Recent comments had me wondering about the premium we pay to live in areas with "high quality public schools." So I put together some publically available data to see just what that premium is. The weighted average API score is 6.5 for all the zipcodes on a scale from 1-10.
One strategy hubby and I have discussed is buying in an area where housing is less expensive and using private schools. Otherwise we end up "paying" for a quality public education out of our home premium and annual real estate taxes. I plan to run some numbers on a break even scenario at a later date.
Methodology:
Took the weighted average (the number of valid students multiplied by a school's 2006 API score) summed it up and derived a single API school score for each zip code. I compared this with median June 2007 housing prices from DataQuick via Sac Bee to get a better feel for the "quality school" premium. (You can't just average all the schools scores for a zip code because the number of students can vary so widely from school to school.)
It is obvious, that aside from select areas, there is a pretty high correlation between higher median home prices and better schools (median home prices over 400k are highlighted). From what I remember of CA school funding, this is a bit of a catch-22, since schools are largely funded with real estate taxes (so more money to give to schools where real estate prices are higher which gives schools more resources to perform well).
Posts
21 comments:
Interesting data. Unfortunately Sacramento is not easily defined by zip. For instance, 95828 is split between EGUSD and Sac City. Probably the southernmost 1/3 is EGUSD while the northern 2/3 is City.
If your data reflects that split then it's a crime for EGUSD to provide an education with a gap of 4.8 to that zip versus an 8.4 for 95757. But it is possible considering that old town Elk Grove (95624) gets a 7.8 and "north" EG earns a 7.0. Yet zip 95829 (adjacent to 95828) earns a 7.3 and that zip is 100% EGUSD. I suspect the numbers for 95828 are skewed by the fact that parts of that zip include some of the worst parts of South Sac that are covered by Sac. City schools and not EGUSD.
I don't know how you could account for that or how many other zips are split between two different school districts. I think parts of Natomas are also split between different districts.
I agree....but decided to go with a rough proxy.
With that in mind, I probably should have mentioned, I didn't know where the school district lines were, so I went purely by the physical location of the school. In other words, if a school is on the edge of a zip and primarily serves an area outside that zip...it was not reflected in this data.
Yes you are absolutely on to something. Median price vs API will get a lot of correlation, but its not the whole story.
You also might want to correlate new communities vs. old or income vs API. I would ID a place like Folsom as new because most of their school stock, especially high schools, are new and cutting edge. Lot of new homes, lot of young families, lot of money to build schools and lot of PTA money to supplement.
Granite Bay vs Loomis - just as I thought but a surprise. Joking with a realtor friend that the lising she had in Loomis was actually priced $300K high - a "Granite Bay" price. I see I was right. (it sold anyway) What surprised me is Loomis scores are high, also. But there is a premium for Eureka School District (Granite Bay) and your kid IS required to have at least a 3 series Bimmer less that 2 years old.
When you get into the northeast Sac county wedge (East sac to Fair Oaks and Gold RIver) you get San Juan District where there are open boundries, magnet schools and a ton of private schools. No high schoolers in east sac go to a public school in their zip. Big zip codes including schools with "9" and schools below "5". A measurable % of kids in these zips load the private schools. Gold River feeds Rio Amer 20 minutes away, but would you really want your kid that far away?
This will rub the social workers the wrong way. . . how about API vs parental involvement, parental involvement vs income, API ws crime rate . .
Old history but Sac city used to bus their kids around to "blend" the scores.
Recent history a teacher at open house said he had been refusing offers for years to go to Elk Grove but would rather deal with his worst problems of 2 minute tardys and saggy pants (my son) instead of knives and guns (EG). Was worth money and commute time to him.
You all know I'm the biggest tree-hugging liberal, and this data disturbs me but it doesn't surprise me.
If I had it to do all over again, I'd live in the crappiest house in the best school district if I had kids and couldn't afford it any other way. My kids got a public school education supplemented by nearly weekly trips to museums, libraries, historical sites, etc. because pretty much our whole hometown had a very sub-standard public education system.
It is certainly an important consideration and BT has done some good groundwork here.
Oh, and Grizzly Flats? Seems like I remember an article in the Bee a few years ago about how it had the last remaining one-room schoolhouse in the country or something like that. Several grades. And most of the kids were not from financially secure families, either. I'll have to look it up when I get home from work today.
