School Inputs And Educational Outcomes In North Carolina: Comparison Of Static And Dynamic Analyses
The relationship between student achievement and school inputs has long been a subject of academic research. The general conclusion of past research is that school inputs, such as the number of teachers relative to pupils, has little impact on student academic outcomes. This paper provides a fresh look at this issue. Seventeen alternative measures of student performance in North Carolina school districts are related to a wide array of school policy inputs and socioeconomic characteristics of students and their families. Both static and dynamic analyses are performed. The key findings are (1) the school policy inputs significantly related to student achievement vary by the measure of student achievement used, (2) the joint contribution of school policy inputs to student achievement is relatively small, and (3) the results differ between the static and dynamic analyses; in particular, changes in the number of teachers relative to the number of pupils in the district have a much stronger association with student achievement in the dynamic analysis.
Volume (Year): 31 (1999)
Issue (Month): 03 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.saea.org/jaae/jaae.htm|
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dale Ballou & Michael Podgursky, 1996. "Teacher Pay and Teacher Quality," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number tptq, November.
- Thomas A. Downes & Jacquelyn L. Horowitz, 1995. "An analysis of the effect of Chicago school reform on student performance," Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, issue May, pages 13-35.
- Anderson, Gary M. & Shughart, William II & Tollison, Robert D., 1991. "Educational achievement and the cost of bureaucracy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 29-45, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:joaaec:15155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.