The purpose of this analysis was to examine issues of equity and excellence by means of exploring the relevance of school and sociodemographic variables on student performance in a large county of Kentucky. The study was correlational in nature. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to identify the predictors of student achievement for the last four years. The predictors included school and sociodemographic variables. The dependent variable was operationalized using school scores on a standardized test, the Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS). Previous research suggesting that poverty is the best predictor of educational outcomes was supported, but other variables were also found to be significant. Implications for policy and administrative practice are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ. E., & WhiteW. E. (1997). The equity consequence of school finance reform in Kentucky. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 165–184.
2.
BrookoverW. B., & LezotteL. W. (1977). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement.East Lansing: Michigan State University, College of Urban Development.
3.
ChildsT., & ShakeshaftC. (1986). A meta-analysis of research on the relationship between educational expenditures and student achievement. Journal of Education Finance, 12, 249–263.
4.
CohenJ., & CohenP. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
ColemanJ. S., CampbellE. Q., HobsonC. J., McPartlandJ., MoodA. J., WeinfieldF. D., & YorkR. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
6.
CookT., ArmorD. (1984). School desegregation and black achievement.Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
7.
Darling-HammondL. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching.New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
8.
Darling-HammondL. (in press). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence.
9.
GallM. D., BorgW. R., & GallJ. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction.White Plains, NY: Longman.
10.
GordonN. B. J. (1986). Total per expenditures, local per pupil expenditures, and pupil performance on the Georgia Basic Skills Test. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(4), 1186.
11.
GrissmerD., FlanaganA., KawataJ., & WilliamsonS. (2000). Improving student achievement: What state NAEP test scores tell us.Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
12.
HabermanM. (1991). The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 290–294.
13.
HabermanM. (1995). Selecting “star” teachers for children and youth in urban poverty. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 777–781.
14.
HanushekE. A. (1997). Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 141–164.
15.
KohnA. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the scores, ruining the schools.Westport, CT: Heinemann.
16.
KramerJ. J., ConoleyJ. C., & MurphyL. L. (1992). The eleventh mental measurements yearbook.Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
17.
LippmanL., BurnsS., & McArthurE. (1996). Urban Schools: The challenge of location and poverty.Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics, Report No. 96–864.
18.
MunozM. A., ClavijoK. G., & KovenS. G. (1999, October). Educational equality in a reform environment: The effects of socio-economic status on student achievement. Paper presented at the annual conference of University Council of Educational Administrators (UCEA), Minneapolis, MN.
19.
MurphyJ. (1991). Restructuring schools: Capturing and assessing the phenomena.New York: Teachers College.
20.
OrfieldG. (1994). The growth of segregation in American schools: Changing patterns of segregation and poverty since 1968. Equity and Excellence in Education, 27, 5–8.
21.
PedhazurE. J., & SchmelkinL. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
PiconeJ. L. (1993). An investigation of student performance and direct instructional expenditures in grades 4, 8, and 10 in the state of New Hampshire. Dissertation Abstracts International, 54(12), 4357.
23.
PittmanK., & WrightM. (1991). A rationale for enhancing the role of the non-school voluntary sector in youth development.New York: Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development.
24.
RoederP. W. (1999). Education reform and equitable excellence: The Kentucky experiment [On-line]. Available: RDSpub@aol.com
25.
RossmillerR. A. (1983). Resource allocation and achievement: A classroom analysis. In OddenA., & WebbL. D. (Eds.), School finance and school improvement—Linkages for the 1980s (pp. 171–192). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
26.
RussellC. (1990). The carrot or the stick for school desegregation policy: Magnet schools or forced bussing.Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
27.
SeeleyD. S. (1985). Education through partnership: Mediating structures and education.Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
SlavinR. E. (1998). Can education reduce social inequity?Educational Leadership, 55, 6–10.
30.
StevensJ. (1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
WhiteK. R. (1982). The relationship between socioeconomic status and academic achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 461–481.
32.
WilsonS. M., & RoederP. W. (1997). KERA Family Resource and Youth Services Centers. In LindleJ. C., PetroskoJ., & PankratzR. (Eds.), 1996: Review of research on the Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA) (pp. 179–189). Lexington: The Kentucky Institute for Education Research.
