Understanding the Cost Effects of Small School Districts and Racial Isolation in New Jersey Bruce D. Baker Department of Educational Theory, Policy and.

Understanding the Cost Effects of Small School Districts and

Racial Isolation in New Jersey

Bruce D. Baker

Department of Educational Theory, Policy and Administration

Rutgers University

© Bruce D. Baker, NJASA 2009

“Unorganized” States

*


Data sources: Effort based on total state and local education resources as % of gross state product (http://www.bea.gov/regional/gsp/ ). Education fiscal data from U.S. Census Fiscal Survey (F-33) - Elem. & Sec. Fin. Enrollment and district characteristics data from National Center for Education Statistics Common Core of Data 2006-07 .

http://www.bea.gov/regional/gsp/



Why New Jersey is Different

• Many small, non-unified New Jersey districts are not remote rural ones - – In fact, they are anything but… Many are a few

blocks wide, along the shore, along the Hudson (Bergen/Hudson), or in the Camden area.

– This is also true in Illinois, where the small K-8 districts are clustered around Chicago.


New Jersey District Enrollments


Data source: Enrollment and district characteristics data from National Center for Education Statistics Common Core of Data 2006-07 .

Inefficiently Small (& Population Dense) in NJ


Race/Ethnicity & New Jersey Schools% Black % Hispanic


Data source: National Center for Education Statistics Common Core of Data 2006-07, Pubic School Universe.

What we know about “economies of scale”

• Per pupil costs of constant outcomes level off between 2,000 and 6,000 students for a unified school district– Optimal elementary size likely between 300 and

500 students– More rigorous evidence on high schools, with

optimal around 600 to 900 students


Andrews, M., Duncombe, W., Yinger, J. (2002) “Revisiting Economies of Size in American Education: Are we any closer to consensus?” Economics of Education Review 21 (3): 245-262

Important Definition

• COST - Is the cost in dollars of current operating expense, needed to achieve a specific set of student outcomes, given the student population and other factors (regional competitive wage variation, etc.)– Cost is not the same as “Spending” – Relationship to “economies of scale”

• In very small schools and school districts, it “costs” more to produce comparable outcomes, holding other factors equal (given the students, labor market conditions, etc.)


Production vs. CostFlip Sides of the Same Coin

• Production Function– What level of outcomes are produced, given a variety of uncontrollable

conditions, at a given spending level?– One can treat size as uncontrollable to estimate the effects of school or district

size on outcomes at constant spending. But, size may be controllable in some cases.

– Research question: All else equal (at constant spending, etc.), is there a negative effect of small school district size on outcomes?

• Cost Function– What is the level of spending (cost), associated with achieving specific

outcome levels, given a variety of uncontrollable conditions? – One can estimate the spending differential associated with small school district

size, at constant outcome levels.– Research question: All else equal, does it cost more to produce the same

level of outcomes in small school districts?

• If the answer to one or both of these research questions is yes, we must carefully evaluate whether we should continue to support these inefficiently small producers.


Cos

t per

Pup

il

2,000 to 6,000

District Enrollment

<300 >10,000

Y (1.0)

(2.0)

Economies of Scale


Scale Related Spending Variation - East Coast

9,000

14,000

19,000

24,000

29,000

34,000

<100

101 to

300

301 to

600

601 to

1200

1201 t

o 150

0

1501 t

o 200

0

Over 2

000

District Enrollment

Per

Pup

il Sp

endi

ng (

pred

icte

d)

New JerseyDelawareMarylandNew YorkPennsylvania

2/1


Data sources: Education fiscal data from U.S. Census Fiscal Survey (F-33) - Elem. & Sec. Fin. Enrollment and district characteristics data from National Center for Education Statistics Common Core of Data 2006-07. “Scale” effect based on interaction term from pooled, cross state model (2003 - 2006). lnSTREVPP = b0 + b1(POV x STATE) + b3 (IEP x STATE) + b2(SCALE x STATE) + b4ECWI

Savings from Consolidation

• Shared services & administrative consolidation– Central administration is typically under 2% of district

budgets. Re-organizing and/or sharing supts., etc. really doesn’t save that much.

