Search

Sixty-seven school finance reforms (SFRs) in 26 states have taken place since 1990; however, there is little empirical evidence on the heterogeneity of SFR effects. We provide a comprehensive description of how individual reforms affected resource allocation to low- and high-income districts within states, including both financial and non-financial outcomes. After summarizing the heterogeneity of individual SFR impacts, we then examine its correlates, identifying both policy and legislative/political factors. Taken together, this research aims to provide a rich description of variation in states' responses to SFRs, as well as explanation of this heterogeneity as it relates to contextual factors.

Congress amended and extended the "Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education" ("Perkins IV") in 2018 with passage of the "Strengthening Career and Technical Education Act for the 21st Century" ("Perkins V"); the law became effective on July 1, 2019. "Perkins V" increases federal funding for career and technical education (CTE), including the amount available for states to spend on educating students who are incarcerated. To provide a framework and to support states as they develop their "Perkins V" plans, this report looks back at how states used "Perkins IV" funds to serve individuals in states institutions during three fiscal years (FYs) 2012-14. This report addresses four research questions: (1) What was the total amount of "Perkins IV" funds that each state made available in each of the three fiscal years (FYs 2012-14) for state institutions, including states correctional institutions?; (2) What percentage of their total grant allocation from "Perkins IV" did each state make available in each of the three fiscal years (FYs 2012-14) for all types of state institutions?; (3) How many incarcerated students in state correctional institutions received programs and services with the "Perkins IV" funds for state institutions?; and (4) What types of programs and services did states offer incarcerated students in their state correctional institutions with "Perkins IV" funds? The number of individuals served in state institutions could increase with the "Perkins V" 1 percent increase in funds made available to serve individuals in state institutions, such as state correctional institutions, juvenile justice facilities, and educational institutions that serve individuals with disabilities. The data and the information in the state narratives about the services and activities for incarcerated students may assist state and local decisions makers in developing correctional education programs with the amount made available under "Perkins V."

This report provides key insights into the difficult working conditions endured by teachers in Arizona and across the nation. Arizona provides just $8,569 in per pupil funding, the lowest among all states. In fact, Arizona provides $5,477 "less" per pupil than the national average. Arizona also invests only 2.5% of its state wealth, as measured by the gross domestic product of its economy, in K-12 public education -- the lowest percentage in the nation. And Arizona's high-need schools, as measured by district poverty levels, receive the same levels of funding as the state's low-need schools. In this report, the authors present their analysis of the condition of public school funding in Arizona and 48 other states. Using the most recently available data from the 2016-17 school year, they rank and grade each state on three core measures to answer the question: How fair is school funding in your state? The measures are: (1) Funding Level; (2) Funding Distribution; and (3) Funding Effort. Each state's rankings and grades on these school measures are presented as a tool to inform policymakers, business and community leaders, teachers, parents and students about the condition of public school funding in their state. The report is also designed to assist advocates in their efforts to improve the level and distribution of school funding for students in state public school systems.

This issue of "WICHE Insights" reviews the results of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education's (WICHE) annual survey of tuition and fees at public postsecondary institutions in the WICHE region in the context of state higher education finance policy. In light of steady increases in tuition and fees rates, modest growth in state appropriations, and varied state financial aid availability, rising postsecondary costs for students and families remain a top concern. All aspects of state higher education finance policy are impacted by fiscal changes at the federal and state levels. How those changes will affect tuition and fees, appropriations, and financial aid in the future is unclear, but recent trends have direct implications for postsecondary affordability and access.

This issue of "Policy Insights" reviews the results of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education's annual survey of tuition and fees at public colleges and universities in the WICHE region and discusses related policy implications. (Data from the survey were published in November 2016.) Overall, tuition and fees in the WICHE region increased relatively little in 2016-17, slightly less than the national average rate of change -- and even decreased in the state of Washington. State appropriations to higher education in the West have generally stabilized in the past several years, although support for higher education in several WICHE states was impacted by the fall in energy prices. But even with the relatively modest increase in tuition and fees, families and students continue to struggle with the rising costs of a college education and affordability remains a key issue for states and individuals.

