America's Most Financially Disadvantaged School Districts and How They Got That Way

Education and Literacy, Government Reform

America's Most Financially Disadvantaged School Districts and How They Got That Way

This report explores some of the most financially disadvantaged school districts in the country and identifies a typology of conditions that have created or reinforced their disadvantage. Financially disadvantaged districts are those that serve student populations with much greater-than-average need but do so with much less-than average funding. The Education Law Center of New Jersey's annual report, "Is School Funding Fair? A National Report Card," uses a panel of the most recent three years of U.S. Census Bureau Fiscal Survey data on state and local revenues per pupil in order to determine which states achieve systematically greater funding per pupil in districts serving higher student poverty concentrations and which states maintain school funding systems where higher poverty districts have systematically fewer resources per pupil.

The same data have been used in follow-up analyses to identify the local public school districts across states that are saddled with greater-than-average student needs and less-than-average state and local revenue.2 As one might expect, numerous poorly funded local public school districts exist in the least fairly funded states. That is, where a state school finance system is such that higher-need districts on average have lower state and local revenue, there tends to be more high-need districts with lower state and local revenue. And as it turns out, there are unfairly funded districts in what are traditionally viewed as fairly funded states. In other words, poorly funded local public school districts exist in states where school finance systems are, on average, progressive. This report looks at why this happens -- and what can be done about it.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America-United States

Road to Success: Tales of Great Schools

Education and Literacy

Road to Success: Tales of Great Schools

This report details our visits in 19 vibrant communities and 47 impressive classrooms across Minnesota. We hope the proof points that educators and community leaders shared will inspire fellow teachers, administrators, community leaders -- and policymakers -- in classrooms and at the capitol. It's critical to learn from and collaborate with Minnesotans working to make great public schools available to all kids.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Midwestern)-Minnesota

Central Office Transformation Toolkit: Strengthening School District Central Offices in the Service of Improved Teaching and Learning

Education and Literacy

Central Office Transformation Toolkit: Strengthening School District Central Offices in the Service of Improved Teaching and Learning

Principals are key to improving teaching and learning in schools, but how can school district central offices give principals the support they need? Three tools designed by education researchers at the University of Washington are meant to help. Two focus on the redesign of central offices in ways that foster effective leadership in schools. The last is an aid for principal supervisors seeking to develop the instructional capabilities of the principals they oversee.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America / United States

Continuous Improvement in Education

Education and Literacy

Continuous Improvement in Education

In recent years, 'continuous improvement' has become a popular catchphrase in the field of education. However, while continuous improvement has become commonplace and well-documented in other industries, such as healthcare and manufacturing, little is known about how this work has manifested itself in education.

This white paper attempts to map the landscape of this terrain by identifying and describing organizations engaged in continuous improvement, and by highlighting commonalities and differences among them. The findings classify three types of organizations engaged in continuous improvement: those focused on instructional improvement at the classroom level; those concentrating on system-wide improvement; and those addressing collective impact. Each type is described in turn and illustrated by an organizational case study. Through the analysis, six common themes that characterize all three types of organizations (e.g., leadership and strategy, communication and engagement, organizational infrastructure, methodology, data collection and analysis, and building capacity) are enumerated.

This white paper makes four concluding observations. First, the three case studies provide evidence of organizations conducting continuous improvement work in the field of education, albeit at different levels and in different ways. Second, entry points to continuous improvement work are not mutually exclusive, but are nested and, hence, mutually informative and comparative. Third, continuous improvement is not synonymous with improving all organizational processes simultaneously; rather, research and learning cycles are iterative and gradual in nature. Fourth, despite being both iterative and gradual, it is imperative that improvement work is planned and undertaken in a rigorous, thoughtful, and transparent fashion.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Southern)-Maryland-Montgomery County, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Wisconsin-Waukesha County-Menomonee Falls, North America-United States (Midwestern)-Ohio-Hamilton County-Cincinnati

School Safety in North Carolina: Realities, Recommendations & Resources

Children and Youth, Crime and Safety, Education and Literacy

School Safety in North Carolina: Realities, Recommendations & Resources

The primary mission of North Carolina schools is to provide students an excellent education. To fully achieve this mission, schools must not only be safe, but also developmentally appropriate, fair, and just.