• That said, we should still try to save here, if we can!

• Reorganizing school enrollments & attendance boundaries– This leads to more significant staffing efficiencies, and

long run cost savings but…

– There are up front costs (new facilities/ renovations)


Outcome Loss in Small K-12sPredicted K-12 Proficiency

at Constant Demographics, Regional Costs and SpendingOLS All Grades Model

0.60

0.62

0.64

0.66

0.68

0.70

0.72

0.74

Enroll

ment 5

00 to

799

Enroll

ment 8

00 to

1199

Enroll

ment 1

200 t

o 149

9

Enroll

ment 1

500 t

o 199

9

Over 2

000

Enrollment Size

Pre

dic

ted

% P

rofi

cien

t

Over 7% reduction in proficiency at same $$


Data source: Based on OLS production function model for New Jersey Public School Districts using NJDOE data from 2001-02 to 2005-05. Full model estimates and alternative models available on request

Excessive Costs of Small K-12s for Same Outcomes

Predicted K-12 per Pupil Costs (at 75% proficiency in 2005)at Average K-12 Demographics & Efficiency Measures

*2SLS Model 1

$8,000

$8,500

$9,000

$9,500

$10,000

$10,500

$11,000

$11,500

$12,000

$12,500

Enroll

ment 5

00 to

799

Enroll

ment 8

00 to

1199

Enroll

ment 1

200 t

o 149

9

Enroll

ment 1

500 t

o 199

9

Enroll

ment o

ver 2

000

Enrollment Size

Pre

dic

ted

per

Pu

pil

Cos

t

Over $2,000 per pupil increase in cost for same proficiency

rate!


Data source: Based on 2SLS (instrumental variables) cost function model for New Jersey Public School Districts using NJDOE data from 2001-02 to 2005-05. Full model estimates and alternative models available on request

Predicted Proficiency Rates (NJASK & GEPA) at Constant Demographics, Regional Costs and Spending

OLS Elementary Outcomes Model

0.70

0.71

0.72

0.73

0.74

0.75

0.76

Enroll

ment 1

00 to

299

Enroll

ment 3

00 to

499

Enroll

ment 5

00 to

799

Enroll

ment 8

00 to

1199

Enroll

ment 1

200 t

o 149

9

Enroll

ment 1

500 t

o 199

9

Over 2

000

Enrollment Size

Pre

dic

ted

% P

rofi

cien

tOutcome Loss in Small K-8s

Over 4% reduction in proficiency at same $$


Data sources: Based on OLS production function model for New Jersey Public School Districts using NJDOE data from 2001-02 to 2005-05. Full model estimates and alternative models available on request

Excessive Costs of Small K-8s for Same OutcomesPredicted K-8 per Pupil Costs (at 75% proficiency in 2005)

at Average K-8 Demographics & Efficiency Measures

*2SLS Model 1

$8,000

$8,500

$9,000

$9,500

$10,000

$10,500

$11,000

Enroll

ment 1

00 to

299

Enroll

ment 3

00 to

499

Enroll

ment 5

00 to

799

Enroll

ment 8

00 to

1199

Enroll

ment 1

200 t

o 149

9

Enroll

ment 1

500 t

o 199

9

Enroll

ment o

ver 2

000

Enrollment Size

Pre

dic

ted

per

Pu

pil

Cos

t

Over $2,000 per pupil increase in cost for same proficiency

rate!



Actual NJ Example (adjacent K-8 school districts separated by <2

miles driving distance)District A District B

PROGRAM Enrollment PROGRAM EnrollmentFull-Day Pre-Kind. 4Half-Day Pre-Kind. 5 Half-Day Pre-Kind. 26Full-Day Kindergarten 15 Full-Day Kindergarten 20.5Grade 1 10 Grade 1 20Grade 2 21 Grade 2 25Grade 3 21 Grade 3 33Grade 4 22 Grade 4 24Grade 5 17 Grade 5 19Grade 6 19 Grade 6 33Grade 7 11 Grade 7 22Grade 8 19 Grade 8 31Total 164 Total 253.5


Per Pupil Resource Structure in Small K-8s•District B is able to offer more breadth at 20% lower staffing expense alone (nearly $1,500 per pupil).

