus 53% statewide. Science proficiency is also higher, at about 63% versus 51% statewide.

Long Island students outperform New York on Regents exams in English Language Arts, Algebra II, Chemistry and U.S. History and Government. The region's four-year graduation rate is also higher than New York and U.S. averages. 

Sounds great, until you dig deeper.

Long Island's doing better than New York is not a sign of excellence. New York lags behind Mississippi in reading and Alabama in mathematics for grade 4, and it merely ties the national average in grade 8 reading and math. Long Island may look good by New York standards, but the state is a very mediocre benchmark.

How would Long Island compare with Massachusetts, which, unlike New York, delivers chart-topping academic performance and higher SAT scores? While that is unclear, it would certainly be cheaper since Massachusetts delivers all that for just $24,500 per student.

Long Island spends $35,000 per student, above the New York statewide average of $32,000 and almost double the national average of $18,000.

The average full-time teacher salary in Long Island public schools exceeds $118,000 — 18% more than New York's nearly $100,000, not to mention the national average of $76,000. Long Island classrooms have 11.5 students per teacher, compared with the average American public school's 15.4.

Meanwhile, just 39% of Long Island students are classified as coming from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, compared with the statewide average of 60%. The Island's students also show up to class more often than their counterparts elsewhere in New York, though that's hardly a success story. Only 16% of elementary and middle school students and 19% of high school students are chronically absent, compared with statewide rates of 25% and 31%, respectively.

When a region spends nearly double the national average, pays six-figure teacher salaries, staffs classrooms generously and serves a student population with fewer economic and attendance challenges, merely edging past the New York average is not much of an achievement. It is evidence of diminishing returns from ever-higher education spending.

Some districts achieve more with less within the state. Williamsville, Saratoga City, Lancaster and Pittsford all spend well below Long Island's $35,000 per student, while outperforming Long Island across math, reading, science, Regents exams and graduation rates.

Looking beyond New York reveals even more examples along these lines. Mississippi outperforms New York in grade 4 reading and mathematics, even though it spends only about $12,000 per student. Mississippi is also undeniably poorer, with all the socioeconomic challenges that implies.

This suggests that throwing more money at education matters most where spending is low. Where spending is already high — as in New York and Long Island — more money barely buys anything.

New York's problem is not a lack of money. Taxpayers already entrust government with $90 billion for education — enough to run a midsized country. For that price, we should expect one of the best education systems in the world. New Yorkers are not underfunding education; we are under-demanding results.

This guest essay reflects the views of Zilvinas Silenas, president of the Empire Center for Public Policy, and Alyssa Lueberring, an adjunct scholar there.