In September 2011, the Association of American Universities launched a major initiative to improve undergraduate STEM education. The overall objective was to influence the culture of STEM departments at AAU institutions so that faculty members are encouraged and supported to use teaching practices proven by research to be effective in engaging students in STEM education and in helping students learn. The Undergraduate STEM Education Initiative's intent was to help research universities better assess and improve the quality of teaching in STEM fields by: promoting the use of teaching techniques in STEM classes demonstrated by scholarship to be the most effective at engaging and helping students learn; encouraging universities and STEM departments to better evaluate, recognize and reward faculty members for the quality and effectiveness of their teaching; and facilitate the creation of an effective network for disseminating and sharing best practices in undergraduate STEM education reform and classroom based educational improvements. (Additional funding for this report was provided from Elsevier and Research Corporation for Science Advancement.)

This report presents the first detailed comparison of resource allocation between rural and nonrural districts in the West Region. Three regional characteristics often associated with rural districts were chosen for the analysis: district enrollment, student population density within a district (students per square mile), and drive time from the center of a district to the nearest urban area/cluster. Two other types of factors thought to be associated with resource allocation were also investigated: student need (incidence of poverty, English language learner students, and students receiving special education services) and geographic differences in labor costs. The report first examines how average regional characteristics, student needs, and labor costs differed across rural and nonrural district locale categories in 2005/06. Next it analyzes how average measures of resource allocation (per student expenditures on instruction, administration and student support, and transportation; ratios of administrative, instructional, and student support staff to students; and ratios of district central administration and maintenance and operations spending to school-level spending) varied across district locale categories. Using regression analysis, the study then models how these measures of resource allocation varied with the three regional characteristics and whether the relationship between resource allocation and regional characteristics differed across the study states. This study finds that rural districts in the West Region spent more per student, hired more staff per 100 students, and had higher overhead ratios of district- to school-level resources than did city and suburban districts. Regional characteristics were more strongly related to resource allocation than were other cost factors studied. [For the main document, see ED515211.]

This issue of "Policy Insights" reviews the results of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education's (WICHE) annual survey of tuition and fees at public colleges and universities in the WICHE region and discusses related policy implications. Overall, tuition and fees in the WICHE region increased relatively little in 2015-16 (and even decreased in Oregon and Washington), slightly less than the national average rate of change. And state appropriations to higher education in the West have generally stabilized in the past several years. But in this climate of overall positive news about higher education financing, families and students continue to struggle with the high costs of a college education. "Free college" initiatives have gotten a lot of attention as a possible solution to college affordability, student borrowing continues to be an important part of the affordability discussion, and affordability has the potential to affect states' attainment of higher education and workforce goals.

A full year of progress in advancing education reform across America is documented in each of the Foundation for Excellence in Education's Annual Reports. The illustrated pages of the 2014 report, provide data-rich updates on Excellence in Education's work to advance student-centered policies in more than 40 states, all aimed at improving learning for millions of students by increasing school performance, empowering parents and students with educational choice, and personalizing education through 21st-century innovations. "2014: A Year of Collaboration" a month by month synopsis of 2014's accomplishments throughout the year. Other topics discussed include: (1) The "Tough Love" of School Grading; (2) Reading is the Gateway to Success; (3) Expanding Access and Equity; (4) Preparing Students for Today's Global Economy; (5) 2014: By the Numbers; (6) Convening the Nation's Leaders; (7) Next Generation Reform; (8) ExcelinEd Across the Nation: State Profiles; and (9) Fiscal Accountability.

This report provides a roadmap for addressing the issues related to the integration of technology into the educational setting. To achieve full technology integration, Adult Education programs will be required to go through systemic changes with implications for budget and resource allocation, professional development and training, certification and hiring criteria, curriculum content and assessment, accountability and data issues, and the structure and scheduling of classes. Technology integration is a slow process that requires extensive support as programs and educators move through the continuum from having no (or very little) technology toward full integration. The Strategic Plan, introduced herein, serves as a guide to assist adult education programs analyze their current situation and then strategize and prioritize their efforts in order to realize the Vision for Technology Use in Adult Education and to achieve the Technology Goals for Adult Education as set forth in this document. The following are appended: (1) The Values for Technology in Arizona Adult Education; (2) Technology Integration Continuum for Arizona Adult Education; (3) Technology Self Assessment Survey for Arizona Adult Education; and (4) Survey of Technology in Arizona Adult Education Programs, including Explanation of Survey Items and Complete Survey Results. (Contains 3 tables.)