This data pains me as well. Anyone who says family income and wealth doesn't make a difference in the opportunties available to children is completely oblivious to reality.
There is a lot more that can/should be done to explore this relationship (using income, and the right school district info as a start). Previously I would never consider private schools, but looking at the data, it appears that quality public schools aren't really so public afterall, there is a price of admission.
Getting on to soapbox.....The way we fund our public schools needs to be more equitable across the state. As Sippn mentioned, some of it has to do with the age and quality of the facilities. A lot of it has to do with the real estate tax base schools are funded from.
While I don't necessarily believe in affirmative action based on the color of someones skin (because it can build resentment and distrust among ethnic groups), I do belive in socioeconomic affirmative action (which can be a surrogate for ethic group in many areas), or subsidizing poor performing schools with state money (what ever happend to the lotto money that was supposed to be going to the schools?).
Its also why I believe in school uniforms. They take the pressure off lower income familys to buy all the latest styles and fit in(of course you can't avoid it alltogether, the consumerism and status symbols then morph into having the latest technology gadgets and cars).....Stepping down from soapbox.
BT - nice analysis.
API score is a good starting point, but it doesn't represent everything about what your child is going to "learn" in school. You should also consider whether the community that you live in represents your own values. For example, I think a child that goes to school in Davis is going to get a different education than one that goes to school in Placer County, even if the API scores are the same. And a child that goes to private Catholic schools in the city of Sac will likewise come out with different values than the other two. Reading, writing, math, science, etc. are extremely important, but beyond the fundamentals, the other values that we and our community teach our children are almost as important as basic education.
It isn't all about funding, its also about top teachers getting to work where they want, where its safe.
Its about higher income families (average) participating and showing up more - even if they're jerks.
Its about keeping boys interested in schools through competition thats been/being removed.
Davis is unique - it looks public but there are unique funding sources and an education mindset - skews the stats.
We need to make all the facilities better, not just rely on growth taxes/fees to do it to theonly place to find a nice facility is in a new neighborhood.
Has to come from us.
I completely agree that quality teachers and parent involement is very important. I was just relating the data back to real estate =)
But parent involvement is much easier when mom (or dad) stays home. Or when parents are around (some of these kids don't have parents involved cause parents are too busy trying to make ends meet).
Not to say it can't happen. I was a latch key kid. One of the few kids in my honors classes that didn't come from an upper middle class family (for the area). I was validictorian and managed to pick up enough scholarships (some need and some academic) to pay for a UC education. Unfortunately it has left me with a pretty big chip on my shoulder cause I had to work twice as hard to get to the same place as all the kids who came from money.
I was talking about this today with a co-worker who has a kid in Rancho public school district. Her kid is in band, some athletic thing that I can't remember, and is also getting college credit for several classes (she says they award it after the 1st year completed in college so that even advanced placement kids are considered Freshmen). We agreed that even with a crappy API, if a kid is motivated and the parents are involved, things can work out.
She said she had her kid in private school for a year, and the kid hated it and begged to go back to public school -- not sure why.
Whats the goal? Getting a higher quality education or getting into a UC?
Had an interesting discussion with a parent last night about UC taking higher classrank/lower GPA/lower API over higher GPA/lower classrank/higher API.
I've found this discussion as interesting as the data. I, too, am troubled about the state of public education and the fact that no one acknowledges that wealth does make a difference. I even noticed this in law school in the difference between how "legacies" approached law school versus us first generation law school students. Legacies knew about the importance of competing for law review, how to study for exams, the importance of securing class outlines from upperclassmen, the significance of judicial clerkships down to the judges who had the most clout, which judges were "feeder judges" to get you to a U.S. Supreme Court clerkship, etc. Their parents had already walked the path and could tell them what they needed to do to separate themselves from the pack. We, those of us whose parents only finished high school, more or less remained part of the pack unless we lucked up on one of these more informed souls who was kind enough share what they knew. Social class and social connections cemented by wealth do indeed make a difference. It's like invisible privilege -- if you don't know these people, you don't even know how much you don't know in terms of academic and career advancement compared to them. And, worst of all, you start to convince yourself that they're smarter than you are when, in fact, they're just better connected.