•Pulling the two districts/schools together, and reducing/eliminating redundancies could save at least as much in annual staffing costs per pupil for District A.

•Given that District B is also below scale economies, per pupil staffing costs could likely be reduced to a level lower than current “B” levels.

District A District BAdministrationSupt $159,265 $124,000School Business Administrator $82,059 $92,117Special Education Supervisor $94,742Potentially CentralizedLibrary/Media $50,170Art $84,249 $71,650School Nurse $72,286 $45,820Social Worker $28,902Counselor $18,804Health/Phys Ed. $55,630 $71,650Music $49,819 $43,720Spanish $66,155 $59,170Technology $43,720

Classroom TeachersKindergarten Teacher $72,943 Preschool Teacher – Non-Abbott $44,570Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $85,330 Kindergarten Teacher $48,470Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $58,785 Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $71,650Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $46,321 Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $55,670Elementary Teachers Grades 4 – 5 $55,630 Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $50,170Elementary Teachers Grades 4 – 5 $55,542 Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $50,170Elementary Teachers Grades 4 – 5 $47,711 Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $46,670Elementary Teachers Grades 4 – 5 $31,235 Elementary Teacher Grades 1 – 3 $43,670English Elementary $49,111 Elementary Teachers Grades 4 – 5 $48,470English Elementary $46,321 Elementary Teachers Grades 4 – 5 $47,520Language Arts/Literacy – Grades 6 – 8 $57,306 English Elementary $52,670Mathematics – Grade 6 – 8 $64,676 English Elementary $45,420Elementary Teacher – 6 – 8 $55,630 Mathematics Elementary $71,650

Mathematics Elementary $59,170Science - Elementary $67,670Social Studies - Elementary $44,570

Special EducationResource Program (POR) Grades 1 – 3 $76,538 Resource Program (In-Class) $60,020

Resource Program (In-Class) $48,470Resource Program (In-Class) $43,720Learning Disabilities Teacher-Consultant $24,008Speech Correction/Speech Language Specialist $27,252

Classroom Payroll per Pupil $4,897 $4,149Support Payroll per Pupil $2,116 $1,636Admin Cost per Pupil $1,471 $1,226Staffing Cost per Pupil $8,484 $7,011


What we know about racial isolation, Costs and Outcome Effects

• Hanushek and Rivken conclude: “The substantial contribution of changes in achievement gaps between schools is consistent with an important role for schools, and we find that the imbalanced racial distribution of specific characteristics of teachers and peers—ones previously found to have significant effects on achievement—can account for all of the growth in the achievement gap following third grade.” (p. 29)

– Hanushek, E., Rivken, S. (2007) School Quality and the Black-White Achievement Gap. Education Working Paper Archive. University of Arkansas, Department of Education Reform.

• Hanushek, Kain, and Rivken (2004) note: “A school with 10% more black students would require about 10% higher salaries in order to neutralize the increased probability of leaving” (p. 350). That is, all else equal, it would cost more simply to provide comparable teaching quality in predominantly black schools.

– Hanushek, E.A., Kain, J., Rivken, S. (2004) Why Public Schools Lose Teachers. Journal of Human Resources 34 (2) 326-354



Effects of Racial Isolation and Size on Costs of Comparable Outcomes2SLS Cost Model All Districts in 2005

(on 4th & 8th Grade Outcomes at 75% Proficient)

$-

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

$20,000

0% 5% 10% 20% 30% 50% 75%

Percent of Students who are Black

Cos

t p

er P

up

il

Per Pupil Cost of 75% Proficiency

In Small District



Effects of Racial Isolation and Size on Costs of Comparable Outcomes


2SLS Cost Model Unified K-12 Districts in 2005 (Outcomes at 75% Proficient)

