Evaluations that consider the cost of educational programs: The contribution of high-quality studies

American Journal of Evaluation

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 477-492

  Ross, John A ^a   Barkaoui, Khaled ^a   Scott, Garth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cost studies; Cost benefit; Cost effectiveness; Cost utility

Indexed keywords

EID: 36549072958     PISSN: 10982140     EISSN: 15570878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1098214007307942     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Balfanz, R., MacIver, D.J., & Byrnes, V. (2006). The implementation and impact of evidence-based mathematics reforms in high-poverty middle schools: A multi-site, multi-year study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37 (1), 33-64.
2. Barnett, W.S. (1985). Benefit-cost analysis of the Perry Preschool Program and its policy implications. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 7 (4), 333-342.
3. Barnett, W.S. (1992). Benefits of compensatory preschool education. Journal of Human Resources, 27 (2), 279-312.
4. Barnett, W.S. (1993). Benefit-cost analysis of preschool education: Findings from a 25-year follow-up. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 63 (4), 500-508.
5. Barnett, W.S. (1995) Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes. Long-term Outcomes of Early Childhood Programs, The Future of Children, 5, 25-50.
6. Berhman, J.R., & Birdsall, N. (1983). The quality of schooling: Quantity alone is misleading. American Economic Review, 73 (5), 928-946.
7. Borman, G.D., & Hewes, G.M. (2002). The long-term effects and cost-effectiveness of Success For All. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24 (2), 243-266.
8. Card, D., & Krueger, A.B. (1992). Does school quality matter? Returns to education and characteristics of public schools in the US. Journal of Political Economy, 100, 1-40.
9. Coleman, P. (1986). The good school district: A critical examination of the adequacy of student achievement and per pupil expenditures as measures of school district effectiveness. Journal of Education Finance, 12 (1), 71-96.
10. Creemers, B., & van der Werf, G. (2000). Economic viewpoints in educational effectiveness: Cost-effectiveness analysis of an educational improvement project. School E fectiveness and School Improvement, 11 (3), 361-384.
11. Cronbach, L. (1982). Designing evaluations of educational and social programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12. Dolan, R.C., & Schmidt, R.M. (1987). Assessing the impact of expenditure on achievement: Some methodological and policy considerations. Economics of Education Review, 6 (3), 285-299.
13. Elliott, M. (1998). School finance and opportunities to learn: Does money well spent enhance students' achievement? Sociology of Education, 71 (3), 223-245.
14. Fielding, A. (1995). Institutional disparities in the cost-effectiveness of GCE "A" level provision: A multilevel approach. Education Economics, 3, 12-36.
15. Fielding, A. (1998). Perspectives on performance indicators: GCE advanced level and differences between institution types in cost-effectiveness. School E fectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 218-231.
16. Figlio, D.N. (1999). Functional form and the estimated effects of school resources. Economics of Education Review, 18, 241-252.
17. Finn, J.D., Gerber, S.B., Achilles, C.M., & Boyd-Zaharias, J. (2001). The enduring effects of small classes. Teachers College Record, 103 (2), 145-183.
18. Fiszbein, A., & Psachropoulos, G. (1993). A cost-benefit analysis of educational investment in Venezuela: 1989 update. Economics of Education Review, 12 (4), 293-298.
19. Flanigan, J.L., Marion, R.A., & Richardson, M.D. (1997). Causal and temporal analyses of increased funding on student achievement. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 30, 222-247.
20. Fletcher, J.D., Hawley, D.E., & Piele, P.K. (1990). Costs, effects, and utility of microcomputer-assisted instruction in the classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 27 (4), 783-806.
21. Geski, T.G., & Zuelke, D.C. (1982). Cost-effectiveness analysis: A practical tool for educational planning and changing. Planning and Changing, 13 (1), 3-10.
22. Greenwald, R., Hedges, L., & Laine, R. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66 (3), 361-396.
23. Hansen, W.L. (1963). Total and private returns to investment in schooling. Journal of Political Economy, 71, 128-140.
24. Hanushek, E.A. (1997). Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19 (2), 141-164.
25. Harter, E.A. (1999). How educational expenditures relate to student achievement. Insights from Texas elementary schools. Journal of Education Finance, 24 (3), 281-302.
26. Hough, J.R. (1994). Educational cost-benefit analysis. Education Economics, 2 (2), 93-128.
27. Huang, G.G., & Yu, B. (2002). District fiscal policy and student achievement: Evidence form combined NAEP-CCD data. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10 (38), Retrieved on January 11, 2006, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n38/
