Crossfire - October 2009

Is Nevada’s education system underfunded?

YES! or NO!

Daniel Klaich vs. Patrick Gibbons


Daniel Klaich is the chancellor for the Nevada System of Higher Education, and argues that the answer is yes.

    State funds to public institutions are declining in most states, including Nevada. As a result of Nevada’s economic downturn, for the first time in many years, the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) saw a decline in state funding for the 2010-2011 biennium.  I am grateful to the State Legislature for its historic ongoing support of higher education.  That support has enabled the system to have a low tuition and fee policy.  In a state where the college participation rate for low-income families is only 14.9 percent, that policy has made sense and such state help is critical.  We have an obligation to provide educational opportunities to every Nevada citizen, and adequate state investment in our higher education system enables us to do so.
    The problem facing Nevada today is that as its population has grown, so has grown the student demand for higher education.  Now state resources are indeed strapped.  The higher education system that was adequately funded for many years now finds itself underfunded for the number of students we serve and unable to graduate students in a timely manner.  The opportunity cost to the state and students is great.  
    Investment in higher education is clearly an investment in Nevada’s future and its citizens.  Higher education is a key contributor to every robust state economy and plays a critical role in developing human capital, creating new knowledge, and building a high quality of life.  But like everything else in this day and age  it costs money.  There is no way to sugar coat that fact.  
    Let me paint the bleak picture of our current reality, a reality that will only get worse without continued strong state investment in higher education.  If you are an employer in this state seeking to hire individuals with an associate or bachelor’s degree, good luck.  Since Nevada is the 49th state in the nation in the number of citizens possessing those degrees, you will likely have to spend the money to recruit outside Nevada, and that search for educated employees may or may not be successful.
    NSHE can produce the graduates and professionals necessary to meet the growing demands for an educated workforce in Nevada and spinoffs from our research will support new businesses. But it depends on what you want.  Underfunded – yes for the number of students we need to graduate.  Under-visioned – I hope not.

Patrick Gibbons is an education policy analyst at the Nevada Policy Research Institute and argues that the answer is no.

    Albert Einstein allegedly defined insanity as doing the same thing repeatedly while expecting different results. Today, demanding more increases in education spending clearly qualifies. Though many intelligent, well-intentioned individuals assert that education is underfunded, the facts say otherwise.
    Between 1960 and 2005, Nevada’s inflation-adjusted, per-pupil spending on public K-12 education increased by more than 150 percent, notes the U.S. Department of Education. Quality, however, failed to improve.
    Today, math and reading scores for Nevada’s fourth graders rank in the bottom 10 among the states, according to the nation’s education report card — while the U.S. Department of Education ranks Nevada’s high-school graduation rate last in the nation, at just 56 percent.
    Higher education is very similar. The education establishment argues that “investing” more in higher education would mean higher-skilled workers in the state, drawing more business investment and boosting the economy.
    However, Nevada’s net migration over the past decade exceeded the combined net migration of all the 38 states that have a top-50 public university, as ranked by U.S. News and World Report. And research studies show a gold-plated higher education system does not effectively net economic growth.
    Nevertheless, Nevada is heavily invested in higher education already. But the return on that investment has been poor.
    According to The Education Trust, the University of Nevada, Reno by 2006 was spending $30,290 per pupil, 62nd-highest in the nation, while the University of Nevada, Las Vegas spent $16,537, ranking 214th. For the 558 public universities included in the database, the median spending level was $14,320 — including classroom instruction, academic support, student services, administration, scholarships, research and more.
    Despite their above-average expenditure levels, UNR and UNLV yield extremely poor results. The six-year graduation rate at UNR is just 46 percent, while at UNLV it is 41. Embarrassingly, just 14 percent of students at UNR and 13 percent at UNLV graduate on time (within four years).
    Nevada has many intelligent, dedicated and hard-working educators, but lacks the incentive frameworks to allow them to succeed.  
    Increasing education expenditures has not improved quality in the past, and it won’t improve quality in the future. Instead, meaningful, innovative reforms are the solutions we need.