$-

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

$20,000

0% 5% 25% 50% 75%

Percent of Students who are Black

Cos

t p

er P

up

il

Per Pupil Cost of 75% Proficiency

In Small District

Northern Shore Small Districts


Shore DistrictsCO DIST Enrollment % Black % Free Lunch % ELL01-ATLANTIC 1410-ESTELL MANOR CITY 221 0% 15% 0%01-ATLANTIC 4240-PORT REPUBLIC CITY 108 0% 17% 0%01-ATLANTIC 5760-WEYMOUTH TWP 256 9% 26% 0%25-MONMOUTH 0130-ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS BORO 293 3% 10% 0%25-MONMOUTH 0180-AVON BORO 144 1% 9% 3%25-MONMOUTH 0500-BRADLEY BEACH BORO 264 6% 51% 14%25-MONMOUTH 1000-DEAL BORO 108 8% 0%25-MONMOUTH 1490-FARMINGDALE BORO 143 6% 14% 0%25-MONMOUTH 2160-HIGHLANDS BORO 179 8% 33% 0%25-MONMOUTH 4520-ROOSEVELT BORO 90 4% 0%25-MONMOUTH 4690-SEA GIRT BORO 164 0% 0%25-MONMOUTH 4980-SPRING LAKE BORO 254 0% 0%29-OCEAN 0210-BAY HEAD BORO 92 0% 0%29-OCEAN 0230-BEACH HAVEN BORO 69 0% 0% 7%29-OCEAN 1150-EAGLESWOOD TWP 142 0% 13% 0%29-OCEAN 2350-ISLAND HEIGHTS BORO 110 0% 10% 0%29-OCEAN 2550-LAVALLETTE BORO 148 1% 9% 0%29-OCEAN 2760-LONG BEACH ISLAND 258 3% 17% 3%29-OCEAN 3800-OCEAN GATE BORO 142 1% 32% 1%29-OCEAN 4710-SEASIDE HEIGHTS BORO 207 20% 89% 8%29-OCEAN 4720-SEASIDE PARK BORO 78 1% 27% 0%29-OCEAN 5220-TUCKERTON BORO 287 0% 38% 1%

CO DIST Enrollment % Black % Free Lunch % ELL01-ATLANTIC 1410-ESTELL MANOR CITY 221 0% 15% 0%01-ATLANTIC 4240-PORT REPUBLIC CITY 108 0% 17% 0%01-ATLANTIC 5760-WEYMOUTH TWP 256 9% 26% 0%25-MONMOUTH 0130-ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS BORO 293 3% 10% 0%25-MONMOUTH 0180-AVON BORO 144 1% 9% 3%25-MONMOUTH 0500-BRADLEY BEACH BORO 264 6% 51% 14%25-MONMOUTH 1000-DEAL BORO 108 8% 0%25-MONMOUTH 1490-FARMINGDALE BORO 143 6% 14% 0%25-MONMOUTH 2160-HIGHLANDS BORO 179 8% 33% 0%25-MONMOUTH 4520-ROOSEVELT BORO 90 4% 0%25-MONMOUTH 4690-SEA GIRT BORO 164 0% 0%25-MONMOUTH 4980-SPRING LAKE BORO 254 0% 0%29-OCEAN 0210-BAY HEAD BORO 92 0% 0%29-OCEAN 0230-BEACH HAVEN BORO 69 0% 0% 7%29-OCEAN 1150-EAGLESWOOD TWP 142 0% 13% 0%29-OCEAN 2350-ISLAND HEIGHTS BORO 110 0% 10% 0%29-OCEAN 2550-LAVALLETTE BORO 148 1% 9% 0%29-OCEAN 2760-LONG BEACH ISLAND 258 3% 17% 3%29-OCEAN 3800-OCEAN GATE BORO 142 1% 32% 1%29-OCEAN 4710-SEASIDE HEIGHTS BORO 207 20% 89% 8%29-OCEAN 4720-SEASIDE PARK BORO 78 1% 27% 0%29-OCEAN 5220-TUCKERTON BORO 287 0% 38% 1%


