Charter School Authorizers

Two types of charter schools exist in Arkansas: open-enrollment charter schools, which operate independently of any district, and district conversion charter schools, which operate within an existing school district. Charter schools have more autonomy on certain rules and regulations than traditional public schools; however, charter schools are held accountable for academic results and fiscal matters, as defined by the charters contract. Charter schools are approved and held accountable by a charter authorizer. In the 2013 General Assembly, a law passed to change Arkansas’ charter authorizer from the State Board of Education to a newly created panel within the Department of Education. The purpose of this policy brief is to provide a snapshot of charter authorizing across the United States and provide detailed information about Arkansas’ newly created Charter Authorizing Panel

2011-2012 Arkansas Test Results

On Monday, July 30, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) released the 2011-2012 test score results. The following brief will highlight the results of these tests, compare achievement scores over time, and provide a glimpse of regional achievement results for the following exams: Benchmark Exam (Grades 3-8) End-of-Course Exam (Algebra I, Geometry, Biology, and Grade 11 Literacy). Iowa Test of Basic Skills (Grades 1-9

Categorical Funding in Arkansas

As a result of the Arkansas Supreme Court’s Lake View v. Huckabee Decision, the Public School Funding Act of 2003 established Arkansas’ current funding system. A part of the current system allocates additional funding for districts based on need (categorical funding). In doing so, the state recognizes that it is necessary to distribute additional funding based on educational need to meet adequacy and equity standards. The system allocates funding for groups of students who face particular challenges: Alternative Learning Environment students (ALE), English-language Learners (ELL), and students in poverty (National School Lunch Act). In the current legislative session, lawmakers are examining the poverty funding system (NSLA). In this brief, we examine Arkansas’ system for poverty funding and how districts spend poverty funding

Traditional and Charter School Funding in Arkansas

Charter schools, once considered an anomaly, are becoming increasingly common in the U.S. There are concerns among some education stakeholders that charter schools pull funding away from traditional public schools, since a large portion of education funds follow the student to the charter school. Conversely, some argue that there are funding inequities that favor public schools. These individuals claim that since charter schools are public schools, the funds allocated to them should be the equivalent of that received by the traditional public schools. This brief examines funding of traditional and charter schools in Arkansa

2013 Legislative Review

The 89th General Assembly in Arkansas convened on Monday January 14th and would file 2,640 pieces of legislation over the next 100 days. Of this legislation, there were 145 House Bills, 4 House Resolutions, and 97 Senate Bills referred to either the House or Senate Education Committees. That is a grand total of 246 pieces of “education” legislation representing roughly 9 percent of legislation filed in the session. The purpose of this policy brief is to review some of the “high -profile” education bills during the session. The highlighted bills here are split into three categories: 1) school choice, 2) funding, and 3) a number of other bills of note are discussed

SLIP4EX- a program for routine slope stability analysis to include the effects of vegetation, reinforcement and hydrological changes

SLIP4EX is a straightforward computer program developed in connection with the EU funded ECOSLOPES project for routine stability analysis and the assessment of the contribution of vegetation to slope stability. The slope section is drawn up and dimensions and parameters are fed in to the Microsoft Excel based program for stability calculations and comparisons of Factors of Safety using different methods of analysis (Bishop, Janbu, Fellenius, Simple, Greenwood). The background and assumptions involved in the derivation of each of the methods is briefly described. The simplicity of the program enables the user to understand the nature of the analysis, explore the parameter assumptions made and compare the different methods of analysis. Soil reinforcement by geosynthetic layers or anchors, and vegetation effects of enhanced cohesion, changed water pressures, mass of vegetation, wind forces and root reinforcement forces are readily included in the analysis. The program is freely available on request from the author

On the existence of nonoptimal equilibria in dynamic stochastic economies

Economic development