The National Governors Association (NGA) and The Hunt Institute co-hosted the 2013 Governors Education Symposium. To inform participants and generate conversation about the themes of the symposium, the two organizations developed a set of issue briefs discussing four areas: (1) college- and career-training ready standards; (2) building coalitions to scale and sustain reform efforts; (3) teacher and leader effectiveness; (4) and reallocating resources to improve student achievement. The first issue brief on standards focuses on governors' and state policymakers' role in this work in the coming years, including implementing the standards and aligning them with other components of the education system, preparing for drops in test performance, considering the impact of the standards' work on other education reform efforts, ensuring and sustaining stakeholder support, and ensuring involvement of higher education and business communities. The issue brief that focuses on building coalitions recommends that governors' offices and other state policymakers consider opportunities to bring together a variety of groups (e.g., business community, non-profit organizations, and the public) under a common agenda as a mechanism for successful reform that is scale-able and sustainable. Tennessee, Arizona, and Kentucky are profiled as states that have built coalitions to scale and sustain reform efforts. The teacher and leader effectiveness brief focuses on three high-leverage areas of reform that are powerful policy levers for governors: strengthening the quality of educator preparation programs, revising certification to focus on demonstration of performance, and enhancing educator evaluation systems to more closely tie to professional development and support. The final issue brief discusses several considerations for reallocating resources toward a more focused goal of improvement student achievement and encourages governors and state policymakers to: align resource strategies to broader reform; use policy as a vehicle to provide autonomy to educators, establish goals and accountability, and build the knowledge and capacity of education leaders; and setting an agenda that focuses on critical resource areas, such as finance systems, compensation systems, and delivery models. [This symposium took place at Fairmont Chicago, Millennium Park.]

Education cut-backs are likely to worsen in the short run. This makes it imperative for policy makers to reverse trends toward lopsided cutbacks that decimate efforts to address factors interfering with learning and teaching. Furthermore, it is essential to move forward in more cost-effective ways by unifying student and learning supports and braiding remaining categorical funding in ways that reduce redundancy and counterproductive competition for sparse resources. This brief highlights these matters. An appendix discusses why schools should develop a unified and comprehensive system of student and learning supports. (Contains 1 exhibit.)

Awarding credits based on student mastery of content and skills can remove barriers to increasing student readiness for college and careers, according to a new issue brief released by the National Governors Association. This brief shows how governors can lead efforts to foster alternative methods of awarding credit by working to: (1) Build flexibility in state policy for students to earn credit based on learning; (2) Modify school funding formulas to allocate resources based on student mastery of content and skills as opposed to enrollment; (3) Ensure data systems are linked across state agencies and education providers; and (4) Require public institutions of higher education to accept student transcripts with credits earned by demonstration of mastery. (Contains 12 endnotes.)

Policy discussions about funding in higher education focus primarily on revenues needed to balance budgets from year to year, rather than on how funds need to be invested to meet strategic priorities. The data in "Trends" show that the incremental approach to fundraising and spending has resulted in a slow disinvestment in core instructional capacity at a majority of institutions. Now more than ever, we need straightforward and strategic policy conversations about money and priorities that are guided by sound metrics. Decisions need to be based on data and not anecdote, and funding increases, whether from tuition or state appropriations, should be justified based on evidence that resources are going to pay for essential priorities. There are five basic steps that higher education leaders and policymakers can take to refocus finance conversations in a way that addresses the troubling trend of spending more and getting less. These are: (1) Set sharp-edged goals for educational attainment; (2) Look at spending patterns and align spending with strategic priorities; (3) Increase degree productivity by reducing the number of excess credits taken by students and the time it takes students to get a degree; (4) Strengthen public accountability for spending; and (5) Improve governing board oversight of spending.

The United States faces a period of opportunity for reinvention unlike any other, and the need for dramatic reform extends to higher education. Today, the United States is at a crossroads, facing unprecedented challenges in meeting expectations and upholding values that have long distinguished the nation. For the benefit of every American, decades-old approaches to structuring and paying for education beyond high school must be altered to ensure the nation produces enough graduates capable of contributing fully to society and to the communities in which they live. Political leaders responsible for meeting this rising demand for a skilled workforce and educated citizenry are seeking fundamental changes in higher education, which has long served as an engine of opportunity and economic mobility in the United States. Longstanding approaches for providing college and other postsecondary education cannot be scaled affordably to meet a growing need for better-educated adults. To ensure the nation has enough people with meaningful workforce credentials and high-quality associate or bachelor's degrees, the United States must develop lower-cost, high-quality alternatives capable of delivering education to millions of students whom colleges and universities are not serving as well as they could. This report outlines a Four Step agenda that higher education leaders and policy makers are adopting across the country to help their states address economic challenges through higher education.

