A decade ago, an academic research team produced a massive report on the shortcomings in how California’s K-12 schools educate about 6 million children and adolescents. The “Getting Down to Facts” report was issued just as a very severe recession...
This report highlights the financial stress facing teachers in regions of fast economic growth and high property values. Teachers in the San Francisco Bay Area report far greater financial anxiety than do samples of adults and workers from across the...
Lashing out against low pay and what they see as paltry state spending on education, teachers in West Virginia, Kentucky, Oklahoma — and recently Arizona and Colorado — have made national headlines by walking off the job in unprecedented displays...
A new study released last week concluded the implementation of California’s school finance reform, with money targeted to address the needs of students and local districts, is making a significant difference in student outcomes, narrowing achievement gaps between groups of...
California’s sweeping education reforms championed by Gov. Jerry Brown have resulted in higher graduation rates and especially sizable gains in math among low-income students in the 11th grade, according to a new study.
New research shows that California’s landmark overhaul of public education finance and accountability is narrowing achievement gaps between groups of students and helping parents learn about school progress, the state Department of Education reported Tuesday. The Learning Policy Institute late...
California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), the school finance overhaul enacted in 2013, is having a measurable positive impact on students’ academic achievement and graduation rates, improving outcomes and narrowing gaps, according to a study released today by the Learning...
One in 4 California school districts received notice that they must work with county offices of education or with a new state agency to improve the education of at least one of their student groups that were ranked among the...
Some low-income students in California could face a steep fee increase for Advanced Placement exams this spring following the elimination of a federal subsidy. The cost for each AP exam for these students could climb from $5 or $15 to...
PACE’s inaugural conference is the premier event for policymakers, researchers, advocates and other leaders working to define and sustain a long-term strategy for comprehensive policy reform and continuous improvement of California’s education system. Our 2017 full-day conference will engage with...
A new study examines charter school closures due to financial struggles and explores funding patterns impacting their viability. Analyzing nine years of finance data from California, it compares spending between charter and traditional public schools. Charter schools, receiving 10% less per pupil in revenue, spend 23% less on instruction and 50% less on pupil support services. They allocate less to administrative costs but invest more in consulting services and operations. This suggests cost-saving strategies such as hiring less experienced teachers and employing part-time consultants. While this fiscal flexibility aids financial stability, it raises concerns. Lower spending on essential areas like instruction and support might affect school quality and academic performance. This challenges assumptions about charter schools' autonomy leading to higher spending on instruction. The findings imply a delicate balance between fiscal flexibility and educational quality in charter schools, highlighting potential sustainability concerns if lower spending compromises student outcomes.
Researchers conducted an experiment to determine if incentives could improve low-income students' attendance in tutoring programs provided through Supplemental Education Services (SEdS). Three groups of 5th-8th graders were formed: one offered a $100 reward for regular attendance, another receiving certificates of recognition, and a control group without incentives. Surprisingly, the monetary reward didn't increase attendance, while the certificate group attended 40% more sessions than the control. This contrasts with past studies showing monetary incentives for improved test scores as ineffective, suggesting that mere rewards may not enhance skills without additional support. The certificate approach proved cost-effective, costing $9 per student versus $100 for the monetary incentive. However, wider implementation's effectiveness might diminish due to students' varied perceptions of recognition's value, related to existing academic achievements or repeated rewards. The study's success suggests non-monetary incentives are effective and inexpensive. Policymakers and educators seeking to boost student participation in underutilized programs should consider these findings, emphasizing nuanced research into varying incentives' effectiveness and cost-efficiency to motivate student engagement. Despite these promising results, a comprehensive solution requires a deeper understanding of how different incentives affect diverse student populations and their sustained impact over time.
Though far from a majority, an increasing number of Californians say that the state’s public schools have gotten better over the past few years, according to a poll released on Thursday. But it’s not because they are impressed with the...
County offices of education—which are charged with assisting districts in developing and achieving accountability plans—may have extra work to do in parts of Southern California, the Bay Area, and Sacramento to ensure that extra state funding improves outcomes of high-need...
