weighted student funding
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

8
(FIVE YEARS 1)

H-INDEX

3
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2017 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 377-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawna Grosskopf ◽  
Kathy Hayes ◽  
Lori Taylor ◽  
William L Weber

2010 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward B. Fiske ◽  
Helen F. Ladd

2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth A. Strike

This article discusses issues of justice concerning school finance with a focus on the development of a conception of equality of educational opportunity. Emphasis is put on discussing the views of the other contributors in this symposium. The main conclusions of the discussion are that (1) equity and adequacy are not inconsistent views because they address fundamentally different questions; (2) adequacy sets a floor under the education that the state owes to all children, but it does not relieve the state of the obligation to provide whatever additional education it chooses to provide equally; (3) equality of opportunity may be limited by conflicting rights; and (4) weighted student funding (WSF) is theoretically attractive because it emphasizes the funding of students rather than districts and is sensitive to relevant differences among them, however the level of theoretical agreement and empirical knowledge required to implement WSF in a nuanced way is not available.


2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 402-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen F. Ladd

Within the context of the school finance literature, the concepts of equity and adequacy raise a number of complex definitional and pragmatic issues. The purpose of this article is to clarify those issues and to use those concepts to evaluate the recent policy proposal called weighted student funding (WSF). Though WSF contains some equity-enhancing elements, it could fall short of its equity goals because of imperfect weights. This approach also fails to take full account of the concentrations of challenging-to-educate students and their effects on the distribution of teachers. In addition, the WSF proposal can be faulted for paying no attention to adequacy, potentially stigmatizing individual students, and placing so much focus on individual schools. A more complete evaluation of WSF would require a broader institutional perspective that extends beyond the equity and adequacy considerations of this article.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document