Page 32 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 32 of 271 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
20
schools. The fourth section delves into nearly four decades of educational research to
reveal the most effective education reform strategies that move schools forward and
promote student learning. The fifth section investigates the research on district-level
support strategies for schools and the relationship between the central office and school
sites. Finally, the last section of this literature review addresses current events in
California and frames the relevance of this study as it investigates resource allocation at
the school site in challenging financial times.
The History of Education Reform & Financing
National trends. The federal government continued to expand its involvement in
and funding of education with the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA) in 1965 (Odden & Picus, 2008). As part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s
War on Poverty, Title I of ESEA was designed to provide funds specifically to low-income
students. The latest of many reauthorizations of ESEA was passed in 2001,
known as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). NCLB provided $13.5 billion in 2001-
2002 and added an array of new accountability measures (Odden & Picus, 2008).
The fight for equity and adequacy of funding. Prior to this legislation, however,
education was established as a common good with the Supreme Court’s decision in
Brown v. Board of Education. The court’s landmark decision abolished school
segregation and established the notion that all students deserve access to equal
educational opportunities. Since the Brown ruling, the courts have been active in
education equality and equity issues (Lindseth, 2006). One such case was Rodriguez v.
San Antonio, which made it to the Supreme Court in 1973. The plaintiffs argued that the
Object Description
| Title | Navigating troubled waters: case studies of three California high schools' resource allocation strategies in 2010-2011 |
| Author | Landisi, Brian Anthony |
| Author email | landisi@usc.edu; blandisi@charter.net |
| 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 | 2011-04-28 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Picus, Lawrence O. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Hentschke, Guilbert C. Nelson, John L. |
| Abstract | This study was conducted to examine instructional strategies and resource allocation in successful schools. The study was based on the analysis of three comprehensive high schools in one school district in Southern California. Each of the study schools increased students’ academic achievement over time as measured by sustained growth on California’s Academic Performance Index. The efforts of these study schools also contributed to narrowing the achievement gap.; Successful schools in this study were analyzed primarily through the lens of Odden’s (2009) 10 Strategies for Doubling Student Performance. In addition to effective organizational and instructional strategies, this study also analyzed human and fiscal resource allocation at the sample schools. The study used the Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) to analyze how the schools allocated resources during 2010-2011, navigating a catastrophic economic crisis facing California and the rest of the nation. Interview data, student achievement data and information on school-level resource use were included in case studies on each of these successful schools.; The findings indicate that although the resource use patterns of the study schools were significantly fewer than what the Evidence-Based Model suggests, the improvement strategies showed many commonalities to those suggested in the body of literature on school improvement. Strong leadership from the district office supported the reform efforts at each of the school sites. This leadership came in the form of a single district focus combined with continuity of leadership, development and retention of talent within the district and a common school improvement framework.; A heavy investment of time and fiscal resources into professional development created a collaborative culture within and between the high schools in the study. The schools that were most successful in raising student achievement demonstrated a commitment to collaboration and embraced the role of teacher leaders. The most effective schools in the study had in place internal accountability structures to support the implementation of the school and district focus. It is the effective implementation of research-based strategies, not simply resource allocation that makes schools successful and contributes to further growth in student achievement. Implications for policy and practice are discussed. |
| Keyword | education finance; secondary education; educational leadership; budget crisis; instructional leadership; Odden and Picus; resource allocation; school finance; school reform |
| Geographic subject (county) | Los Angeles |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 2010/2011 |
| 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-m3797 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Landisi, Brian Anthony |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Landisi-4355 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume14/etd-Landisi-4355.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 32 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 20 schools. The fourth section delves into nearly four decades of educational research to reveal the most effective education reform strategies that move schools forward and promote student learning. The fifth section investigates the research on district-level support strategies for schools and the relationship between the central office and school sites. Finally, the last section of this literature review addresses current events in California and frames the relevance of this study as it investigates resource allocation at the school site in challenging financial times. The History of Education Reform & Financing National trends. The federal government continued to expand its involvement in and funding of education with the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965 (Odden & Picus, 2008). As part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty, Title I of ESEA was designed to provide funds specifically to low-income students. The latest of many reauthorizations of ESEA was passed in 2001, known as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). NCLB provided $13.5 billion in 2001- 2002 and added an array of new accountability measures (Odden & Picus, 2008). The fight for equity and adequacy of funding. Prior to this legislation, however, education was established as a common good with the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The court’s landmark decision abolished school segregation and established the notion that all students deserve access to equal educational opportunities. Since the Brown ruling, the courts have been active in education equality and equity issues (Lindseth, 2006). One such case was Rodriguez v. San Antonio, which made it to the Supreme Court in 1973. The plaintiffs argued that the |
