This study was designed to examine state and division-level changes in Virginia Title I discretionary spending as proficiency standards increased under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The study was also designed to identify some characteristics of Virginia school divisions that changed Title I discretionary spending as proficiency standards increased. The study was also meant to indicate whether end-of-course test (SOL) results may have influenced spending the following year.
This study included all 49 Virginia school divisions that had schools participating in the Title I Schoolwide Program from 2003-2004 to 2007-2008. Data was collected through the Virginia Department of Education through a Freedom of Information Act request. Title I discretionary spending was reported at the state and division level for the 5-year period.
A correlation analysis was conducted to compare state-level spending proportions in each of the Title I discretionary areas with proficiency standards under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The correlation analysis revealed a strong linear relationship between spending and academic proficiency standards in the areas of school improvement (r = 0.866) and administration (r = -0.755).
A correlation analysis was then conducted to compare division-level spending in the six discretionary areas with academic proficiency standard. A strong linear relationship was not observed in any area of discretionary spending. School divisions were then separated by size and also by location. A correlation analysis was performed to compare previous year's SOL scores to spending in each of the discretionary areas under Title I. Several division size or location categories returned consistent correlation values over the 5-year period for specific areas of spending.
The results of this study showed that spending and academic proficiency standard have a strong linear relationship at the state level, but not at the division level. Further, while certain division size and location categories returned consistent correlation values between previous year's standardized test scores and spending in specific Title I discretionary areas, the relationship was often consistently weak. It is unlikely that the SOL scores drove discretionary spending under Title I the following year.
|Advisor:||Howerton, Everett B.|
|Commitee:||Clair, Susan M., Emerson, Joseph T.|
|School:||The George Washington University|
|Department:||Educational Administration and Policy Studies|
|School Location:||United States -- District of Columbia|
|Source:||DAI-A 70/02, Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Education finance, School administration|
|Keywords:||Academic proficiency, Accountability, Discretionary, Funding, Funds, No Child Left Behind, Student achievement, Title I|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be