The impact of competing definitions of quality on the geographical distribution of teachers

Educational Policy

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 359-397

  Choi, Daniel S ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Demographics trends; Educational equity; Educational policy; Teacher quality

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649249216     PISSN: 08959048     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0895904808330171     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Barr, J.M. (2004). Teacher location choice and the distribution of quality: Evidence from New York City. Contemporary Economic Policy, 23(4), 585-600.
2. Berliner, D.C. (2005). The near impossibility of testing for teacher quality. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(3), 205-213.
3. Biegel, S., & Slayton, J. (1997). Policy issues and prospects: Regarding the potential breakup of the Los Angeles Unified School District. Available fromhttp://www.gseis.ucla.edu/gseisdoc/study/equal/html.
4. Bruno, J.E. (2002). The geographical distribution of teacher absenteeism in large urban school district settings: Implications for school reform efforts aimed at promoting equity and excellence in education [Electronic version]. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(32). Retrieved August 24, 2004, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n32/.
5. California Department of Education (2005). School Accountability Report Card (SARC). Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved fromhttp://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa.
6. California Department of Education, Office of Policy and Evaluation. (2000). 1999 base year Academic Performance Index (API). Sacramento, CA: Author.
7. Carroll, S.J., Krop, C., Arkes, J., Morrison, P.A., & Flanagan, A. (2005). California's k -12 public schools: How are they doing? Santa Monica, CA; Rand Corporation.
8. Carroll, S.J., Reichardt, R., & Guarino, C. (2000). The distribution of teachers among California's districts and schools. Santa Monica, CA; Rand Corporation.
9. Choi, D.S. (2007) Understanding the impact of district-level decision-making on the distribution of highly qualified teachers: A multi-method and geo-spatial approach. PhD dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe. Retrieved May 30, 2008, from Dissertations & Theses @ Arizona State University database. (Publication No. AAT 3258066).
10. Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teaching quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
11. Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national teacher supply policy for education: The right way to meet the Highly Qualified Teacher challenge [Electronic version]. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(33). Retrieved fromhttp://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n33/.
12. Darling-Hammond, L., & Young, P. (2002). Highly Qualified Teachers: What does the scientifically-based research actually tell us? Educational Researcher, 31(9), 13-25.
13. Esch, C.E., Chang-Ross, C.M., Guha, R., Tiffany-Morales, J., & Shields, P.M. (2005). California's teaching force 2005: Key issues and trends. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning.
14. Fuller, E.J. (1999). Does teacher certification matter? A comparison of TAAS performance in 1997 between schools with low and high percentages of certified teachers. Austin: University of Texas at Austin, Charles A. Dana Center.
15. Goe, L. (2002). Legislating equity: The distribution of emergency permit teachers in California [Electronic version]. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(42). Retrieved October 14, 2005, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n42/.
16. Hanushek, E.A., & Rivkin, S.G. (2004). How to improve the supply of high quality teachers. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
17. Jacobson, L. (2006). LAUSD providing better teachers to all schools, judge concludes. Education Week, 25(32), 6.
18. Lankford, H., Loeb S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37-62.
19. Mitchell, D.E., Scott, L.D., & Covrig, D. (1999). Cultural diversity and the labor market: A literature review. Riverside: California Education Research Cooperative (CERC), University of California, Riverside.
20. Oakes, J. (2002). Education inadequacy, inequality and failed state policy. A synthesis of expert reports prepared for Williams v. State of California. In Decent schools for California: Williams v. State of California. Available fromhttp://www.decentschools.org.
21. Powers, J.M. (2004). Increasing equity and increasing school performance-Conflicting or compatible goals? Addressing the issues in Williams v. State of California [Electronic version]. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(10). Retrieved December 5, 2006, from http://edpaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n19/.
22. Rubenstein, R., Schwartz, A.E., & Steifel, L. (2006). Rethinking the intradistrict distribution of schools inputs to disadvantaged students. Paper presented for the conference: "Rethinking Rodriguez," Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California, Berkeley.
23. School Matters. (2005). A service of Standard and Poor's Education Database. Available fromhttp://www.schoolmatters.com.
24. Wayne, A.J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73, 89-122.