PHILADELPHIA — Debate questions Tuesday about public school funding in Pennsylvania exposed big differences in how the three candidates for the Republican nomination for governor to challenge Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf would approach or fund public schools.

To a great extent, it appeared that two candidates — Paul Mango and Scott Wagner — would be unwilling to devote more money to public schools, in stark contrast with the third candidate, Laura Ellsworth. Steering children toward alternatives, such as charters, played heavily into their responses, and they clashed in a similar fashion over eliminating school property taxes.

The debate came as a lawsuit working its way through the courts contends that Pennsylvania state government has failed in its school-funding obligation to students, a case that could eventually have a dramatic effect on the shape of public education in the state.

The questions — including one about whether Pennsylvania’s schools are funded fairly and adequately and how would they improve student success — came at a debate sponsored by the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce.

Mango, a former health care systems consultant from suburban Pittsburgh, said spending more on schools has nothing to do with improving test scores or producing excellent graduates.

“I don’t know whether they’re fair and adequate, but I know that we’re not going to throw any more good money after bad money,” Mango told more than 150 people at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.

The state, Mango said, must expand alternatives to public schools and make it easier for parents to choose an alternative.

Wagner, a state senator from suburban York who owns the $65 billion waste hauler Penn Waste, said he believes the state spends “enough money” on public schools, while stressing the need for frugality, fewer regulations and more accountability.

“In the last four years, we’ve put almost $1 billion more into the school system,” Wagner said. “Not a nickel has hit the classrooms. It has gone to cover the pension, health care and salary increases that we have seen over the last four years.”

Figures from the Pennsylvania School Boards Association show that salary and benefits historically absorb the vast majority of money for classroom instruction.

Wagner also said he would push for students to hear about career opportunities as early as the fourth grade and, later, suggested that he would seek deep concessions in school employees’ benefits.

Ellsworth, a commercial litigation attorney from suburban Pittsburgh who once headed the Greater Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce, said Pennsylvania’s school funding is not fair or adequate.

While she warned against throwing money at problems to solve them, she suggested that making public schools compete for money with public school alternatives, as they’ve done for seven years, is holding back achievement.

“Right now, we have a system where we are asking school districts to basically slit their wrists and bleed themselves to pay for these alternatives for other children,” Ellsworth said. “That makes no sense. We’re not incentivizing them to be creative and to deliver learning environments where our children learn. We need to fund alternative education in a more fair and rational way. We cannot starve public school districts either.”

A top priority of Wolf’s has been pumping money into public schools to reverse budget-balancing cuts under his predecessor, Republican Tom Corbett, that helped lead to teacher layoffs, bigger class sizes and program cuts.

Meanwhile, Wagner and Mango said they support legislation to eventually eliminate school property taxes by raising other state taxes, such as on sales and income.

Ellsworth said property taxes need to come down and that they should be frozen for seniors, but not eliminated.

The debate will be broadcast by public television stations and Pennsylvania Cable Network.