Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Chambers, Jay G.; Parrish, Thomas B.; Esra, Phil E; Shkolnik, Jamie L. |
|---|---|
| Institution | American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences, Palo Alto, CA. Center for Special Education Finance. |
| Titel | How Does Spending on Special Education Students Vary across Districts? An Analysis of Spending by Urbanicity, District Size, Median Family Income, and Student Poverty Levels in 1999-2000. Report. Special Education Expenditure Project (SEEP). [Report No.: SEEP-R-02-02 |
| Quelle | (2002), (25 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Monographie |
| Schlagwörter | Disabilities; Educational Finance; Elementary Secondary Education; Expenditure per Student; Gifted; National Surveys; Poverty; Rural Education; School Demography; School District Size; School Districts; Special Education; Trend Analysis; Urban Education |
| Abstract | This document is one of a series of reports based on the Special Education Expenditure Project, a study of the nation's spending on special education and related services based on analysis of data for the 1999-2000 school year. This report focuses on general patterns of variation in total spending on special education students across districts categorized according to urbanicity, district size, median family income, and student poverty levels. A cost index is used to assess the effects on expenditure levels of geographic variations in the costs of education. A highlights section notes the following: (1) the smallest districts spend the most (districts with fewer than 2,500 students spend 22% more than the largest districts in cost-adjusted dollars to educate a special education student); (2) rural districts spend the most (in cost adjusted dollars), although urban districts spend the most in actual dollars; (3) the third of the districts with the lowest median family income spend less per student in both actual ($2,314) and cost-adjusted ($1,658) terms than districts with middle-income families; and (4) low-poverty districts have the lowest spending ratios (1.72 as compared with 1.98 for the highest-poverty quartile). Following an introduction, individual sections analyze: actual versus cost-adjusted expenditures; spending differences by urbanicity; spending differences by district size; spending differences by income level; and spending differences by student poverty. Appendices provide data on samples used and further analyses. (DB) |
| Anmerkungen | For full text: http://www.seep.org. |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
| Update | 2004/1/01 |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
