The implementation issues of Senate Bill 7 on equalization of state school funding as perceived by superintendents of selected school districts in Texas /
The purpose of the study was to determine the perceptions of
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis Book |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[Place of publication not identified] :
[publisher not identified] ;
1995.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://proxy.library.tamu.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=741213051&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientId=2945&RQT=309&VName=PQD |
| Summary: | The purpose of the study was to determine the perceptions of Texas school superintendents on the implementation issues of Senate Bill 7 on equalization of state school funding. The population for the study consisted of practicing superintendents in selected Texas school districts from the 1993-1994 Texas School Directory, published annually by the Texas Education Agency. Using a stratified random sampling process by size, 346 school districts were selected for the study and mailed a survey, of which 249 responses were received for a response rate of 71.96%. Major research findings for the study indicated: 1. Senate Bill 7 had very little effect in equalizing school funding for school districts in Texas. superintendents indicated that their districts were not better off but were also not worse off. 2 Property poor school districts were provided little to no relief and only to a fortunate few who were able to receive funds from property rich school districts through one of the share the wealth options. 3.The share the wealth options for equalizing funding between property rich and property poor school districts were perceived as ineffective. However, on the open-ended questions when asked what were the positive effects of Senate Bill 7, the options were regarded as positive. 4. Senate Bill 7 affected negatively the small rural property poor school districts of Texas. Based on the findings of the study, researcher recommendations include: 1. State funding for education needs to include other forms of revenue beside property taxes and shift the financial responsibility of funding schools from the local property owner to the state. 2.Do away with the $1.50 tax rate cap for maintenance and operations. 3. Increase the state basic allotment per pupil and allow for growth in statewide enrollment. 4.Provide funding for school facilities. 5. Provide more funds to avoid a leveling-down of education. Further comparative studies utilizing weighted average daily attendance, expenditures for instruction and facilities, geographic location, tax rates and option four partnerships could be done. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Vita. "Major Subject: Educational Administration". In title, numerals are used. |
| Physical Description: | xvi, 231 leaves : illustrations ; 28 cm. Issued also on microfiche from University Microfilms Inc. |
| Bibliography: | Includes bibliographical references. |