Nội dung được dịch bởi AI, chỉ mang tính chất tham khảo
Vai trò của các chỉ số nghèo trong việc đạt được công bằng giáo dục thông qua cải cách tài chính trường học
Tóm tắt
Trong bài báo này, chúng tôi ước tính một loạt các hàm chi phí biên ngẫu nhiên cho các trường tiểu học, sử dụng một bảng ngắn của dữ liệu Texas cho phép chúng tôi xem xét các đặc điểm học sinh, giá đầu vào, các yếu tố môi trường và kết quả học sinh. Texas hiện tại sử dụng thông tin về tỷ lệ học sinh tham gia chương trình Bữa ăn miễn phí và giảm giá (FRL) để xác định mức tài trợ bổ sung cung cấp cho các trường học. Chỉ số FRL đã bị chỉ trích là một chỉ số cần thiết tương đối kém. Chúng tôi xem xét một chỉ số nghèo mới, được phát triển gần đây, chỉ số Dân số và Kinh tế Nội suy Không gian (SIDE), như một sự bổ sung hoặc thay thế có thể cho chỉ số FRL. SIDE sử dụng thu nhập của khu vực mà trường học nằm trong đó như là cơ sở để đánh giá nhu cầu và tình trạng nghèo. Chúng tôi phát hiện rằng việc sử dụng cả hai chỉ số nghèo nhấn mạnh các chi phí bổ sung liên quan đến việc phục vụ các dân số có hoàn cảnh nghèo trong các khu vực có hoàn cảnh nghèo, tức là, vị trí khu vực là quan trọng.
Từ khóa
#công bằng giáo dục #cải cách tài chính trường học #chỉ số nghèo #chương trình Bữa ăn miễn phí và giảm giá #Texas #chi phí biên ngẫu nhiênTài liệu tham khảo
Baker BD, Taylor LL, Vedlitz A (2008) Adequacy estimates and the implications of common standards for the cost of instruction. National Res Council 9(2):24–38
Baker BD, Taylor LL, Levin J, Chambers J, Blankenship C (2013) Adjusted poverty measures and the distribution of title I aid: Does title I really make the rich states richer? Educ Finance Policy 8(3):394–417
Barrow MM (1991) Measuring local education authority performance: a frontier approach. Econ Educ Rev 10(1):19–27
Bessent A, Bessent W, Kennington J, Reagan B (1982) An application of mathematical programming to assess managerial efficiency in the Houston independent school district. Manag Sci 28(12):1355–1367
Berne R, Stiefel L (1979) Taxpayer equity in school finance reform: The school finance and the public finance perspectives. J Educ Finance 5(1):36–54
Carpenter DM, Noller SL (2010) Measuring charter school efficiency: An early appraisal. J Educ Finance 35(4):497–415
Conroy SJ, Arguea NM (2008) An estimation of technical efficiency for Florida public elementary schools. Econ Educ Rev 27(6):655–663
Cooper ST, Cohn E (1997) Estimation of a frontier production function for the South Carolina educational process. Econ Educ Rev 16(3):313–327
de Witte K, López-Torres L (2017) Efficiency in education: a review of literature and a way forward. J Operational Res Soc 68(4):339–363
Domina T, Pharris-Ciurej N, Penner AM, Penner EK, Brummet Q, Porter SR, Sanabria T (2018) Is free and reduced-price lunch a valid measure of educational disadvantage? Educational Res 47(9):539–555
Duncombe W, Yinger J (2005) How much more does a disadvantaged student cost? Econ Educ Rev 24(5):513–532
Figlio DN, Winicki J (2005) Food for thought: the effects of school accountability plans on school nutrition. J Public Econ 89(2-3):381–394
Gleason P (2008) Direct certification in the national school lunch program expands access for children. J Assoc Public Policy Analysis Manag 27(1):82–103
Gleason P and Burghardt J (2005) The National School Lunch Program: Ensuring that Free and Reduced-Price Meal Benefits Go to the Poor. Mathematica Policy Research Inc. Issue Brief Number 2. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/the-national-school-lunch-program-ensuring-that-free-and-reducedprice-meal-benefits-go-to-the-poor
Geverdt D, Nixon L (2018). Sidestepping the Box: Designing a Supplemental Poverty Indicator for School Neighborhoods (NCES 2017-039). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/.