Elsewhere in NJBergen County Morris/Essex


Bergen/Morris/Essex

CO DIST Enrollment % Black % Free Lunch % ELL03-BERGEN 0080-ALPINE BORO 134 1% 0% 5%03-BERGEN 3350-MOONACHIE BORO 268 1% 31% 1%03-BERGEN 4620-SADDLE RIVER BORO 230 4% 3% 0%03-BERGEN 4870-SOUTH HACKENSACK TWP 221 4% 15% 5%27-MORRIS 3520-NETCONG BORO 296 2% 21% 7%27-MORRIS 4440-RIVERDALE BORO 282 0% 5% 1%13-ESSEX 1400-ESSEX FELLS BORO 250 1% 0%

CO DIST Enrollment % Black % Free Lunch % ELL03-BERGEN 0080-ALPINE BORO 134 1% 0% 5%03-BERGEN 3350-MOONACHIE BORO 268 1% 31% 1%03-BERGEN 4620-SADDLE RIVER BORO 230 4% 3% 0%03-BERGEN 4870-SOUTH HACKENSACK TWP 221 4% 15% 5%27-MORRIS 3520-NETCONG BORO 296 2% 21% 7%27-MORRIS 4440-RIVERDALE BORO 282 0% 5% 1%13-ESSEX 1400-ESSEX FELLS BORO 250 1% 0%


Still Elsewhere!


Hunterdon/Warren

CO DIST Enrollment % Black % Free Lunch % ELL19-HUNTERDON 0430-BLOOMSBURY BORO 146 1% 12% 0%19-HUNTERDON 0670-CALIFON BORO 143 1% 1% 0%19-HUNTERDON 1680-FRENCHTOWN BORO 146 1% 10% 0%19-HUNTERDON 1970-HAMPTON BORO 171 7% 17% 0%19-HUNTERDON 2530-LAMBERTVILLE CITY 151 3% 16% 6%19-HUNTERDON 2590-LEBANON BORO 80 1% 5% 0%19-HUNTERDON 3180-MILFORD BORO 114 1% 5% 0%19-HUNTERDON 5050-STOCKTON BORO 36 0% 3% 0%19-HUNTERDON 5600-WEST AMWELL TWP 262 3% 3% 0%

CO DIST Enrollment % Black % Free Lunch % ELL19-HUNTERDON 0430-BLOOMSBURY BORO 146 1% 12% 0%19-HUNTERDON 0670-CALIFON BORO 143 1% 1% 0%19-HUNTERDON 1680-FRENCHTOWN BORO 146 1% 10% 0%19-HUNTERDON 1970-HAMPTON BORO 171 7% 17% 0%19-HUNTERDON 2530-LAMBERTVILLE CITY 151 3% 16% 6%19-HUNTERDON 2590-LEBANON BORO 80 1% 5% 0%19-HUNTERDON 3180-MILFORD BORO 114 1% 5% 0%19-HUNTERDON 5050-STOCKTON BORO 36 0% 3% 0%19-HUNTERDON 5600-WEST AMWELL TWP 262 3% 3% 0%


Somerset County Enrollments


Somerset County

From SFRA 2008-09 documentation (NJDOE)


