Does Higher Tuition Result in Lower Student to Staff Ratios? Not Necessarily, It Turns Out!

By Dr. Harry Bloom, Founder and President, Benchmarking for Good, Inc.

At a time when inflation and perceived value are on everyone’s mind, Benchmarking for Good decided to examine the relationship between student to staff ratios and tuition levels since staff costs tend to drive the majority of school costs and much of a school’s perceived value. This initial article, which will be part of a series on this topic, will focus on the largest private day schools while subsequent articles will examine these issues for schools of different sizes and types.

Why This Is Important

This issue is key because our quantitative and qualitative research among tens of thousands of parents and thousands of students indicates that a key perceived benefit from private education is increased indvidualized attention that brings out the very best in every student. A more beneficial student-to-staff ratio can potentially translate into smaller class sizes, a broader range of programs offered, and more specialist support.

Our Data Sample: Large Private N/K-12 Day Schools with Enrollment of 1,500 or More

Our analysis will focus on the twenty largest NAIS member schools for which enrollment, staffing and tuition data were available in NAIS’ invaluable DASL database. These schools will be segmented into tertiles based on their tuition levels:

Tertile 1 schools had a median tuition level of $26k; Tertile 2 schools, $31k; and Tertile 3 schools, $42k.

Bottom Line: Do Higher Tuitions Result in Predictably Lower Student to Staff Ratios? Answer= “Mostly,” But with Notable Exceptions, Particularly Among Middle Tuition Schools. Let’s examine the data and its implications.

1. Student to Total Full Time Equivalent Staff Ratios did indeed improve by 10% for Middle Tuition level schools relative to Lower Tuition level schools. Notably, however, the improvement in student to staff ratio between Middle and Higher Tuition schools was much more marginal at 3%, relative to a 35% tuition differential between the two groups of schools.

2. Student to “Teaching Duties” Staff Ratio. Once again, there was a ten percent reduction in this critically important student to staff ratio when moving from Lower Tuition to Middle Tuition levels. However, the incremental student to staff reduction from Middle to Higher Tuition levels was extremely modest at 2%.

3. Student to “Instructional Support” Staff Ratio. Instructional Support staff includes teaching assistants, counselors, and coaches and accounts for a major part of the incremental benefits of a private school experience. In this instance we have an unexpected outcome as student to staff ratios actually increased significantly for Middle Tuition schools relative to Lower Tuition schools. Higher Tuition School ratios were the lowest of the three groups as would be expected.

4. Student to “Administrative” Staff Ratio. In the case of students relative to Administrators, once again, Middle Tuition schools’ student to staff ratio actually increased relative to that of Lower Tuition schools. This raises a question about the value of the incremental tuition charged and where the resources were focused if not on creating a more personalized staff to student experience. While certainly some administrators do not play a direct value-added role relative to a student or family’s experience, many do, and having a lower student to staff ratio has the potential for increasing the quality and effectiveness of the school ecosystem for the family. Higher Tuition schools demonstrated a very modest 3% reduction relative to Lower Tuition schools despite a 60% higher tuition level.

Summary and Implications

In summary, relative to our expectation that increased tuition would translate into lower, more intimate student to staffing ratios, we found that this hypothesis held for the Total Staff and Teaching Duties staff ratios but broke down among Middle Tuition schools for the Instructional Support and Administrative ratios. This raises important questions about whether students attending Middle Tuition schools are getting as much value as they should for tuition paid relative to Lower Tuition schools.

The indicated action emerging from the analysis for leaders of Middle Tuition schools should be to carefully assess their goals for the student experience and their success in achieving those goals as well as the magnitude of staff resources realistically required to attain those goals. The risk Middle Tuition schools face, particularly in tougher economic times, is that families will migrate to schools with lower ratios or to schools whose lower tuition plus a “good enough” ratio seems more attractive than theirs.

Additionally, while Higher Tuition schools generally emerged with a relatively favorable story relative to staffing ratios compared to lower tuition schools, the magnitude of their advantage relative to Lower and Middle Tuition schools was quite slim on the key ratio of Students to Teaching Duties staff suggesting that they too should look hard at their desired student experience outcomes, the degree to which they are achieving them, and the quantity of staff resources required to achieve them. This is particularly the case in light of their 35% tuition premium relative to Middle Tuition schools and their 60% tuition premium relative to Lower Tuition schools.

We welcome your comments on this article and Dr. Harry Bloom invites you to set up a time to speak with him about this key topic via this link. Benchmarking that focuses on enhancing relative value is critically important and Benchmarking for Good welcomes an opportunity to help your school and associations to which it belongs use benchmarking’ s capabilities to their greatest effect.

# independent school #staffing ratio #student to teacher ratio #administrative structure