Page 38 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 38 of 217 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
30
guidance or direction will also fail to improve student achievement, (Loeb &Bryk, 2007;
Odden & Picus, 2008; Hanusheck & Lindseth, 2009). Currently, states and lawmakers are
trying to determine what are the adequate resources necessary to fund schools. A working
definition of adequacy is the amount of resources necessary in order for students to meet
their academic or proficiency targets (Odden & Picus, 2008; Odden, 2003; Baker, 2005;
Clune, 1994).
Before one can describe how adequacy is impacting the way we finance schools,
we must look at the prior approach to school finance and why there has been a shift to
adequacy. Up until approximately 15 years ago, policymakers focused on making sure
that schools received the same amount of money (Clune, 1994). Shifting from an inputs
only focus to a focus on inputs that leads to desired outcomes or achievement has been
the transition from equity to adequacy, which was prompted by the standards-based
reform movement. (Clune, 1994). Because No Child Left Behind (2001) held states
accountable to outcomes and educating all students to a high standard, case law also
began the shift from equity to adequacy (Odden, 2003; Rebell, 2007). As Rebell (2007)
noted, courts and states use the educational standards to determine the resources
necessary to meet these standards at a proficient level. Policy makers, pressured by
greater systems of accountability, have also intern shifted from ensuring schools receive
enough money to are schools utilizing the money they are receiving in a way that allows
students to meet higher educational standards. Results are now being linked directly to
the funding (Baker, Taylor, Vedlitz, 2008; Clune, 1994).
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 38 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 30 guidance or direction will also fail to improve student achievement, (Loeb &Bryk, 2007; Odden & Picus, 2008; Hanusheck & Lindseth, 2009). Currently, states and lawmakers are trying to determine what are the adequate resources necessary to fund schools. A working definition of adequacy is the amount of resources necessary in order for students to meet their academic or proficiency targets (Odden & Picus, 2008; Odden, 2003; Baker, 2005; Clune, 1994). Before one can describe how adequacy is impacting the way we finance schools, we must look at the prior approach to school finance and why there has been a shift to adequacy. Up until approximately 15 years ago, policymakers focused on making sure that schools received the same amount of money (Clune, 1994). Shifting from an inputs only focus to a focus on inputs that leads to desired outcomes or achievement has been the transition from equity to adequacy, which was prompted by the standards-based reform movement. (Clune, 1994). Because No Child Left Behind (2001) held states accountable to outcomes and educating all students to a high standard, case law also began the shift from equity to adequacy (Odden, 2003; Rebell, 2007). As Rebell (2007) noted, courts and states use the educational standards to determine the resources necessary to meet these standards at a proficient level. Policy makers, pressured by greater systems of accountability, have also intern shifted from ensuring schools receive enough money to are schools utilizing the money they are receiving in a way that allows students to meet higher educational standards. Results are now being linked directly to the funding (Baker, Taylor, Vedlitz, 2008; Clune, 1994). |