President Obama’s proposal to make community colleges free is a valiant effort to address the rising demand for skilled workers throughout the nation and to improve college access for low-income students. As states consider his proposal, they would be wise...
During the Great Recession many states made deep cuts to education budgets. Some states have begun to restore funding as the economic recovery has slowly increased revenues. Others have resisted. In Arizona, the state Legislature is asking to delay implementation...
Schools in California are seeing new funding and greater local flexibility in how to use their financial resources. According to a paper released earlier this year by Stanford University's Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE).
A new study that examines the implementation of California’s Local Control Funding Formula revealed that district leaders welcome a need-based local funding model but that they were hindered by a lack of time, information, skills and resources. The report, “Toward...
Now, this is different: The California legislature passed a law, and people actually like it. They are trying hard to implement the spirit of the state’s new finance formula rather than trivialize it with minimum compliance behavior. Such is the...
Education policies often focus on evaluating the effectiveness of interventions without considering their costs. This oversight limits policymakers’ ability to make informed decisions about resource allocation. Understanding intervention costs in relation to their effectiveness is crucial for efficient policymaking. For instance, reducing high school dropout rates, a national priority, could alleviate substantial economic burdens, yet education budgets are limited. Researchers conducted cost-effectiveness analyses on five dropout prevention programs, finding considerable variations in costs and effectiveness. Remedial programs aimed at dropouts were notably more expensive per additional graduate compared to preventative programs, which targeted at-risk students still in school. These findings emphasize the need for cost-effectiveness assessments in educational program evaluations to guide policymaking effectively. Without such analyses, research evidence alone may not provide policymakers with a comprehensive view for decision-making, potentially leading to inefficient resource allocation.
California has taken the first steps down an historic path that fundamentally alters how its public schools are financed, education decisions are made, and traditionally underserved students' needs are met. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), passed with bipartisan legislative...
California has taken the first steps down an historic path that fundamentally alters how its public schools are financed, education decisions are made, and traditionally underserved students’ needs are met. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), passed with bipartisan legislative...
School districts across California have begun working to implement the Common Core State Standards and to prepare for California’s new assessments. Policy Analysis for California Education (http://edpolicyinca.org) and California County Superintendents Educational Services Association (http://ccsesa.org) are pleased to sponsor six...
Year-round school calendars, widely adopted in California due to school crowding, aim to evenly distribute school days. Multi-track calendars, seen as cost-saving, accommodate larger student bodies. There is a belief that redistributing summer breaks could counteract summer learning loss, particularly for disadvantaged students. Research highlights caution regarding year-round schooling. While cost savings are clear, academic gains haven't materialized, impacting high-risk student groups negatively. California showed notably negative effects compared to neutral outcomes in Wake County, North Carolina, where multi-track calendars were used widely. This disparity emphasizes considering demographics; schools with substantial minority or low-income populations may face different challenges. The findings caution policymakers against risking student achievement solely for minor savings. Tailored approaches for schools based on their demographics are suggested. The academic benefits of year-round schooling remain scarce, except for addressing severe overcrowding. Yet, amid tightening budgets, year-round schools are cautiously endorsed as a financial reform, urging further examination and context-specific considerations in policymaking.
This commentary, part of a broader PACE series exploring school finance, speaks to challenges faced by California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The two biggest problems with the California financial system are inequitable revenue allocations and inefficiencies caused by categorical restrictions. Governor Brown's proposal addresses these issues, but critics argue that the system still has other problems. One major criticism is that there are winners and losers in the system. Under Brown's proposal, the allocations for some districts will look drastically different, with some receiving less than others. This is because current allocations have little connection to the costs of educating students and the characteristics of students and schools. Another alternative is to raise the base so everybody "wins," which would provide more flexibility and a more correlated revenue with costs. However, this system still creates winners and losers because allocations would not be as tightly connected to costs as under the current system. Governor Brown's proposal nevertheless helps solve the two biggest problems with California's school finance system and offers a better alternative to the current financial system.