Derrow column on public schools missed the mark by using rich district for finance base

I started reading Philip Derrow’s guest column regarding public school problems (June 30) and thought, “this guy gets it.” He wrote “Teachers and staff more than have their hands full just doing that [conveying basic knowledge of literacy, math, natural sciences, history, civics, and the arts].” Then he stopped short and fell off a cliff.

He listed what various school districts spend per student, noting outcomes don’t match these dollar amounts. He concluded with his home school district, New Albany-Plain Local Schools and how they spent less money yet had better outcomes. He neglected to indicate that district has a per capita income double the state average, a median household income double the state average and a poverty rate a quarter of the state poverty rate. In other words, the families in his district have resources that help their children be more successful in school.

You see, he left off the fact that, while some districts may spend more (he used Columbus as an example), he ignores the fact those teachers, and many teachers around the state, have more to do than teach those basics. He ignores the fact many teachers also are social workers, parent figures, counselors, and more, to the kids they teach.

In some sense, he is correct that spending more money on schools may not improve them. Education, like so many issues, is, as they say, complicated. It’s not a matter of spending more money on education. We also need to provide support for mental health, reducing poverty, providing childcare, job skills, housing, and more.

It’s all connected and that is the part Mr. Derrow left off. I also can tell you where we can find about $1 billion in the state budget to help with these issues.

Mark Gooch, Wooster