1 / 23

Adequacy and Equity in Nevada School Funding: A School-Level, Cost Function Analysis

Adequacy and Equity in Nevada School Funding: A School-Level, Cost Function Analysis. Wen Wang, Ph.D., Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Anna Lukemeyer , J.D., Ph.D., University of Nevada Las Vegas. Special Acknowledgements.

bozek
Download Presentation

Adequacy and Equity in Nevada School Funding: A School-Level, Cost Function Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Adequacy and Equity in Nevada School Funding: A School-Level, Cost Function Analysis Wen Wang, Ph.D., Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Anna Lukemeyer, J.D., Ph.D., University of Nevada Las Vegas

  2. Special Acknowledgements • Carrie Sampson, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Nevada Las Vegas • Jaewon Lim, Ph.D., University of Nevada Las Vegas • Robin Mendoza, MPA Student, University of Nevada Las Vegas • The Lincy Institute, Las Vegas, Nevada (for funding and support)

  3. Introduction • Nevada ranks among the lowest states in the nation in terms of both student achievement and school funding • 39th (2013 NAEP 4th grade reading) • 37th (2013 NAEP 4th grade mathematics) • 43rd (2012 spending per pupil)

  4. Introduction • A number of school funding reform bills are currently under consideration in the Nevada legislature. • This study uses cost function methodology to analyze the adequacy and the equity of the Nevada school finance system • Presentation today: preliminary findings

  5. Current Nevada School Finance System

  6. Current Nevada School Finance System

  7. Current Nevada School Finance System • No state funding for capital outlay (i.e., buildings, etc.) • Only 17 school districts (coterminous with counties) • Per pupil funding (state and local) determined largely at the state level. There is little leeway for additional local discretionary spending.

  8. Current Nevada School Finance System

  9. Current Nevada School Finance System • Based on enrollment with adjustments made for district economic and geographic characteristics and ability to raise revenue. • Does not structurally account for the relatively large number of ELL or low-income students. • Only allocation for at-risk students is for special education. • Categorical state funding exists for specific purposes such as class-size reduction and early childhood programs.

  10. Current Nevada School Finance System

  11. Current Nevada School Finance System

  12. Current Nevada School Finance System

  13. Research Objectives • Using education cost function methodology and school level data: • Estimate the amount of funding needed to provide students in a hypothetical “average” school a reasonable opportunity to achieve specified performance outcomes • Estimate adjustments to this level of funding based on resource costs and student characteristics

  14. Data and Methods • Primary challenges; • No integrated dataset with the variables needed for a cost function study of Nevada • N=17 school districts

  15. Data and Methods • Current dataset; • School level performance, demographic, and spending data for almost all public schools for school years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 (approximately 635 of the 700 public schools for each year) • District-level data for property tax base, community income and demographics, etc.

  16. Data and Methods • Data underlying findings presented today • Omits combined schools (K-12, K-8, 6-12), state sponsored charter schools, and special purpose schools. • Cost function study also omits outliers and schools in very sparsely populated counties (Esmeralda and Eureka).

  17. Data and Methods • Cost function model and variables • E=f(P, R, St, Ef) where: • E = Per pupil operating expenditures • P = Student performance (% attaining proficiency in math and reading, treated as endogenous) • R = Resource costs (Comparable Wage Index) • St = Student and family characteristics (enrollment, enrollment squared, FRL, ELL, IEP)

  18. Data and Methods • Cost function model and variables (cont’d) • E=f(P, R, St, Ef) where: • Ef = Efficiency • Income, property value, aid/income ratio, education (proportion of bachelors or higher), district type – large urban, small centralized, rural, small enrollment • Efficiency index (DEA)

  19. Conclusions and Next Steps • Current Nevada school finance system does not formally account for student characteristics and in fact directs money away from school districts with the highest needs (Clark and Washoe). • Suggests that at-risk students require additional funding to achieve

  20. Conclusions and Next Steps • Next steps: • Refine model. • Estimate model using spatial econometric techniques • Calculate Cost Indices and make recommendations • Add to dataset

More Related