"At the end of the 20th century, the constitutionality of school finance systems in Vermont and New Hampshire was challenged in courts for the first time. Both states initiated dramatic school finance reforms after their school finance systems were ruled as unconstitutional. This study aims to evaluate the effect of these school finance reforms on per pupil spending. By utilizing a quasi-experimental research design and using school districts in Maine and Rhode Island as comparison groups, this study found that the school finance reform in Vermont decreased per pupil spending in rich school districts by 4-10% and increased per pupil spending in poor school districts by 2-5%. The school finance reform in New Hampshire decreased per pupil spending in rich school districts by 5-7% and had no significant effect on per pupil spending in poor school districts. The results from this study suggest that restrictions on the use of state aid are needed and should be considered in the process of school finance policy design. This study also indicates that directly transferring property tax revenue from rich school districts to poor school districts is probably not a sustainable way to achieve equity in education spending because it stimulates strong opposition from school districts whose tax revenue is recaptured"--Page xii.

At the end of the 20th century, the constitutionality of school finance systems in Vermont and New Hampshire was challenged in courts for the first time. Both states initiated dramatic school finance reforms after their school finance systems were ruled as unconstitutional. This study aims to evaluate the effect of these school finance reforms on per pupil spending. By utilizing a quasi-experimental research design and using school districts in Maine and Rhode Island as comparison groups, this study found that the school finance reform in Vermont decreased per pupil spending in rich school districts by 4-10% and increased per pupil spending in poor school districts by 2-5%. The school finance reform in New Hampshire decreased per pupil spending in rich school districts by 5-7% and had no significant effect on per pupil spending in poor school districts. The results from this study suggest that restrictions on the use of state aid are needed and should be considered in the process of school finance policy design. This study also indicates that directly transferring property tax revenue from rich school districts to poor school districts is probably not a sustainable way to achieve equity in education spending because it stimulates strong opposition from school districts whose tax revenue is recaptured.

Contains papers by state education dept. policymakers, analysts, and data providers on emerging issues in school finance. Includes: estimates of disparities and analysis of the causes of expenditures in public school districts; race, poverty and the student curriculum; court-ordered school finance equalization; resource allocation to schools under conditions of radical decentralization; building equity and effectiveness into school-based funding models; alternative options for deflating education expenditures over time; productivity collapse in schools; and evaluating the effect of teacher degree level on educational performance.

A Brookings Institution Press and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute publication From race to speech, from religion to school funding, from discipline to special education, few aspects of education policy have escaped the courtroom over the past fifty years. Predictably, much controversy has ensued. Supporters of education litigation contend that the courts are essential to secure student (and civil) rights, while critics insist that the courts distort policy and that the mere threat of litigation undermines the authority of teachers and administrators. From Schoolhouse to Courthouse brings together experts on law, political science, and education policy to test these claims. Shep Melnick (Boston College) and James Ryan (University of Virginia School of Law) draw lessons from judicial efforts to promote school desegregation and civil rights. Martha Derthick (University of Virginia), John Dinan (Wake Forest University), and Michael Heise (Cornell Law School) discuss litigation over high-stakes testing and school finance in the era of No Child Left Behind. Richard Arum (New York University), Samuel R. Bagenstos (Washington University Law School), and Frederick M. Hess (American Enterprise Institute) analyze the consequences of court rulings for school discipline, special education, and district management. Finally, editors Joshua Dunn and Martin R. West probe the tangled relationship between religious freedom, student speech, and school choice.

Spending on K-12 education across the United States and across local school districts has long been characterized by great disparitiesâ€"disparities that reflect differences in property wealth and tax rates. For more than a quarter-century, reformers have attempted to reduce these differences through court challenges and legislative action. As part of a broad study of education finance, the committee commissioned eight papers examining the history and consequences of school finance reform undertaken in the name of equity and adequacy. This thought-provoking, timely collection of papers explores such topics as: What do the terms "equity" and "adequacy" in school finance really mean? How are these terms relevant to the politics and litigation of school finance reform? What is the impact of court-ordered school finance reform on spending disparities? How do school districts use money from finance reform? What policy options are available to states facing new challenges from court decisions mandating adequacy in school finance? When measuring adequacy, how do you consider differences in student needs and regional costs?

Since Coleman (1966), many have questioned whether school spending affects student outcomes. The school finance reforms that began in the early 1970s and accelerated in the 1980s caused some of the most dramatic changes in the structure of K-12 education spending in US history. To study the effect of these school-finance-reform-induced changes in school spending on long-run adult outcomes, we link school spending and school finance reform data to detailed, nationally-representative data on children born between 1955 and 1985 and followed through 2011. We use the timing of the passage of court-mandated reforms, and their associated type of funding formula change, as an exogenous shifter of school spending and we compare the adult outcomes of cohorts that were differentially exposed to school finance reforms, depending on place and year of birth. Event-study and instrumental variable models reveal that a 10 percent increase in per-pupil spending each year for all twelve years of public school leads to 0.27 more completed years of education, 7.25 percent higher wages, and a 3.67 percentage-point reduction in the annual incidence of adult poverty; effects are much more pronounced for children from low-income families. Exogenous spending increases were associated with sizable improvements in measured school quality, including reductions in student-to-teacher ratios, increases in teacher salaries, and longer school years.