Unfortunately, many so-called "school safety" proposals in the wake of the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut have been shortsighted measures inspired by political expediency but unsupported by data. We aim to provide a more thoughtful approach informed by decades of research and centered on the mission of public schools.

This issue brief responds to the newly established N.C. Center for Safer Schools, which has requested public input on "local concerns and challenges related to school safety" and has made available the opportunity to submit written comments.

The first section of the brief debunks common myths and provides essential facts that must provide the backdrop for the school safety debate. The second section offers proven methods of striving for safe, developmentally appropriate, fair, and just public schools. It also provides examples of reforms from other cities and states. The third section makes note of resources that we encourage Center staff to study carefully.

This brief rests on several key premises. First, "school safety" includes both physical security of students as well as their emotional and psychological well-being. Many of the proposals following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School have had an overly narrow focus on physical security at the expense of this broader picture of holistic student well-being. Second, public education in this state needs more funding in order for schools to even have a chance of achieving their core mission. North Carolina consistently ranks among the worst states in the country for funding of public education.

Schools need more resources to implement measures that can truly ensure student safety. Third, student well-being depends on a coordinated effort by all the systems that serve youth. For example, school safety will be helped by laws that keep guns off school property and by full funding of the child welfare, mental health, and juvenile justice systems. Finally, this issue brief is not intended to be a comprehensive set of suggestions.

Instead, our focus is on providing the Center important context that we view as missing from the current debate.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Southern)-North Carolina

Making Change: Lessons from the Families Improving Education Initiative

Education and Literacy, Parenting and Families

Making Change: Lessons from the Families Improving Education Initiative

The James Irvine Foundation launched the Families Improving Education (FIE) initiative in 2008 by funding eleven community-based organizations in California's Central Valley and Inland Empire to support parent involvement in K-12 educational policymaking. Families In Schools, a Los Angeles-based advocacy organization was selected to serve as a technical assistance provider and grant-making intermediary. The FIE initiative is based on the premise that parent-engagement efforts can foster more responsive and appropriate school policies that enhance student success. This report, prepared by Harder+Company Community Research, highlights the insights and promising strategies of the FIE initiative, looking closely at three core components: increasing the involvement of parents in K-12 decision-making; influencing educational decisions, policies, and practices that lead to improved academic outcomes; and strengthening the capacity of community-based organizations to engage in educational advocacy.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Western)-California

Avoiding Accountability: How Charter Operators Evade Ohio's Automatic Closure Law

Education and Literacy

Avoiding Accountability: How Charter Operators Evade Ohio's Automatic Closure Law

Ohio's charter-closure law is touted as one of the toughest in the nation because it requires the automatic closure of charter schools that consistently fail to meet academic standards. The law has been showcased by the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA) in its "One Million Lives" campaign, which calls for tougher state laws to close failing charter schools.

The widespread attention and support of the NACSA campaign has pushed Ohio's closure law into the spotlight as a model of accountability for low-performing charter schools. However, The Plain Dealer's editorial board, in a commentary on NACSA's praise of Ohio's charter school accountability standards, pointed out what NACSA did not: Ohio's charter school laws, while they may have stronger mandates for closure than those of other states, are still replete with loopholes.

Since the charter-closure law went into effect in 2008, 20 schools across the state have met closure criteria, and all are currently listed as closed by the Ohio Department of Education (ODE). But an investigation of the schools by Policy Matters revealed that eight schools -- and the management companies that run them -- have found ways to skirt the closure law and remain open, severely undermining the law's effectiveness and highlighting the lax accountability that prevails in Ohio's charter sector. For-profit managers -- the Leona Group, Mosaica Education and White Hat Management -- operate six of the reopened schools.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Midwestern)-Ohio

Good for Teachers, Good for Students: The Need for Smart Teacher Evaluation in Michigan

Education and Literacy

Good for Teachers, Good for Students: The Need for Smart Teacher Evaluation in Michigan

Michigan school districts and charter schools are struggling to support teachers in building their skills, a report by the nonprofit Education Trust-Midwest found. "Good for Teachers, Good for Students" examines 28 local teacher evaluation models across Michigan and urges the state to make a new educator evaluation system a priority.

August 1970

Geographic Focus: North America-United States (Midwestern)-Michigan

See More Reports

Go to IssueLab