Page 104 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 104 of 217 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
96
Resource Allocation
Charter schools, in comparison to traditional public schools, have considerably
more discretion in how they allocate their resources. Odden and Picus’ (2008) Evidence-
Based Model (EBM) was used to analyze the allocation of resources, and although there
are some areas in which the amount of resources are in alignment with the EBM
prototype, overall the schools lacked resources in multiple areas and there was a great
deal of variance in how each individual school allocated their resources.
Class Size. In all of the schools studied, kindergarten was a full day program,
which is in alignment with the EBM. However, the average number of students, 21, in
each classroom was over 25% more than the recommended ratio of 15 students per
teacher. Although class sizes are higher in the upper grades, they more closely reflect the
recommended class sizes and on average were 8% larger or 27 students per teacher in
comparison to the recommended 25 students per teacher. Table 4.4 displays the class size
of the sample schools in comparison to the EBM (Odden & Picus, 2008).
Table 4.4: Class Size of Sample Schools Compared to EBM
Grade Level EBM Byron Timothy Delano Amarado
K 15 21 20 20 20
1 15 21 20 20 20
2 15 23 n/a 20 20
3 15 26 n/a 20 20
4 25 26 n/a 28 26
5 25 29 n/a 28 26
6 25 23 n/a 28 n/a
7 25 n/a n/a 28 n/a
8 25 n/a n/a 28 n/a
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 104 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 96 Resource Allocation Charter schools, in comparison to traditional public schools, have considerably more discretion in how they allocate their resources. Odden and Picus’ (2008) Evidence- Based Model (EBM) was used to analyze the allocation of resources, and although there are some areas in which the amount of resources are in alignment with the EBM prototype, overall the schools lacked resources in multiple areas and there was a great deal of variance in how each individual school allocated their resources. Class Size. In all of the schools studied, kindergarten was a full day program, which is in alignment with the EBM. However, the average number of students, 21, in each classroom was over 25% more than the recommended ratio of 15 students per teacher. Although class sizes are higher in the upper grades, they more closely reflect the recommended class sizes and on average were 8% larger or 27 students per teacher in comparison to the recommended 25 students per teacher. Table 4.4 displays the class size of the sample schools in comparison to the EBM (Odden & Picus, 2008). Table 4.4: Class Size of Sample Schools Compared to EBM Grade Level EBM Byron Timothy Delano Amarado K 15 21 20 20 20 1 15 21 20 20 20 2 15 23 n/a 20 20 3 15 26 n/a 20 20 4 25 26 n/a 28 26 5 25 29 n/a 28 26 6 25 23 n/a 28 n/a 7 25 n/a n/a 28 n/a 8 25 n/a n/a 28 n/a |
