You are here:

Intradistrict equity of public education resources and performance
ARTICLE

,

Economics of Education Review Volume 22, Number 1 ISSN 0272-7757 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

This paper presents empirical evidence on input and output equity of expenditures, teacher resources, and performance across 840 elementary and middle schools in New York City. Historically, researchers have studied interdistrict distributions, but given the large numbers of pupils and schools within many urban districts, it is important to learn about intradistrict distributions as well. The empirical work is built on a framework of horizontal, vertical, and equal opportunity equity. The results show that the horizontal equity distributions are more disparate than what would be expected relative to results of other studies, vertical equity is lacking, especially in elementary schools, and equality of opportunity is at best neutral but more often absent. Middle schools exhibit more equity than elementary schools. The paper is one of the first to measure output equity, using levels and changes in test scores to do so.

Citation

Iatarola, P. & Stiefel, L. Intradistrict equity of public education resources and performance. Economics of Education Review, 22(1), 69-78. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved May 30, 2023 from .

This record was imported from Economics of Education Review on March 1, 2019. Economics of Education Review is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7757(01)00065-6

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Berne, R., & Stiefel, L. (1984). The measurement of equity in school finance: Conceptual and methodological issues.. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  2. Berne, R., & Stiefel, L. (1994). Measuring equity at the school level: The finance perspective . Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 16(4), pp. 405-421.
  3. Berne, R., & Picus, L.O. (1994). Outcome equity in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
  4. Betts, J.R., Reuben, K.S., & Dannenberg, A. (2000). Equal resources, equal outcomes? The distribution of school resources and student achievement in California. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
  5. Burke, S.M. (1999). An analysis of resource inequality at the state, district, and school levels . Journal of Education Finance, 24(Spring), pp. 435-458.
  6. Coleman, J.S., Campbell, E.Q., Hobson, C.F., McPartland, J., Mood, A.M., Weinfeld, F.D., (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education.
  7. Duncombe, W., & Yinger, J. (2000). Financing higher student performance standards: The case of New York state . Economics of Education Review, 19, pp. 363-386.
  8. Evans, W.N., Murray, S.E., & Schwab, R.M. (1997). Schoolhouses, courthouses, and statehouses after Serrano . Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16(Winter), pp. 10-31.
  9. Hertert, L. (1996). Does equal funding for district mean equal funding for classroom students? Evidence from California . Where does the money go: Resource allocation in elementary and secondary schools, pp. 71-84. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
  10. Hertert, L., Busch, C., & Odden, A. (1994). School financing inequities among the states: The problem from a national perspective . Journal of Education Finance, 19(3), pp. 231-255.
  11. Hussar, W., & Sonnenberg, W. (2000). Trends in disparities in school district level expenditures per pupil. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education, NCES 2000020.
  12. Murray, S.E., Evans, W.N., & Schwab, R.M. (1998). Education-finance reform and the distribution of education resources . The American Economic Review, 88(September), pp. 789-812.
  13. Nakib, Y.A. (1996). Beyond district-level expenditures: Schooling resource allocation and use in Florida . Where does the money go? Resource allocation in elementary and secondary schools, pp. 85-105. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
  14. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Digest of education statistics, 1999, NCES 2000-031, by Thomas D. Snyder and Charlene M. Hoffman. Washington, DC.
  15. Owens, T., & Maiden, J. (1999). A comparison of interschool and interdistrict funding equity in Florida . Journal of Education Finance, 24(Spring), pp. 305-318.
  16. Odden, A., & Picus, L. (2000). School finance: A policy perspective. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
  17. Parrish, T.B., & Hikido, C.S. (1998). Inequalities in public school district revenues. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
  18. Reschovsky, A., & Imazeki, J. (1998). The development of school finance formulas to guarantee the provision of adequate education to low-income students . Developments in school finance, 1997, pp. 121-147. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
  19. Rubenstein, R. (1998). Resource equity in the Chicago public schools: A school-level approach . Journal of Education Finance, 23(4), pp. 468-489.
  20. Rubenstein, R., & Moser, M. (2002). The equality of public school district funding in the U.S.: A national status report . Public Administration Review, 62(1), pp. 63-72.
  21. Schwartz, A.E., & Gershberg, A. (2001), Immigrants and education: evidence from New York City. National Tax Association Proceedings (pp. 125–134).
  22. Schwartz, A.E. (1999). School districts and spending in the schools . Selected papers in school finance 1997–99, pp. 55-84. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
  23. Stiefel, L., Rubenstein, R., & Berne, R. (1998). Intra-district equity in four large cities: Data, methods, results . Journal of Education Finance, 23(4), pp. 447-467.
  24. U.S. Census Bureau, Department of Commerce (2000). Public education finances 1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  25. Wyckoff, J.H. (1992). The interstate equality of public primary and secondary education resources in the U.S., 1980–1987 . Economics of Education Review, 11(1), pp. 19-30.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References