This Statistics in Brief summarizes the changes from the 1998-99 to the 2012-13 school years in the average age of public schools, ratings of satisfaction of the environmental quality of school facilities, the cost to put school buildings in good overall condition, and short-range plans to improve school facilities. In addition to providing results for all schools, selected comparisons are made within 2012-13 by school level (elementary, secondary, and combined) and school size (less than 300, 300-599, and 600 or more students). This Statistics in Brief uses data from two surveys on the condition of public school facilities conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) through its Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). The first survey on this topic was conducted in the 1998-99 school year, and the second was conducted during the 2012-13 school year. Although the surveys sampled individual schools, the questionnaires were mailed to the districts with which the schools were associated, with a separate questionnaire enclosed for each school included in the sample. The following questions were asked: (1) How did the average functional age of schools' main instructional buildings change?; (2) How did dissatisfaction with schools' environmental factors change?; (3) Was there a difference in the percentages of schools that needed money for repairs, renovations, and modernizations to put onsite buildings in good overall condition, and what was the estimated cost of these projects, in total and per school?; and (4) Was there a difference in the percentages of schools with plans for building improvements in the next 2 years? The survey was designed to be completed by district-level personnel familiar with the school facilities in the district, often a district facilities coordinator (although the title of the position varied). The differences reported in this brief are statistically significant at the p

The American Dream and the Public Schools examines issues that have excited and divided Americans for years, including desegregation, school funding, testing, vouchers, bilingual education, and ability grouping. While these are all separate problems, much of the contention over them comes down to the same thing--an apparent conflict between policies designed to promote each student's ability to succeed and those designed to insure the good of all students or the nation as a whole. The authors show how policies to promote individual success too often benefit only those already privileged by race or class, and often conflict with policies that are intended to benefit everyone. They propose a framework that builds on our nation's rapidly changing population in order to help Americans get past acrimonious debates about schooling. Their goal is to make public education work better so that all children can succeed.

Examines desegregation, school funding, testing, vouchers, bilingual education, multicultural education, and ability grouping. These seem to be separate problems, but much of the contention over them comes down to the same thing: an apparent conflict between policies designed to promote each student's ability to pursue success and those designed to insure the good of all students or the nation as a whole. The authors show how polices to promote individual success too often benefit only those already privileged by race or class. The book also examines issues such as creationism and afrocentrism.

In the new edition of this essential, all-inclusive text, the authors provide more important research for future principals and others enrolled in graduate-level school finance courses. Written in a style that is highly readable, the book offers strong connections to real-world experiences. Readers get both a broad overview of funding concepts and a detailed examination of daily funding operations and will come away with a deep understanding of the relationship between money and student achievement. New to this edition:Current research on the impact of money on student learning outcomes, New concepts that are gaining traction, such as sustainability, Current web resources and recommended reading

The federal government has direct responsibility for two school systems serving elementary and secondary students the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) school systems. Unlike public schools, where federal funding constitutes a small portion of total resources, the BIA and DOD school systems depend almost entirely on federal funds. Although the two school systems have this feature in common, their histories and settings are quite different. Because these school systems are a federal responsibility, the Congress is interested in ensuring that children attending BIA and DOD schools are receiving a quality education.