Traditional school finance research tracks how the government distributes funds among school districts.
Instead, we focused on how districts and schools used their funds and how these uses affected students’ learning opportunities. We helped district and school leaders structure policy and allocate funds in ways that use every dollar to the students’ maximum benefit.
This working paper shows that many districts have accelerated student learning by reallocating funds to emphasize targeted assistance to students, fewer non-instructional burdens on teachers, greater use of instructional technology, coaching for teachers, and class...
This working paper paper suggests how a performance-driven system would allocate funds, monitor performance, search for more productive models of instruction, and replace less effective schools and programs.
This paper explores how schools can seek “continuous improvement.”
This paper asks whether significant changes in public education finance are politically feasible.
In this paper, Diana Sharp and John Bransford show how the learning sciences can be applied to school finance.
This report demonstrates that there are many promising alternative ways to allocate and use funds under Title I, the federal government’s largest K-12 funding program.
New accountability systems require that states and districts accomplish something never accomplished before—ensuring that all students meet state standards. This report explores how these expectations have altered resource decisions in Texas.
How might money be used in a more productive system? This working paper imagines a public educational system in which it is possible to link benefits received with costs borne.
This paper investigates the effects of implementing CSR models on student achievement.
This chapter of Hopes, Fears, & Reality: A Balanced Look at American Charter Schools in 2005 explores the details of how to compare charter school and traditional school funding.
Current Research
Previous Research