28. Hummel-Rossi, B., & Ashdown, J. (2002). The state of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses in education. Review of Educational Research, 72 (1), 1-30.
29. Hy, R.J. (2000). Education is an investment: A case study. Journal of Education Finance, 26 (2), 209-218.
30. Ilon, L. (2004). Cost-effectiveness of government inputs to schooling: technical and policy contexts. Compare, 34 (1), 87-101.
31. Kim, J.S., & Sunderman, G.L. (2005). Measuring academic proficiency under the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for educational equity. Educational Researcher, 34 (8), 3-13.
32. Knapp, T.R., & Knapp, L.T. (1990). A benefit-cost analysis of New York State's "Bundy Aid" program. Economics of Education Review, 9, 31 - 37.
33. Krueger, A.B. (2003). Economic considerations and class size. Economic Journal, 113 (485), F34-F63.
34. Levin, H.M. (1983). Cost analysis. A primer. London: Sage.
35. Levin, H.M. (2001). Waiting for Godot: Cost-effectiveness analysis in education. New Direction for Program Evaluation, 90, 55-68.
36. Levin, H.M., Glass, G., & Meister, G. (1987). A cost-effectiveness analysis of computer-assisted instruction. Evaluation Review, 11, 50-72.
37. Levin, H.M., & McEwan, P.J. (2001). Cost-e fectiveness analysis: Methods and applications (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38. Lewis, D.R. (1990). Estimating the economic worth of a 5th-year licensure program for teachers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 25-39.
39. Lewis, D.R., Bruininks, R.H., & Thurlow, M. (1988). Using benefit-cost analysis in special education. Exceptional Children, 55 (3), 203-214.
40. Lewis, D.R., Stockdill, S.J., & Turner, T.C. (1990). Cost-effectiveness of micro-computers in adult basic reading. Adult Literacy and Basic Education, 14 (2), 176-189.
41. Lopez-Acevedo, G. (2003). A reassessment of technical education in Mexico. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 19, 59-81.
42. Monk, D.H., & King, J.A. (1993). Cost analysis as a tool for education reform. In S. L. Jacobson & R. Berne (Eds.), Reforming education: The emerging systemic approach (pp. 131-152). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
43. Nas, T. (1996). Cost-benefit analysis: Theory and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44. Nye, B., Hedges, L.V., & Kostantopoulos, L. (2000). The effects of small classes on academic achievement: The results of the Tennessee class size experiment. American Educational Research Journal, 37 (1), 123-152.
45. Patton, M. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. Posavac, E., & Carey, R. (2007). Program evaluation: Methods and case studies (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
47. Quinn, B., van Mondfrans, A., & Worthen, B.R. (1984). Cost-effectiveness of two math programs as moderated by pupil SES. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6 (1), 39- 52.
48. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Boston: Belknap Press of Harvard University.
49. Rossi, P., Lipsey, M.W., & Freeman, H.E. (2003). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7 th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. Schweinhart, L.J. (n.d.). The High/Scope Perry Preschool study through age 40: Summary, conclusions, and frequently asked questions (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation). Ypsilanti, MI: High Scope Press.
51. Slavin, R.E. (1987). Best-evidence synthesis: Why less is more. Educational Researcher, 16 (4), 15-16.
52. Slavin, R.E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31 (7), 15-21.
53. Stecher, B., Bohrnstedt, G., Kirst, M., McRobbie, J., & Williams, T. (2001). Class-size reduction in California: A story of hope, promise, and unintended consequences. Phi Delta Kappan, 82 (9), 670-674.
54. Stern, D., Dayton, C., Paik, I.-W., & Weisberg, A. (1989). Benefits and costs of dropout prevention in a high school program combining academic and vocational education: Third-year results from replications of the California Peninsula Academics. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 405-416.
55. Toh, M.H., & Wong, C.S. (1999). Rates of return to education in Singapore. Education Economics, 7, 235-252.
56. Tsang, M.C. (1997). Cost analysis for improved educational policymaking and evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19 (4), 318-324.
57. Verstegen, D.A., & King, R.A. (1998). The relationship between school spending and student achievement: A review and analysis of 35 years of production function research. Journal of Education Finance, 24 (2), 243-262.
58. Wenglinsky, H. (1997). How money matters: The effect of school district spending on academic achievement. Sociology of Education, 70 (3), 221-237.
59. What Works Clearinghouse. (n.d.). WWC Study Review Standards Revised September 2006. Retrieved April 19, 2007, from http://www.whatworks.ed.gov/reviewprocess/study_standards_final.pdf.
60. Wortman, P. (1994). Judging research quality. In H. Cooper & L. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 98-109). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
61. Wortman, P. (1995). An exemplary evaluation of a program that worked: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Project. Evaluation Practice, 16 (3), 257-265.