Measuring the outcomes of state policies for gifted education: An equity analysis of texas school districts

Gifted Child Quarterly

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 4-14

  Baker, Bruce D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038978079     PISSN: 00169862     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/001698620104500102     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Baker, B.D. (1995). The economic health of gifted education in three northeastern states: An analysis of public school opportunities and private programs in New York, Connecticut and New Jersey. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. (ED 419 321)
2. Baker, B. D., & Richards, C. E. (1998). Equity through vouchers: The special case of gifted children. Educational Policy, 12, 363-379.
3. Berne, R., & Steifel, L. (1984). The measurement of equity in school finance. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
4. Borland, J. (1994). Identifying young, potentially gifted, economically disadvantaged students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 164-171.
5. Brent, B. O., Roellke, C. F., & Monk, D. H. (1997). Understanding teacher resource allocation in New York State secondary schools: A case study approach. Journal of Education Finance, 23, 207-233.
6. Chambers, J. G. (1995). Public school teacher cost differences across the United States: Introduction to a teacher cost index (TCI). In W. J. Fowler (Ed.), Developments in school finance (pp. 19-32). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
7. Coleman, M. R., Gallagher, J., & Foster, A. (1994). Updated report on state policies related to the identification of gifted students. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center, Gifted Education Policy Studies Program.
8. Curley, J. (1991). Financing programs for education of the gifted in New York State. Journal of Education Finance, 16, 332-17.
9. Gallagher, J., & Coleman, M. R. (1992). State policies on the identification of gifted students from special populations: Three states in profile. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center, Gifted Education Policy Studies Program.
10. Gallagher J., & Coleman, M. R. (1994). Gifted education policy studies program final report. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center, Gifted Education Policy Studies Program.
11. Hanushek, E. A. (1996). The quest for equalized mediocrity: School finance reform without consideration of school performance. In L. O. Picus & J. L. Wattenbarger (Eds.), Wheredoes the money go? Resource allocation in elementary and secondary schools (pp. 20-43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
12. Harter, E. (1999). How educational expenditures relate to student achievement: Insights from Texas elementary schools,. Journal of Education Finance, 24, 281-302.
13. Laine, R. D., Greenwald, R., & Hedges, L. V. (1996). Money does matter: A research synthesis of a new universe of education production function studies. In L. O. Picus, & J. L. Wattenbarger (Eds.), Where does the money go? Resource allocation in elementary and secondary schools (pp. 44-70). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
14. Monk, D. H. (1984). Stalking full fiscal neutrality: The distinction between school district wealth and tastes. Educational Theory, 34, 55-69
15. Odden, A. R., & Clune, W. H. (1998). School finance systems: Aging structures in need of renovation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 157-177.
16. Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (1999) School finance: A policy perspective (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
17. Parrish, T. B., & Wolman, J. (1999). Trends and new developments in special education funding: What the states report. In T. B. Parrish, J. G. Chambers, & C. M. Guarino (Eds.), Funding special education: Nineteenth yearbook of the American Education Finance Association (pp. 203-229). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
18. Passow, H. A., & Rudnitski, R. A. (1993). State policies regarding education of the gifted as reflected in legislation and regulation. National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut, Storrs. (CRS93302)
19. Passow, H. A., & Rudnitski, R. A. (1994). Transforming policy to enhance educational services for the gifted. Roeper Review, 16, 271-275.
20. Purcell, J. (1992). Programs for the gifted in a state without a mandate: An "Endangered Species." Roeper Review, 15, 93-95.
21. Purcell, J. (1995). Gifted education at a crossroads: The program status study. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 57-65.
22. Raudenbush, S. W., Fotiu, R. P, & Cheong, Y. F. (1998). Inequality of access to educational resources: A national report card for eighth-grade math. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 253-267.
23. Reis, S. M. (1999). Testimony of the National Association for Gifted Children: Hearing on elementary and secondary education actEducating diverse populations. Subcommittee on early childhood, youth, and families. House Committee on Education and the Workforce. Retrieved August 1, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.nagc.org/Policy/testimon.html.
24. Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S.M. (1991). The reform movement and the quiet crisis in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 26-35.
25. Reschovsky, A., & Imazeki, J. (1999). Does the school finance system in Texas provide students with an adequate education? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Finance Association, Seattle, WA.
26. Tiebout, C. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416-424.
27. U.S. Department of Education. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's talent. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.