I've wondered whether there should be a national K-12 curriculum, or at least a superior college preparatory K-12 curriculum posted online (Hey Google -- are you reading this?) along with all the materials necessary (Aren't most of the classics in the public domain, anyway?) so that economically disadvantaged but highly motivated students can even up the score, so to speak. I don't know about you, but when I went to college, it was the first time that I realized that most students who were admitted to my college had had the benefit of summer reading lists all throughout their private school educations. I had never heard of summer reading lists until I was admitted to college and given one.
When we realize that inequities in public education put the entire nation at a competitive disadvantage, perhaps we'll wake up and change things.
watchingthebubble, that was an interesting post. I think this country has practically given up on the idea that a person should be able to increase their standard of living through education, or may it's just that a good education is necessary, but not sufficient. Connections seem to be more important today than they were 20 or 30 years ago. I think it's because we've become more divided as a society. The term "American" has less and less meaning today. We aren't really a nation of Americans anymore, we're a world of corporations.
BT,
If you are really intested in how family econ affects child development - I can give you quite the reading list >; )
If mildly interested in journalist work, look for the terms "family Stress model" and "economic hardship" in Blackwell or another journal search engine.
Back to the local area -
When looking at these areas with high scores, you also need to look at how many households have a stay at home parent. When discussing this topic with child development professors and teachers, they say it always comes down to parent involvement. Stay at Home Parents, if they are committed to lots of interaction with the child makes a bigger difference then the school.
I know way too many teachers at the Jr and HS level. Teacher salaries are pretty flat across school districts and the good teachers get priced out out of the better neighborhoods all the time so they leave.
Sadly, I've lost many of these friends to the midwest in the last 3 yrs. The plan was to have one parent stay at home while the other worked, even in cases where both parents were teachers.
Any school in the area will have a staggering amount opportunity if the child is motivated.
Then just to muddy the water further, never underestimate resiliency. Children are not that fragile! (a soapbox lecture for another time >; )
"priced out of neighborhood schools?" Most of teachers cross town, I don't see any of them driving crummy cars, seen several newer teachers buy homes and start families, not bad.
Watching - I thought we were talking about wealth?
With my kids not pulling 4.2 GPAs for the UC's I'm thinking JC's try again.
Sippin,
your mileage seems to always vary, strangely consistently so. Pardon me if I smell a pattern to your spin
The teacher know either bought in 99 - 00 or have left the state. The only exception is 1 couple who are both turning to teaching after their previous occuptions dried up (software and management). They are trying to not loose the house.
The number 1 reason every person I've spoken with over the last 6 yrs as to why they are relocating or looking to relocate out of the state is because of CoL, specifically housing prices.
Now to make it more interesting, lets add in Univ professors being priced out as well. Recruiting is hell for UC since no one seems to want to move here with the wages UC offers once they look at the home market. CSU system has got to have it much worse.
When top researchers tell you that they are glad they bought in 01 because otherwise they'd have been priced out of the area, you know you have a real problem.
Sippn,
I was talking about wealth. Wealthy people are better able to educate their kids because they know what their education should include, hence my law school example. They have higher expectations for educational institutions, whether public or private, and for their kids. Oftentimes poor folks simply don't know what their kids should be studying or the levels to which they should be holding educational institutions accountable. When you have the insider's knowledge about education that wealthy people often do, that advantage, when pressed into the service of educating your own kids, is oftentimes more valuable than the wealth they have.
WTB - I had the exact same experience as you in undergrad and graduate school. You don't know you are missing something if you don't know its there! The connectons and "grooming" make a huge difference, especially when it came to the workforce and landing good quality jobs. Which then perpetuates the income inequality.
Gynster - Funny you should bring up the job mobility issue...its the subject of my next post...unfortunately I don't have much time to elaborate at this moment.
@ cmyst
I was talking about this today with a co-worker who has a kid in Rancho public school district.
The Rancho district somewhat emulates the EGUSD. Full disclosure requires me to report that the full name of that Rancho district is the Folsom Cordova Unified School District.
I suspect that it mirrors some of the EGUSD results based on zip.