Golebiewski JA (2011) An overview of the literature measuring education cost differentials. Peabody J Educ 86(1):84–112
Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW, Taylor LL, Booker KT (2004) School outcomes and school costs: The cost function approach. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. https://bush.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SchoolOutcomesAndSchoolCosts.pdf
Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW, Taylor LL, Booker KT (2005) School outcomes and school costs: A technical supplement. Texas A&M University. College Station, TX. https://bush.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/GJTBTechnicalSupplement4-8.pdf
Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW, Taylor LL (2011a) The adequacy of educational cost functions: Lessons from Texas. Peabody J Educ 86(1):3–27
Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW, Taylor LL (2011b) The impact of facilities on the cost of education. Natl Tax J 64(1):193–218
Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW, Taylor LL (2012) The relative efficiency of charter schools: A cost frontier approach. Econ Educ Rev 31(2):302–317
Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW, Karakaplan MU, Taylor LL (2015) School district consolidation: Market concentration and the scale‐efficiency tradeoff. Southern Econ J 82(2):580–597
Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW, Taylor LL (2017) Are charters the best alternative? A cost frontier analysis of alternative education campuses in Texas. Southern Econ J 83(3):721–743
Grosskopf S, Hayes K, Taylor LL, Weber WL (1997) Budget-constrained frontier measures of fiscal equality and efficiency in schooling. Rev Econ Statistics 79(1):116–124
Grosskopf S, Hayes K, Taylor LL, Weber WL (2018) Would weighted-student funding enhance intra-district equity in Texas? A simulation using DEA. J Operational Res Soc 68(4):377–389
Harwell M, LeBeau B (2010) Student eligibility for a free lunch as an SES measure in education research. Educational Res 39(2):120–131
Hauser RM (1994) Measuring socioeconomic status in studies of child development. Child Dev 65(6):1541–1545
Henderson DJ, Simar L, Wang L (2017) The three Is of public schools: irrelevant inputs, insufficient resources and inefficiency. Appl Econ 49(12):1164–1184
Hoxby CM, Kuziemko I (2004) Robin Hood and his not-so-merry plan: Capitalization and the self-destruction of Texas’ school finance equalization plan. NBER Working Papers 10722, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. https://doi.org/10.3386/w10722
Imazeki J, Reschovsky A (2004) Is No Child Left Behind an un (or under) funded federal mandate? Evidence from Texas. Natl Tax J 57(3):571–588
Karakaplan MU (2022) Panel stochastic frontier models with endogeneity. Stata J 22(3):643–663
Kurki A, Boyle A, Aladjem DK (2005) Beyond free lunch: Alternative poverty measures in educational research and program evaluation. American Institute For Research, paper prepared for the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada, April 11–15, 2005
Koedel C, Parsons E (2021) The Effect of the Community Eligibility Provision on the Ability of Free and Reduced-Price Meal Data to Identify Disadvantaged Students. Educational Eval Policy Analy 43(1):3–31. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373720968550
Marks J, Isaacs J, Smeeding T, Thornton K (2010). Development of the Wisconsin Poverty Measure: Methods and findings for 2008. www.irp.wisc.edu/research/povmeas/ASA_SPM_WIPOV_2010.pdf. Accessed 13 March 2013.
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). Comparable Wage Index for Teachers (CWIFT) [Data file]. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/Economic/TeacherWage
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). School neighborhood poverty [Data file]. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/Economic/NeighborhoodPoverty
Owens A (2020) Unequal opportunity: school and Neighborhood segregation in the USA. Race Social Prob 12:29–41
Owens A, Candipan J (2019) Social and spatial inequalities of educational opportunity: A portrait of schools serving high- and low-income neighborhoods in US metropolitan areas. Urban Studies 56(15):3178–3197
Owens A, Reardon SF, Jencks C (2016) Income segregation between schools and school districts. Am Education Res J 53(4):1159–1197
Reback R (2008) Teaching to the rating: School accountability and the distribution of student achievement. J Public Econ 92(5–6):1394–1415
Renwick T (2009) Alternative Geographic Adjustments of U.S. Poverty Thresholds: Impact on State Poverty Rate. U.S. Census Bureau Working Paper. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2009/demo/geo-adj-pov-thld8.pdf
Renwick T (2011) Geographic adjustments of supplemental poverty measure thresholds: Using the American Community Survey five-year data on housing costs. U.S. Census Bureau SEHSD Working Paper Number 2011-21. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2011/demo/SEHSD-WP2011-21.pdf
Ruggles P (1990) Drawing the line: Alternative poverty measures and their implications for public policy. Urban Press Institute, Washington, DC
Short KS (2011) The research supplemental poverty measure. In 2010, Current Population Reports P60241, Census Bureau
Snyder T, Dinkes R, Sonnenberg W, Cornman S (2018) Study of the Title I, Part A Grant Program Mathematical Formulas (2019-016). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC, Retrieved [04/18/2021] from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
StataCorp (2021) Stata: Release 17. Statistical Software. StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX
Taylor LL, Grosskopf S, Hayes KJ (2014) Applied Efficiency Analysis in Education. Econ Business Lett 3(1):19–26
Taylor LL and Dar J (2015) Fairer trade, removing gender bias in US import taxes. Mosbacher Institute for Trade, Economics & Public Policy. https://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/153774
Taylor LL, Gronberg TJ, Jansen DW and Bartlett CS (2021) A Study on Geographic Education Cost Variations and School District Transportation Costs. https://tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/hb3-transportation-report.pdf
Texas Education Agency (2016) 2016 Accountability manual. Retrieved December 30, 2022 from https://tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/2016%20Accountability%20Manual-Full_Final.pdf