Negative effects on student outcomes.
A new study commissioned by the Association for Equity in Funding (AEF) finds disparities in school funding among school districts with vastly different student demographics have
negative effects on student outcome measures such as scores on school and district report cards.
Based on the study analyses, the following are key results that funding disparity does indeed have
a negative effect on student outcome:
Not exact matches
Such compensatory policies generate a
negative relationship between changes in school spending and
student outcomes that would bias analyses of the
effects of school spending based
on correlations alone.
Two recent experimental evaluations of the Louisiana Scholarship Program found
negative effects of the program
on student test scores but one study was limited to just a single year of
outcome data and the second one (which I am leading) has only analyzed two years of
outcome data so far.
Carnoy and Loeb also investigated the impact of accountability
on student retention and high - school graduation rates and demonstrated that there is no discernible
negative effect on either
outcome.
A 2013 report from the Center for Research
on Education
Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found that Uncommon's schools «completely cancel out the
negative effect associated with being a
student in poverty,» concluding that «it IS possible to take innovation to scale and maintain a focus
on quality.»
Their summary of the sector's academic
outcomes, which draws heavily on a series of studies by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University, is likewise relatively uncontroversial: there is a positive achievement effect for poor, nonwhite, urban students, but suburban and rural charters come up short, as do online charters, about which the authors duly report negative f
outcomes, which draws heavily
on a series of studies by the Center for Research
on Education
Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University, is likewise relatively uncontroversial: there is a positive achievement effect for poor, nonwhite, urban students, but suburban and rural charters come up short, as do online charters, about which the authors duly report negative f
Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University, is likewise relatively uncontroversial: there is a positive achievement
effect for poor, nonwhite, urban
students, but suburban and rural charters come up short, as do online charters, about which the authors duly report
negative findings.
To support my case, I presented three categories of evidence: (1) the fact that national reform groups seem deeply concerned about Detroit; (2) the similarity in performance between the city's charter and traditional public schools; and (3) the large
negative effects of two statewide voucher programs
on student outcomes.
A 2013 study by the Center for Research
on Education
Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found that attending an Uncommon school «completely cancel [s] out the
negative effect associated with being a
student in poverty.»
Another trend — exemplified by the humanizing law school movement — seeks to improve both learning and
student well - being by decreasing some of the well - documented
negative psychological
effects of law school created in part by the focus
on competition and extrinsic motivation.8 Law schools are beginning to respond to these reports by revising their curricula and preparing for anticipated changes in the American Bar Association (ABA) standards for law school accreditation that will require a greater focus
on student assessment and
outcome measures.9