Christopher A. Candelaria , Ishtiaque Fazlul , Cory Koedel , Kenneth A. Shores
{"title":"加权以求进步?田纳西州与加权学生资助相关的隐性权衡分析","authors":"Christopher A. Candelaria , Ishtiaque Fazlul , Cory Koedel , Kenneth A. Shores","doi":"10.1016/j.econedurev.2024.102600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We study the progressivity of school district funding under Tennessee's weighted student funding formula. We propose a simple definition of progressivity based on the difference in exposure to district per-pupil funding between poor and non-poor students. The realized progressivity of district funding in Tennessee is much smaller—only about 17 percent as large—as the formula weights imply directly. The attenuation is driven by the mixing of poor and non-poor students within districts. We further show the components of the Tennessee formula not explicitly tied to student poverty are only modestly progressive.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48261,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Education Review","volume":"103 ","pages":"Article 102600"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Weighting for progressivity? An analysis of implicit tradeoffs associated with weighted student funding in Tennessee\",\"authors\":\"Christopher A. Candelaria , Ishtiaque Fazlul , Cory Koedel , Kenneth A. Shores\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.econedurev.2024.102600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>We study the progressivity of school district funding under Tennessee's weighted student funding formula. We propose a simple definition of progressivity based on the difference in exposure to district per-pupil funding between poor and non-poor students. The realized progressivity of district funding in Tennessee is much smaller—only about 17 percent as large—as the formula weights imply directly. The attenuation is driven by the mixing of poor and non-poor students within districts. We further show the components of the Tennessee formula not explicitly tied to student poverty are only modestly progressive.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48261,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economics of Education Review\",\"volume\":\"103 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102600\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economics of Education Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775724000943\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economics of Education Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775724000943","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Weighting for progressivity? An analysis of implicit tradeoffs associated with weighted student funding in Tennessee
We study the progressivity of school district funding under Tennessee's weighted student funding formula. We propose a simple definition of progressivity based on the difference in exposure to district per-pupil funding between poor and non-poor students. The realized progressivity of district funding in Tennessee is much smaller—only about 17 percent as large—as the formula weights imply directly. The attenuation is driven by the mixing of poor and non-poor students within districts. We further show the components of the Tennessee formula not explicitly tied to student poverty are only modestly progressive.
期刊介绍:
Economics of Education Review publishes research on education policy and finance, human capital production and acquisition, and the returns to human capital. We accept empirical, methodological and theoretical contributions, but the main focus of Economics of Education Review is on applied studies that employ micro data and clear identification strategies. Our goal is to publish innovative, cutting-edge research on the economics of education that is of interest to academics, policymakers and the public. Starting with papers submitted March 1, 2014, the review process for articles submitted to the Economics of Education Review will no longer be double blind. Authors are requested to include a title page with authors'' names and affiliation. Reviewers will continue to be anonymous.