A Study on the Relationship between Local Discretional Authority and Educational Performance- Focused on County Level FCAT Scores -
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The main interest of this study lies in how local discretional authority is associated with local educational outcomes, using the 2010 Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT). Based on the Item Response Theory (IRT) model, the present study analyzed the main effects of local government types (charter vs. non-charter counties) reflecting different discretional levels and county urbanicity levels, while controlling for other local factors, such as county average per capita income, county free/reduced lunch ratio, county pupil to teacher ratio, and county race ratio. The results of this study supported that urbanicity, race ratio, and all socio-economic status variables, such as county free/reduced lunch ratio and income, are influential on educational performance. However, the county type and pupil-teacher ratio variables did not matter. Particularly, the interaction between the average per capita income and urbanicity was meaningful, which shows the average per capita income differently moderated on the educational outcome depending on urbanicity. Diagnosing the research model with a large effect size, the most predictive variable on local academic performance was the ratio of free/reduced lunch. In terms of urbanicity, this study exhibited that the students who live in towns had higher scores than those in cities. Nevertheless, the results indicating the insignificance of the variables of county type and pupil-teacher ratio require a cautious interpretation due to the nature of aggregated data at county level. Future studies should compare the analytic results derived from the collective data used in this study with those of hierarchically nested data with multiple levels such as both schools and counties.
Abstract
The main interest of this study lies in how local discretional authority is associated with local educational outcomes, using the 2010 Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT). Based on the Item Response Theory (IRT) model, the present study analyzed the main effects of local government types (charter vs. non-charter counties) reflecting different discretional levels and county urbanicity levels, while controlling for other local factors, such as county average per capita income, county free/reduced lunch ratio, county pupil to teacher ratio, and county race ratio. The results of this study supported that urbanicity, race ratio, and all socio-economic status variables, such as county free/reduced lunch ratio and income, are influential on educational performance. However, the county type and pupil-teacher ratio variables did not matter. Particularly, the interaction between the average per capita income and urbanicity was meaningful, which shows the average per capita income differently moderated on the educational outcome depending on urbanicity. Diagnosing the research model with a large effect size, the most predictive variable on local academic performance was the ratio of free/reduced lunch. In terms of urbanicity, this study exhibited that the students who live in towns had higher scores than those in cities. Nevertheless, the results indicating the insignificance of the variables of county type and pupil-teacher ratio require a cautious interpretation due to the nature of aggregated data at county level. Future studies should compare the analytic results derived from the collective data used in this study with those of hierarchically nested data with multiple levels such as both schools and counties.
참고문헌 (39)
- Adelman, C., "Increasing Access to College: Extending Possibilities for All Students", pp.35~64 (2002)
- Alexander, K. L., "School Performance, Status Relations, and the Structure of Sentiment: Bringing the Teacher Back in", American Sociological Review, 52, pp.665~682 (1987)
- Allen, W. R., "College in Black and White: African American Students in Predominantly White and in Historically Black Public Universities", pp.95~109 (1991)
- Allison, P., "Logistic regression using SAS: Theory and application" (2012), SAS Institute
- Bachman, J. G., "Youth in Transition. Volume II, The Impact of Family Background and Intelligence on Tenth-Grade Boys" (1970)
- Effect Size and Measures of Association, "Barnette, J.", 2006 Summer Evaluation Institute, ~ (2006)
- Benton, J. E., "County Service Delivery: Does Government Structure Matter?", Public Administration Review, 62(4), pp.471~479 (2002)
- Blatchford, Peter, "Examining the Effect of Class Size on Classroom Engagement and Teacher—Pupil Interaction: Differences in Relation to Pupil Prior Attainment and Primary vs. Secondary Schools", Learning and Instruction, 21, pp.715~730 (2011)
- Broomhall, D. E., "Economic Factors that Influence Educational Performance in Rural Schools", American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 76(3), pp.557~567 (1994)
- Card, D., "Does Money Matter?: The Effect of School Resources on Student Achievement and Adult Success" (1996), Brookings Institution
- De Ayala, R. J., "The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory" (2009), The Guilford Press
- Duncombe, H. S., "Modern County Government" (1977), National Association for Counties
- "FCAT 2.0. In Florida Statewide Assessments Report" (2012)[URL]
- "Florida Association of County" (2014)[URL]
- Gibbs, G., "Teaching Students to Learn: A Student-Centered Approach" (1981)
- Hambleton, Ronald K., "Fundamentals of Item Response Theory" (1991), Sage Publications
- Hanson, S. L., "Gaining Ground: Values and High School Success", American Educational Research Journal, 25(3), pp.334~365 (1988)
- "An Examination of the Relationship between Urbanicity and Children with Emotional Disturbances Served in Restructuring Public Schools" (2005)[URL]
- Jeffrey, B., "County Government Structure" (1989), National Association of Counties
- Jensen, E., "Teaching with Poverty in Mind" (2009), ASCD
- Land, S. M., "Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments", pp.1~23 (2000)
- Lareau. A., "Home Advantage: Social Class and Parental Intervention in Elementary Education" (1980), Falmer Press
- 이영선, "Relationships between cognitive diagnosis, CTT, and IRT indices: an empirical investigation", Asia Pacific Education Review, 13(2), pp.333~345 (2012), 교육연구소[DOI]
- Urban Schools: The Challenge of Location And Poverty, "Lippman, L", U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research AND Improvement (OERI). NCES, 96~184 (1996)
- Lord, F. M., "Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems" (1980), Lawrence Erlbaum
- "Superkids: Educational Software Review" (2005)[URL]
- Martin, L. L., "Determinants of County Charter Home Rule", International Journal of Public Administration, 17(5), pp.955~970 (1994)
- Mehan, H., "Understanding Inequality in Schools: The Contribution of Interpretive Studies", Sociology of Education, 65(1), pp.1~20 (1992)
- "National Assessment of Educational Progress" (2005)[URL]
- "National Center for Education Statistics" (2010)[URL]
- Roscigno, V. J., "Race, Cultural Capital, and Educational Resources: Persistent Inequalities and Achievement Returns", Sociology of Education, pp.158~178 (1999)
- Documentation to the NCES Common Core of Data Public Elementary, "Secondary School Universe Survey: School Year 2007-2008", Sable, J., 2009, NCES 2010-302
- Sandholtz, J. H., "Teaching with Technology: Creating Student-Centered Classrooms" (1997), Teachers College Press
- Schneider, M., "Metropolitan Counties as Service Delivery Agents: The Still Forgotten Governments", Public Administration Review, pp.345~352 (1989)
- Sewell, W. H., "Causes and Consequences of Higher Education: Models of the Status Attainment Process", American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54(5), pp.851~861 (1972)
- Summers, A. A., "Do Schools Make a Difference?", The American Economic Review, pp.639~652 (1977)
- Thissen, D., "MULTILOG User’s Guide: Multiple Categorical Item Analysis and Test Scoring Using Item Response Theory" (1991), Scientific Software
- Overview of Public Elementary and Secondary Students, Staff, Schools, School Districts, Revenues, and Expenditures: School Year 2004-05 and Fiscal Year 2004, "U. S. Dept. of Education", IES National Center for Education Statistics, ~ (2007)