Page 13 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 13 of 217 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
5
not have special needs. A critique of this approach is that because it specifically selects
high performing schools and districts, it many times only studies those with higher
socioeconomic status. By doing this, it is difficult to generalize the approach to schools
where students may require special services due to the inherent disadvantages of their
situations.
The third model, the cost function approach, is seen as an alternative to the other
adequacy models, this approach derives data from current spending and outcomes of
schools and school districts to come to a composite or optimum spending (Hanusheck &
Lindseth, 2009). The limitation of using this method is that it is complex—making it
difficult to understand and apply. Additionally, the level of analysis remains at the district
and does not include the specificity needed to evaluate school-level decision-making.
The final method, which will be used as the framework in this study, is the
Evidenced-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008). In this model, research is used to
generate best practices that lead to intended outcomes or student achievement. The
model costs out each research-based component. The costs per school are then scaled to a
state level to determine overall funding needed (Hanuscheck & Lindseth, 2009). One
criticism of such approach is that although you can recommend a model, there is no
evidence that implementing it in conjunction will achieve the intended results. This
model, however, is the most appropriate model to use in this study because it is the only
approach that directly links research-based strategies and approaches to resource
allocation. The other models fail to do this and do not provide an appropriate framework
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 13 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 5 not have special needs. A critique of this approach is that because it specifically selects high performing schools and districts, it many times only studies those with higher socioeconomic status. By doing this, it is difficult to generalize the approach to schools where students may require special services due to the inherent disadvantages of their situations. The third model, the cost function approach, is seen as an alternative to the other adequacy models, this approach derives data from current spending and outcomes of schools and school districts to come to a composite or optimum spending (Hanusheck & Lindseth, 2009). The limitation of using this method is that it is complex—making it difficult to understand and apply. Additionally, the level of analysis remains at the district and does not include the specificity needed to evaluate school-level decision-making. The final method, which will be used as the framework in this study, is the Evidenced-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008). In this model, research is used to generate best practices that lead to intended outcomes or student achievement. The model costs out each research-based component. The costs per school are then scaled to a state level to determine overall funding needed (Hanuscheck & Lindseth, 2009). One criticism of such approach is that although you can recommend a model, there is no evidence that implementing it in conjunction will achieve the intended results. This model, however, is the most appropriate model to use in this study because it is the only approach that directly links research-based strategies and approaches to resource allocation. The other models fail to do this and do not provide an appropriate framework |
