As a corollary to discussion of local school budgets, we need to address the “cost-per-student” argument.

Aggrieved by property tax hikes that school budgets as proposed would trigger, opponents cite steep increases from years ago in the average cost per student calculated by dividing the overall budget by the number of students in a district.

That calculation ignores the costmultiplier effect of a profit-driven health insurance system, grade-bygrade variations in enrollment, the increased specialization required to prepare students to compete in the 21st century, and drastically heightened demands on public educators to impart socialization skills to students lacking adequate parental involvement.

Scientifically and politically, the “cost-per-student” argument represents simplistic, flawed methodology.

It also sets a poor precedent for other government cost-benefit analyses. Do we really want the already fevered debate over the national debt and spending priorities to devolve further into haggling over mathematical machinations that show not only spikes in the cost per student, but also in the cost per veteran or the cost per retiree?

That’s no way for a nation that claims to be great to measure its values.