DistrictDFG 2000

OP TYPE

Enrollment Full-

Day K

Enrollment Half-

Day K Enrollment

gr 1-5 Enrollment

gr 6-8 Enrollment

gr 9-12 Distrct EqVal

PP

District Income Per

Pupil MILLSTONE 0 - 6 22 8 16 1,126,394$ 260,745$ ROCKY HILL 0 - 9 48 21 26 1,354,299$ 312,649$ BEDMINSTER TWP I 2 56 - 343 194 238 3,273,896$ 669,290$ BRANCHBURG TWP I 2 - 146 1,124 687 715 1,230,776$ 267,806$ GREEN BROOK TWP GH 2 99 - 567 354 417 1,062,613$ 231,415$ SOUTH BOUND BROOK B 2 37 - 233 153 128 658,481$ 157,482$ WARREN TWP I 2 196 - 1,297 728 - 1,550,615$ 435,941$ WATCHUNG BORO I 2 67 - 406 233 - 1,996,422$ 497,836$ BERNARDS TWP J 3 352 - 2,262 1,368 1,700 1,267,585$ 374,363$ BOUND BROOK BORO B 3 125 - 510 308 390 709,733$ 140,024$ BRIDGEWATER-RARITAN REG I 3 - 443 3,786 2,243 2,892 1,195,772$ 231,219$ FRANKLIN TWP GH 3 591 - 3,178 1,718 2,304 1,154,290$ 237,552$ HILLSBOROUGH TWP I 3 - 418 2,890 1,880 2,331 828,575$ 196,631$ MANVILLE BORO CD 3 94 - 496 292 427 878,539$ 153,565$ MONTGOMERY TWP J 3 - 238 2,066 1,308 1,739 928,826$ 268,647$ NORTH PLAINFIELD BORO DE 3 214 - 1,234 739 931 621,021$ 130,911$ SOMERSET HILLS REGIONAL I 3 136 - 757 425 577 2,131,440$ 681,934$ SOMERVILLE BORO FG 3 107 - 620 358 455 926,044$ 172,742$ WATCHUNG HILLS REGIONAL I 5 - - - - 1,778 1,452,725$ 384,259$ SOMERSET CO VOCATIONAL 8 - - - - 406

Summary• Many K-8 districts enrolling fewer than 300 students

[and the handful of K-12 under 800], in population dense areas should be considered for consolidation.

• Only marginal savings will be found in administrative consolidation and shared services.

• The bigger, long-run savings are in reorganizing schools and school attendance boundaries.– Up front costs of infrastructure

– Long-run reduction in staffing (for savings to be realized)

• Demography may present significant political/social barriers.


How’s NJ doing?


Alabama

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

ConnecticutDelawareFlorida

Georgia

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New HampshireNew Jersey

New Mexico

New YorkNorth Carolina

North DakotaOhio

OklahomaOregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode IslandSouth Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

VirginiaWashington

West Virginia

Wisconsin Wyoming

230

240

250

NA

EP

Mat

h G

r 4

2007

6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000Pred. Basic State & Local Rev. PP

naep_m4_07_all Fitted values


Alabama

Alaska

ArizonaArkansas

California

Colorado

ConnecticutDelaware

Florida

Georgia

Idaho

Illinois

IndianaIowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

MaineMaryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada


New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

WisconsinWyoming

260

270

280

290

300

NA

EP

Mat

h G

r 8

2007


naep_m8_07_all Fitted values


Alabama

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

DelawareFlorida

Georgia

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

IowaKansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

MaineMaryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada


New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North DakotaOhio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

TexasUtah

VermontVirginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

210

220

230

240

NA

EP

Rea

d G

r 4

2007


naep_r4_07_all Fitted values


Alabama

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

ColoradoConnecticut

Delaware

FloridaGeorgia

Idaho

IllinoisIndiana

IowaKansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada


New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North DakotaOhio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode IslandSouth Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

250

255

260

265

270

275

NA

EP

Rea

d G

r 8

2007


naep_r8_07_all Fitted values



$(10,000)

$(8,000)

$(6,000)

$(4,000)

$(2,000)

$-

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

Rel

ativ

e W

age*

K12 Teacher Rel. Wage

K12 Admin Rel. Wage

Linear (K12 Teacher Rel. Wage)

Data Source: IPUMS Census 2000 and American Community Survey 2001 - 2007Place of Work: New JerseyWage differential controls for (holds constant) hours per week, weeks per year, education level (MA and BA only), age (23 to 65), gender, race

© Bruce D. Baker, 2009

Understanding the Cost Effects of Small School Districts and Racial Isolation in New Jersey Bruce D. Baker Department of Educational Theory, Policy and.

Documents

new jersey bruce

education fiscal data

district characteristics

students bruce

data sources

njdoe data

hispanic bruce

nj bruce