I'm not certain whether any of the zips in FCUSD include parts of SCUSD or not. I do know for a fact that some EGUSD zips are split between poorer areas of SCUSD and EGUSD. I suspect there is also some overlap in FCUSD and SCUSD. Also between GJUHSD and SCUSD.
@sippn
Recent history a teacher at open house said he had been refusing offers for years to go to Elk Grove but would rather deal with his worst problems of 2 minute tardys and saggy pants (my son) instead of knives and guns (EG).
Care to report the school where this teacher is currently employed versus the school he/she's been offered in EG?
I strongly suspect that they're not currently employed at Kennedy, Johnson, Burbank, AL, or :gasp: even McClatchy. Could they be working in one of the charter schools?
If so, that would explain a lot. I would imagine any teacher at a charter school would be far happier working with motivated, pre-screened students than any other teacher working in regular public high schools in any district. Also, that they'd be more highly compensated since the teachers are also pre-screened.
Otherwise, I think two minute
tardies and your son's sagging jeans should be the least of an engaged teacher's worries working in most public high schools in the US right now, especially in most SCUSD high schools. As you pointed out previously, many zips in the city send their children to private
schools with very good reason.
Jesus, 20 years ago when I was in high school in a rural area (think Mayberry) there was a LOT more for an engaged HS teacher to be concerned about. If they cared.
@ sippn:
You cast, I bit. : )
Now, answer the question please?
Which wonderful SCUSD school employs this teacher and which awful EGUSD school were they offered?
@ sippn
When you get into the northeast Sac county wedge (East sac to Fair Oaks and Gold RIver(sic) you get San Juan District where there are open boundries(sic), magnet schools and a ton of private schools. No high schoolers in east sac go to a public school in their zip.
From the SJUSD site:
The district serves the northeast area of Sacramento County, with 73 schools in Sacramento, Arcade, Arden, Carmichael, Citrus Heights, Fair Oaks, portions of Folsom, Gold River, and Orangevale.
SJUSD claims three "open" schools but these are alternative schools, not open to all students from other districts. The SJUSD also calls its boundaries thusly:
http://www.sanjuan.edu/files/filesystem/documents/Boundary-Descriptions0708.pdf
Basically, starting east and north of the American River to the Placer County line.
To me, as a former resident of East Sacramento, once you cross the river past CSUS or the Folsom Blvd southern boundary, or Alhambra Blvd, ito mid-town, it's no longer East Sacramento. I know, I know, people southwest of Folsom but before I50 claim E. Sac. as their residence and they have some value to their claims. But to me, E.Sac. is always bounded by Folsom Blvd, Alhambra Blvd, and the American River which creates a near 90% angle at E. Sac. Even River Park is not technically E. Sac. to me, it's River Park. But quibbles aside, there is nothing that says anyone's description of East Sacramento falls into the SJUSD system. It's SCUSD or private schools (which are plentiful in this neighborhood if you like Catholic magnet schools).
Once you cross those boundaries, you are not in E. Sac., you are in Arden, Arden-Arcade, or whatever lovely and expensive neighborhoods you might live in. They're just not East Sacramento anymore.
Perhaps I misunderstood your boundaries. If you'd said east of East Sacramento, then I'd have no quarrel with most of your statements.
-signed Ex-East Sacramento snob.
Sorry, I just love this neighborhood and would love to live here as a homeowner rather than the renter I was when I lived there. The sad fact was, if you had kids, they were either going to private school on your dime or going into one of the worst districts of the public school system in the entire area. Sippn is right, the city used to bus kids everywhere to try to even out their test scores. You either paid for private school or moved out of the distict to a better school system.
-anectodal evidence of the stability of this neighborhood even with horrible public schools will be saved for another time if appropriate. (I just cut this rant in 1/2). Sorry y'all.
Sorry - working yesturday - pesky day job.
Talking about SJUSD. Thats east of "east Sacramento" in eastern Sac county for those of you who in the Flat Earth Society who have never crossed that great divide - the American River.
You know, they actually developed the hop fields into Campus Commons.
You can almost transfer your kid into any middle or high school in the district from within the district, but magnet schools like Mira Loma get kids coming in from El Dorado County, surprisingly, not being outdone by Jesuit who's attendees are from as far away as Auburn and Fairfield - thats just insane.
Interesting notes anony.
Post a Comment