The Recession, Retrenchment, and Recovery Project examined the effects of recessions on financial access to college during the 25-year period 1979-2004, identified states that have been relatively successful in maintaining financial access, and collected policy strategies used by these states. This study examined the similarities and differences among states, and the effects of recessions on higher education funding, tuition and fees, and need-based student financial aid programs. Tuition and student aid were the focus of the study because state policymakers can influence or control them through policies, appropriation priorities, administrative processes, and coordination. Among the findings were that higher education appropriations did not keep pace with growth in the state economy in any state. In all states, the real Gross State Product (GSP) increased faster than higher education appropriations during the period of the study. Three of the four recessions negatively affected funding for higher education--total appropriations as well as appropriations per FTE enrollment. Nationally, appropriations per FTE declined 2.0% following the 1980 recession, 5.0% after the 1990-91 recession, and 8.6% following the 2001 recession. Unlike other recessions, there was an increase in appropriations per FTE following the 1981-82 recession. Following an introduction, this report is divided into four chapters. The first chapter of this report, Consequences of Recessions, describes the results of the first phase of this project, analysis of 25-year trends in state appropriations for higher education, allocations to student financial aid, and changes in tuition and fees at public institutions. These trends are examined in the context of national recessions and related changes in states' economies. The second phase of the project was a survey of state higher education organizations designed to ascertain how states dealt with the national recession that occurred in 2001. Chapter 2, Impact of the 2001 Recession, describes the results of this survey--priorities that guided state funding, program changes, strategies used to maintain financial access, and the outlook for the future. Chapter 3, State Visit Report, highlights the third phase of the project: seven states were selected for further study through interviews of policy leaders in higher education and student financial aid administration. Interviews addressed policies and strategies the selected states used to maintain and expand financial access across successive economic cycles. Based on what was learned from the fiscal analysis, survey of states, and interviews of policymakers in seven states, Chapter 4, Recovery and Beyond: Strategies for maintaining Financial Success, presents recommendations formulated to serve as resources for states seeking new strategies. Four appendixes include: (1) Fiscal and Economic Analysis Tables; (2) Data and Research Design; (3) State Survey Questionnaire; and (4) Policymakers and Higher Education Leaders Interviewed. (Contains 24 tables and 6 figures.) [This project was also conducted by the National Association of State Student Grant Aid Programs (NASSGAP). For related volume, see ED502181.]

Results of a national study of the use of funds provided by the 1974 amendments to Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act by the state education agencies (SEAs) are presented. The study was undertaken to (1) describe and analyze SEA policies and activities regarding bilingual education, (2) describe and analyze the SEA-level management structure for the coordination of technical assistance, and (3) provide information on technical management and assistance activities the Department of Education may use to help SEA grantees assist local schools in building their capacity to provide bilingual education services to language minority students. The study involved a literature review, analysis of Title VII grant applications submitted by SEAs, and case studies of the implementation of Title VII grants in nine states. This volume presents the nine state case studies for Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, New York, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. An introductory section also compares the nine states' funding and key legislative requirements with regard to bilingual education. (MSE)

This document explores how well the four conditions necessary for implementation of performance-based policies in vocational education can be met in postsecondary education. The four conditions require that: (1) it must be possible to specify the desired outcomes precisely and unambiguously; (2) these outcomes must be easily, accurately, and fairly measured; (3) performance must be tied directly to funding so that success is rewarded or failure penalized; and (4) information on outcomes must be disclosed to consumers and policy makers to improve choices and decision making. The first of the report's five chapters explains why performance-based policy seems desirable at this time. The second chapter addresses issues surrounding definition and measurement of performance in postsecondary vocational education, covering labor market outcomes, learning outcomes, and access to education outcomes. Chapter 3 concerns how performance can be linked to funding, discussing performance contracting, performance-based funds allocation formulas, and performance-based student financial aid, and offering guidelines for federal vocational education policy. Chapter 4 explains information disclosure for potential consumers of postsecondary education, including the benefits and costs of disclosing more information, the necessary conditions for effective disclosure, and Arizona's experience with disclosure. Chapter 5 considers how to introduce performance funding into the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act and discusses several objections that proponents of the changes are likely to confront. (CML)