Page 12 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 12 of 217 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
4
achievement gap are well documented. The increased focus on outcomes and meeting
high standards prompted a shift from equity to adequacy funding models in school
finance (Clune, 1994). This change represented a significant shift in funding because
minimum outcomes were now being directly linked to the inputs as opposed to focusing
solely on the inputs. There is not one main approach to adequacy. The four methods for
determining adequacy are the professional judgment approach, successful schools
approach, the cost function approach and the evidence-based approach (Hanusheck &
Lindseth, 2009). Brief summaries of each approach are discussed below and will be
expanded upon in Chapter 2.
According to Hanusheck & Lindseth (2009), the professional judgment approach
is the most frequently used method to determining adequacy. This model is defined by
the use of a panel or group of individuals, primarily practitioners such as teachers,
principals or superintendents to discuss best practices that lead to intended outcomes.
From this gathering, a list of suggestions or a model approach is conceived. The final
output from the model is a menagerie of best practices with costs associated, generally
derived from a consultant. One of the drawbacks of such an approach is that educators
may not focus on the minimum needed to produce a result, thus inflating the cost of
achieving adequacy.
Another frequently used method is the successful schools approach. (Hanuscheck
& Lindseth, 2009). In this method, schools and districts that have produced successful
outcomes are studied and the costs associated calculated. Funding for special programs
are subtracted from the final cost to develop a base cost for educating a student who does
Object Description
| Title | Allocation of educational resources to improve student achievement: Case studies of four California charter schools |
| Author | Patrick, Ramona Kay |
| Author email | rpatrick@usc.edu; ramonakaypatrick@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-28 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-05-04 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Picus, Lawrence O. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Hentschke, Guilbert C. Nelson, John L. |
| Abstract | Charter schools are growing at a rapid pace have significantly more flexibility in their allocation of resources in comparison to their traditional public school counterparts in California. Because of this, it is important to study how successful charter schools, with this increased flexibility, are utilizing their resources to achieve high results with their students in a time of fiscal constraint. There is a plethora of data and research on effective school practices to improve student achievement, but a dearth of research on the effective allocation of resources at charter schools. The purpose of this study is to analyze how four high performing charter schools, with high percentages of socioeconomically disadvantaged students in Los Angeles, California, are implementing school improvement strategies and utilizing resources at their school site to impact student achievement. The Evidenced-Based Model, (Odden & Picus, 2008) along with Odden and Archibald’s (2009) Ten Strategies for Doubling Student Performance were used as a lens in this study to compare resource allocation as well as school improvement strategies to best support student achievement at the schools. This study will describe each schools’ instructional vision and improvement strategy, how resources are utilized to implement their instructional improvement plan, how the current fiscal crisis is affecting their allocation of resources, and how actual resource patterns are aligned with the Evidence Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008). |
| Keyword | charter schools; resource allocation; evidenced-based model |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 2000/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3815 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Patrick, Ramona Kay |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Patrick-4438 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume51/etd-Patrick-4438.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 12 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 4 achievement gap are well documented. The increased focus on outcomes and meeting high standards prompted a shift from equity to adequacy funding models in school finance (Clune, 1994). This change represented a significant shift in funding because minimum outcomes were now being directly linked to the inputs as opposed to focusing solely on the inputs. There is not one main approach to adequacy. The four methods for determining adequacy are the professional judgment approach, successful schools approach, the cost function approach and the evidence-based approach (Hanusheck & Lindseth, 2009). Brief summaries of each approach are discussed below and will be expanded upon in Chapter 2. According to Hanusheck & Lindseth (2009), the professional judgment approach is the most frequently used method to determining adequacy. This model is defined by the use of a panel or group of individuals, primarily practitioners such as teachers, principals or superintendents to discuss best practices that lead to intended outcomes. From this gathering, a list of suggestions or a model approach is conceived. The final output from the model is a menagerie of best practices with costs associated, generally derived from a consultant. One of the drawbacks of such an approach is that educators may not focus on the minimum needed to produce a result, thus inflating the cost of achieving adequacy. Another frequently used method is the successful schools approach. (Hanuscheck & Lindseth, 2009). In this method, schools and districts that have produced successful outcomes are studied and the costs associated calculated. Funding for special programs are subtracted from the final cost to develop a base cost for educating a student who does |
