2009
DOI: 10.1353/jef.0.0004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On Equity: The Illinois Dilemma Revisited: A Response to a Response

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This approach makes it conducive to compare student-level costs across and within school districts based on a proportional metric. It also allows for students or school districts to be considered as the unit of analysis because weighted student data facilitates student-level comparisons and between-district equity analyses (Verstegen & Driscoll, 2009).…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach makes it conducive to compare student-level costs across and within school districts based on a proportional metric. It also allows for students or school districts to be considered as the unit of analysis because weighted student data facilitates student-level comparisons and between-district equity analyses (Verstegen & Driscoll, 2009).…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They reviewed their original study and compared it to the Mullin and Brown (2009) replication study. They indicated Verstegen and Driscoll (2009) reiterated their original findings that the Illinois funding system is inequitable and is not wealth neutral (does not provide equal opportunities for all students). Hickrod and Hubbard (1977) and Hickrod, Chaudhari and Lundeen (1980) compared indices between two points in time to evaluate a new funding formula.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most of these recommendations stemmed from a difference in opinion as to whether categorical funding and special population adjustments should be included in the equity measures or not. Verstegen and Driscoll (2009) responded to the criticisms included in the replication study by Mullin and Brown (2009). They reviewed their original study and compared it to the Mullin and Brown (2009) replication study.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%