Reforms in American public education have not resolved the wide academic performance gap between students. Officials respond by developing reforms, that is, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act and Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Waivers. The Waivers modified the more controversial aspects of ESEA/NCLB, which imposed a strict compliance deadline. This was a difficult task for many and an impossible one for the poorest school districts. Using factor analysis and logistic regression, this study provides a methodology for generating data to explain variation in student performance in Michigan school districts associated with organizational, school, financial, and social characteristics.
BohteJ. (2001). School bureaucracy and student performance at the local level.Public Administration Review,61(1), 92–99.
2.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital. In RichardsonJohn G (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood.
3.
ChubbJ. E., & MoeT. M. (1990). Politics, markets, and American schools.Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
4.
CobbR. W., & ElderC. D. (1981). Communication and public policy. In NimmoDan D., & SandersKeith R. (Eds.), Handbook of political communication (pp. 391–416). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
5.
ColemanJ. S., CampbellE. Q., HobsonC. J., McPartlandJ., MoodA. M., & WeinfeldF. D. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
6.
ColemanJ. S. (1987). Families and schools.Educational Researcher, 32–38.
7.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital.American Journal of Sociology,94, 95–120.
8.
CrosbyE. (1991). Urban schools: Forced to fail. Unpublished Manuscript.
9.
Darling-HammondL. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters what leaders can do.Educational Leadership,60, 6–13.
10.
DreierP., MollenkopfJ., & SwanstromT. (2001). Place matters: Metropolitics for the twenty-first century.Kansas, KS: University Press of Kansas.
11.
DuncanG., & MurnaneR. (2011). Introduction: The American dream, then and now. In DuncanGreg, & MurnaneRichard (Eds.), Whither opportunity: Rising inequality, schools, and children's life chances (pp. 3–23). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
12.
DysonD. D. (2009). Pendulum swings in educational policymaking: The effects of organizational, school, financial and social characteristics on student performance outcomes in Michigan school districts.ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
13.
FantilliR. D., & McDougallD. E. (2009). A study of novice teachers: Challenges and supports in the first years.Teaching and Teacher Education,25(6), 814–825.
14.
FurstenbergF. F. (2011). The Challenges of Finding Causal Links between Family Educational Practices and Schooling Outcomes. In DuncanGreg J., & MurnaneRichard J. (Eds.), Whither opportunity: Rising inequality, schools, and children's life chances (pp. 465–482). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
15.
GrubbW. N. (2009). The money myth: School resources, outcomes and equity.New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
16.
HanushekE. A., PetersonP. E., & WoessmannL. (2013). Endangering prosperity: A global view of the American school.Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com.
17.
HanushekE. (2009). Schoolhouses, courthouses, and statehouses: Solving the funding-achievement puzzle in America's public schools.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18.
HanushekE. (1986). The economics of schooling production and efficiency in public schools.Journal of Economic Literature,24(3), 1141–1177.
19.
HedgesL., LaineR., & GreenwaldR. (1994). Does Money Matter? A Meta-Analysis of Studies of the Effects of Differential School Inputs on Student Outcomes.Educational Researcher,23(3), 5–14.
20.
HoveyH. (1998). The outlook for state and local finances: The dangers of structural deficits to the future of American education.Kahn, Michael, National Education Association.
21.
IngersollR. M., & SmithT. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage.Educational Researcher,60(8), 30–33.
22.
JohnstonJ. M. (1998). Changing state-local fiscal relations and school finance in Kansas: Pursuing “equity.”State and Local Government Review,30(1), 26–41.
23.
KearneyC. P., & AddonizioM. (2002). A primer on Michigan school finance.Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
24.
KozolJ. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America.New York, NY: Crown Publishers.
25.
KaushalN., MagnusonK., & WaldfogelJ. (2011). How is family income related to investments in children's learning? In DuncanGreg J., & MurnaneRichard J. (Eds.), Whither opportunity: Rising inequality, schools, and children's life chances (pp. 187–206). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
26.
MagnusonK., & WaldfogelJ. (Eds.). (2008). Steady gains and stalled progress: Inequality and the black-white test score gap.New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
27.
MalenB., & King RiceJ. (2004). A framework for assessing the impact of education reforms on school capacity: Insights from studies of high-stakes accountability initiatives.Educational Policy,18(5), 631–660.
28.
MannaP. (2011). Collision course: Federal education policy meets state and local realities.Washington, DC: CQ Press.
29.
Michigan Department of Education. Center for Educational Performance and Information (CEPI). Last accessed 06/13/2015. http://michigan.gov/cepi
MillerT. C. (1981). Political and mathematical perspectives on educational equity.American Political Science Review,75(2), 319–333.
34.
MoeT. M., & ChubbJ. E. (2009). Liberating learning: Technology, politics, and the future of American education.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
35.
OrfieldG. (Ed.). (2004). Losing our future: Minority youth left out. In Dropouts in America: confronting the graduation rate crisis.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education
36.
ParcelT. L., DufurM. J., & ZitoR. C. (2010). Capital at home and at school: A review and synthesis.Journal of Marriage and Family,72(4), 828–846.
37.
RavitchD. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education.New York, NY: Perseus Books.
38.
RussoC. J. (2010). Litigation and School Finance: A Cautionary Tale.School Business Affairs,76(8), 23–23.
39.
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriquez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973).
40.
Serrano v. Priest, 487 P.2d 1241(Cal. 1971).
41.
Serrano v. Priest (II), 557 P.2d 929 (Cal.1976), cert. denied, 432 U.S. 907 (1977).
42.
SmeedingT., EriksonR., & JanttiM. (Eds.). (2011). Persistence, privilege, and parenting.New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
43.
SmithK. B., & MeierK. J. (1994). Politics, bureaucrats, and schools.Public Administration Review,54(6), 551–558.
44.
SmithK. B., & LarimerC. W. (2004). A mixed relationship: Bureaucracy and school performance.Public Administration Review,64(6), 728–736.
45.
SmithM. S. (1972). Equality of educational opportunity: The basic findings reconsidered. In MostellerFrederick, and MoynihanDaniel P. (Eds.), On equality of educational opportunity (pp. 230–342). New York, NY: Random House.
46.
SundermanG. L., KimJ. S., & OrfieldG. (2005). NCLB meets school realities: Lessons from the field.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
47.
SweeneyM. (2011). Family structure instability and adolescent educational outcomes: A focus on families with stepfathers. In DuncanGreg J., & MurnaneRichard J. (Eds.), Whither opportunity: Rising inequality, schools, and children's life chances (pp. 229–251). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
48.
TieboutC. M. (1956). A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.The Journal of Political Economy,64, 416–424.
49.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. National Center for Education Statistics. Common Core Data 2005–2006.Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Last accessed 06/13/2015. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/.
50.
WongKenneth (1999). Funding public schools: Politics and policies.Lawrence, MA: University of Press of Kansas.
