View in EDS

Weighting for Progressivity? An Analysis of Implicit Tradeoffs Associated with Weighted Student Funding in Tennessee. EdWorkingPaper No. 23-871

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Weighting for Progressivity? An Analysis of Implicit Tradeoffs Associated with Weighted Student Funding in Tennessee. EdWorkingPaper No. 23-871
Language: English
Authors: Christopher A. Candelaria, Ishtiaque Fazlul, Cory Koedel, Kenneth A. Shores, Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University
Source: Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. 2023.
Availability: Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. Brown University Box 1985, Providence, RI 02912. Tel: 401-863-7990; Fax: 401-863-1290; e-mail: AISR_Info@brown.edu; Web site: http://www.annenberginstitute.org
Peer Reviewed: N
Page Count: 24
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Secondary Education
Descriptors: Educational Equity (Finance), Equalization Aid, State Aid, Educational Finance, Funding Formulas, Expenditure per Student, School Districts, Public Schools, Resource Allocation, School Demography, Poverty, Low Income Students, Special Education, Elementary Secondary Education, Finance Reform, Weighted Scores
Geographic Terms: Tennessee
Abstract: We study the progressivity of state funding of school districts under Tennessee's weighted student funding formula. We propose a simple definition of progressivity based on the difference in exposure to district per-pupil funding between poor and non-poor students. The realized progressivity of district funding in Tennessee is much smaller--only about 17 percent as large--as the formula weights imply directly. The attenuation is driven by the mixing of poor and non-poor students within districts. We further show the components of the Tennessee formula not explicitly tied to student poverty are only modestly progressive. Notably, special education funding is essentially progressivity-neutral for poor students. If we adjust the formula so all factors except individual student poverty receive zero weight and distribute the excess to poor students, we can increase the progressivity of district funding by 124 percent. We interpret this as the opportunity cost of the non-poverty-based funding components, measured in terms of progressivity.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: ED638936
Database: ERIC
Description
Abstract:We study the progressivity of state funding of school districts under Tennessee's weighted student funding formula. We propose a simple definition of progressivity based on the difference in exposure to district per-pupil funding between poor and non-poor students. The realized progressivity of district funding in Tennessee is much smaller--only about 17 percent as large--as the formula weights imply directly. The attenuation is driven by the mixing of poor and non-poor students within districts. We further show the components of the Tennessee formula not explicitly tied to student poverty are only modestly progressive. Notably, special education funding is essentially progressivity-neutral for poor students. If we adjust the formula so all factors except individual student poverty receive zero weight and distribute the excess to poor students, we can increase the progressivity of district funding by 124 percent. We interpret this as the opportunity cost of the non-poverty-based funding components, measured in terms of progressivity.