Matching Items (3)
Description
ABSTRACT In Roosevelt v. Bishop (1994), Arizona public school districts and parents challenged Arizona's school financing system arguing that it was not "general and uniform" as required by the Arizona Constitution. The purpose of this study was to analyze Arizona's Students Fair and Immediate Resources for Students Today (Students FIRST) legislation, the remedy that resulted from the Roosevelt decision, empirically, and longitudinally. Three types of statistical analyses were conducted on a sample of 165 public school districts. Fiscal neutrality was measured for each of the eleven years of the study, to assess the association between the per-pupil Students FIRST funding level and the per-pupil property wealth. Multiple regression analysis was also conducted to assess if both property wealth and district size were associated with the distribution of Students FIRST funding. Finally, I analyzed the eleven-year average of the total Students FIRST funding distributed to school districts and assessed how the plaintiff districts ranked in the distribution. Overall, the findings revealed that Students FIRST met the fiscal neutrality standard in some, but not in all the categories and years of this study, per-pupil property wealth was only weakly related to, and district size was not associated with, Students FIRST funding. The analysis of average funding suggested that some property rich school districts benefited most from Students FIRST. These results suggest that the traditional measures used to assess the fiscal neutrality of operating funding may not be appropriate for assessing the fiscal neutrality of capital finance reforms. While the results of this study provide some suggestive evidence that Students FIRST did not fulfill the Court's mandate, additional research is needed as to whether or not Arizona's capital finance system has resulted in disparities in funding that fall short of the constitutional standard.
ContributorsBaca, Kenneth R (Author) / Powers, Jeanne M. (Thesis advisor) / Garcia, David R. (Committee member) / Essigs, Chuck (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
This dissertation explores the effect of school competition on the human capital accumulation of students. Policies that expand the scope for school choice have become increasingly popular largely due to the belief that this will create incentives for low-performing, incumbent schools to improve academic outcomes. However, there is a general lack of empirical support for these positive academic spillover effects in most contexts. In the first chapter, I demonstrate that if schools respond to competition through channels not typically considered in standard arguments in favor of school choice, it means that these policies may lead to negative, unintended consequences for academic achievement. I find that increasing the number of schools serving a given market can have a negative effect on test scores through creating incentives for schools to increase the provision of non-academic services that do not contribute to academic preparation, and through the creation of excess costs in the public school system. I use an empirical strategy designed to address strategic location decisions by new entrants as well as student selection across schools to show that entry of a new charter middle school during a recent large-scale charter expansion in North Carolina decreased average traditional public middle school test scores across a school district.
The second chapter considers the extent to which policymakers have tools available to them that can improve the ability of competition to generate the increases in test scores at incumbent schools that they have prioritized. I show that the efficacy of school choice can be improved by providing short-term, partial reimbursements to public school districts for increases in charter school enrollment by resident pupils. I also demonstrate that these effects occur not only due to the direct increase in district revenue associated with reimbursements, but also because the presence of this aid reduces the incentives of school administrators to compete for students through non-academic channels. The empirical strategy that I use to generate these results leverages plausibly exogenous cutoffs for aid eligibility induced by a unique policy in the state of New York.
ContributorsTobin, Zachary Benjamin (Author) / Aucejo, Esteban (Thesis advisor) / Silverman, Daniel (Committee member) / Murphy, Alvin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
ABSTRACT
Closing the achievement gap between low-income, marginalized, racially, and linguistically diverse students has proven difficult. Research has outlined the effects of funding on student achievement in a manner that focuses the attention on dollars expended, in order overcome barriers to learning. Arizona has long been recognized for its education funding disparity, and its inability to balance fiscal capacity in a manner that serves to improve educational outcomes.
This dissertation examines how Arizona funds its education system. It measures horizontal inequity in a robust manner by examining those fiscal capacity resources directly related to learning and poverty. Recognizing districts with higher concentrations of special needs students will impact fiscal capacity at the district level, this dissertation applies a non-linear analysis to measure how English language learners/ limited English proficient (ELL/ LEP) student proportionality impacts federal and state revenue per pupil, ELL expenditures per pupil, and total expenditures per pupil.
Using the Gini Ratio, McCloone Index, Coefficient of Variation, and Theil inequality index, this dissertation confirms that significant education funding disparity exists across Arizona’s school districts. This dissertation also shows the proportion of English language learners is negatively related to local revenue per pupil, and ELL expenditures per ELL pupil.
Arizona has characteristically funded the public education system inequitably and positioned its students in a manner that stratifies achievement gaps based on wealth. Targeted funding toward ELLs is in no way meaningfully related to the proportion of ELLs in a district. Conceptually the way in which equity is defined, and measured, may require re-evaluation, beyond correlated inputs and outputs. This conceptual re-evaluation of equity must include the decision making process of administrative leaders which influence the quality of those resources related to student learning.
Closing the achievement gap between low-income, marginalized, racially, and linguistically diverse students has proven difficult. Research has outlined the effects of funding on student achievement in a manner that focuses the attention on dollars expended, in order overcome barriers to learning. Arizona has long been recognized for its education funding disparity, and its inability to balance fiscal capacity in a manner that serves to improve educational outcomes.
This dissertation examines how Arizona funds its education system. It measures horizontal inequity in a robust manner by examining those fiscal capacity resources directly related to learning and poverty. Recognizing districts with higher concentrations of special needs students will impact fiscal capacity at the district level, this dissertation applies a non-linear analysis to measure how English language learners/ limited English proficient (ELL/ LEP) student proportionality impacts federal and state revenue per pupil, ELL expenditures per pupil, and total expenditures per pupil.
Using the Gini Ratio, McCloone Index, Coefficient of Variation, and Theil inequality index, this dissertation confirms that significant education funding disparity exists across Arizona’s school districts. This dissertation also shows the proportion of English language learners is negatively related to local revenue per pupil, and ELL expenditures per ELL pupil.
Arizona has characteristically funded the public education system inequitably and positioned its students in a manner that stratifies achievement gaps based on wealth. Targeted funding toward ELLs is in no way meaningfully related to the proportion of ELLs in a district. Conceptually the way in which equity is defined, and measured, may require re-evaluation, beyond correlated inputs and outputs. This conceptual re-evaluation of equity must include the decision making process of administrative leaders which influence the quality of those resources related to student learning.
ContributorsMartinez, David G (Author) / Pivovarova, Margarita (Thesis advisor) / Berliner, David C. (Thesis advisor) / Dorn, Sherman (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018