Site search
sponsored by
Home
News
Great news for Nevada! America's Best Cities and States: The Annual Gold Guide to Leading Rankings, recently published by the National Policy Research Council, has concluded that our little bit of heaven is a hotbed of business opportunity and economic ecstasy. The "Gold Book's" findings resulted from a review of data from a variety of surveys, studies and similar sources. They note that Nevada's unemployment rate is 4.3% as opposed to a national rate of 5.6%. Statewide taxable sales soared by 16% over a year earlier capping 21 straight months of increases (did we REALLY need that tax increase, Governor?). Tourists are flooding to both Las Vegas and Reno at significantly increased rates over just last summer. As a result of all this the "Gold Guide" ranks Nevada as the NUMBER ONE STATE in providing a favorable business climate for entrepreneurs and small businesses . . . which, as everybody knows, constitute the backbone of the Republican Party.
But there's more good news, friends. The June issue of New York's Men's Journal magazine ranks Reno as number eight among best small cities examined and rated by that magazine. Key factors were our location, lots of sunshine, Lake Tahoe and the high desert. So there's also a smiley face for the environmentalists who, some say, are the backbone of the Democrat Party. Bipartisan bliss! Nirvana! And if you harbor any nagging doubts about the optimism overwhelming Northern Nevada just check the residential real estate market. Homes for sale in Reno are gone before they ever hit the multiple listing service while Incline prices are ratcheting inexorably upward to unheard of levels.
So is there any news that would please the pessimists? Yeah, there is. The same edition of the "Gold Guide" says Nevada ranks last in education among the 50 states because of low per-pupil spending. The Guide says Nevada spends a mere $6,481 annually per pupil which is $1,686 below the national average of $8,167 based on data they obtained from the teacher union . . . the National Education Association (NEA). NOW WAIT JUST A DARN MINUTE. I don't want to sound like Johnny one-note (I preached on this in last week's column) but why do they measure the excellence of schools by per pupil spending when the only appropriate measure is student achievement.
The NEA's web site lists as "Good News About Public School in Nevada": "Math scores up 14% since 1996". "SAT scores have risen faster than the national average since 1996". "The number of schools offering advanced placement classes has increased 37% since 2000". "The number of teachers earning National Board certification has increased 400% since 2000." "Nevada is among the best in the nation in percentage of teacher certification." "Foreign language programs are among the nation's best."
In a section titled: "Yet Challenges Remain," the NEA says: "Nevada ranks 4th worst in the country in total taxable resources spent on public education." AHA! Not only is Nevada not last in the nation the NEA's ranking was based on their figures that show Nevada spends only $4,300 per student. Seems to me that if they are saying elsewhere that Nevada spends $6,481 per student that someone in that organization has been reading "How to Lie With Statistics."
But let me cut to the chase. Whichever of the NEA's figures is correct let's concede that Nevada probably spends less per student than the national average. After all we don't have a state income tax, housing prices are moderate and costs of living in Nevada are affordable so teachers' salaries (84% of education spending in Nevada) don't have to be as high as in New York or New Jersey.
When you consider the good things the NEA says about Nevada schools as well as the fact that Nevada's per pupil spending is below the national average I believe that the only correct and logical conclusion is that Nevada produces a quality education for less money than most other states. And that's a good thing. Why couldn't the "Gold Guide" say that?
Here's proof of my hypothesis. The state with the best student achievement is . . . Utah. The state with the lowest (50th of 50) per pupil spending is . . .Utah.
Take that, big spenders!
Jim Clark is president of the Incline Village/Crystal Bay Republican Advocates [formerly Republican Men's Club] and a vice chair of the Washoe County Republican Party. He also serves as chair of Independent Incline.
But there's more good news, friends. The June issue of New York's Men's Journal magazine ranks Reno as number eight among best small cities examined and rated by that magazine. Key factors were our location, lots of sunshine, Lake Tahoe and the high desert. So there's also a smiley face for the environmentalists who, some say, are the backbone of the Democrat Party. Bipartisan bliss! Nirvana! And if you harbor any nagging doubts about the optimism overwhelming Northern Nevada just check the residential real estate market. Homes for sale in Reno are gone before they ever hit the multiple listing service while Incline prices are ratcheting inexorably upward to unheard of levels.
So is there any news that would please the pessimists? Yeah, there is. The same edition of the "Gold Guide" says Nevada ranks last in education among the 50 states because of low per-pupil spending. The Guide says Nevada spends a mere $6,481 annually per pupil which is $1,686 below the national average of $8,167 based on data they obtained from the teacher union . . . the National Education Association (NEA). NOW WAIT JUST A DARN MINUTE. I don't want to sound like Johnny one-note (I preached on this in last week's column) but why do they measure the excellence of schools by per pupil spending when the only appropriate measure is student achievement.
The NEA's web site lists as "Good News About Public School in Nevada": "Math scores up 14% since 1996". "SAT scores have risen faster than the national average since 1996". "The number of schools offering advanced placement classes has increased 37% since 2000". "The number of teachers earning National Board certification has increased 400% since 2000." "Nevada is among the best in the nation in percentage of teacher certification." "Foreign language programs are among the nation's best."
In a section titled: "Yet Challenges Remain," the NEA says: "Nevada ranks 4th worst in the country in total taxable resources spent on public education." AHA! Not only is Nevada not last in the nation the NEA's ranking was based on their figures that show Nevada spends only $4,300 per student. Seems to me that if they are saying elsewhere that Nevada spends $6,481 per student that someone in that organization has been reading "How to Lie With Statistics."
But let me cut to the chase. Whichever of the NEA's figures is correct let's concede that Nevada probably spends less per student than the national average. After all we don't have a state income tax, housing prices are moderate and costs of living in Nevada are affordable so teachers' salaries (84% of education spending in Nevada) don't have to be as high as in New York or New Jersey.
When you consider the good things the NEA says about Nevada schools as well as the fact that Nevada's per pupil spending is below the national average I believe that the only correct and logical conclusion is that Nevada produces a quality education for less money than most other states. And that's a good thing. Why couldn't the "Gold Guide" say that?
Here's proof of my hypothesis. The state with the best student achievement is . . . Utah. The state with the lowest (50th of 50) per pupil spending is . . .Utah.
Take that, big spenders!
Jim Clark is president of the Incline Village/Crystal Bay Republican Advocates [formerly Republican Men's Club] and a vice chair of the Washoe County Republican Party. He also serves as chair of Independent Incline.
