Alternative Approach Term Paper

Pages: 5 (1468 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: 0  ·  Level: College Senior  ·  Topic: Teaching  ·  Buy This Paper

SAMPLE EXCERPT:

[. . .] It seems rather natural that this should actually be so, because these children need an additional effort for them to reach the minimum educational level or the adequacy level.

As for the second part of our question, this also seems to be true, as demographical studies and statistics have shown.

Hence, we may conclude that the cost of a sound basic education in the City is equal to the cost of basic education in the state, which will be adjusted by the two specific elements that I have mentioned, that is, additional costs implied by higher teacher wages and the higher concentration of children with disadvantages in the city.

No matter how potentially good this methodology seems to be, there are several aspects worth mentioning that may minimize its overall value. First of all, as the article mentions in the end, the two key steps, which are the fundamental pieces in the entire methodology, evaluating the additional costs of teacher wages and evaluating both the concentration of disadvantaged children and additional costs that these children imply, are rather technical.

Indeed, we should assume that these are estimates and, as any estimates, it is more than likely that they are not even close to reality. Besides, these additional costs are extremely hard to evaluate. If the case of teachers' wages is pretty straightforward, because we will be assessing such things as the cost of living in New York City and how this differs from the cost of living in New York State, evaluating the additional cost of providing basic education for disadvantaged students is more than difficult. Indeed, we need to ask ourselves what extra necessities does such a child have and what extra resources to we need to provide so that he will reach the same minimum educational level as a normal child.

Another disadvantage that I see when applying this methodology refers to the additional costs included by education in the City as compared to education in the State. I am wondering whether the two components that the authors use are the only ones that make a difference in this case. Indeed, shouldn't we be considering other elements that may increase the cost of minimum level education in the City as compared to the one in the State?

Finally, a third negative aspect in this methodology that may be worth considering is the fact that the additional cost that the disadvantaged category implies is not actually structured into other categories and it is hard to decide what should actually be added there. In this sense, there may also be a problem in differentiating the cost of resources used for the education of disadvantaged children in the City, with respect to the ones in the State.

However, the methodology certainly has several pluses and positive aspects. First of all, it provides a clear way of evaluating what the cost of resources is for adequacy levels in the City. This is a clear, four steps program and it is pretty straight forward. If we ignore the fact that steps two and three are rather technical and hard to properly evaluate, the methodology is quite perfect from this point-of-view.

Additionally, the approaches mentioned in the first step, even if they differ one from the other, it is clear (as the article mentions), that they "all lead approximately to the same answer," which shows that this is a sound method.

The methodology that the article describes and explains can be used in any other state, including California, in order to calculate how much reaching the minimum education level actually costs and how this costs is differentiated between different locations.

In this sense, if we take the cost of these resources in the state (step one), we may then use steps two, three and four to transfer the cost and adjust it for one of the Californian cities, much the same way in which the authors of this article are extrapolating their calculations from New York State to New York City.

From the article and Court decision [END OF PREVIEW]

Four Different Ordering Options:

?
Which Option Should I Choose?

1.  Buy the full, 5-page paper:  $26.88

or

2.  Buy & remove for 30 days:  $38.47

or

3.  Access all 175,000+ papers:  $41.97/mo

(Already a member?  Click to download the paper!)

or

4.  Let us write a NEW paper for you!

Ask Us to Write a New Paper
Most popular!

Alternative Source for Tax Dollars for My School District Essay


Testing vs. Alternative Forms of Assessment Term Paper


Traditional Teachers vs. Alternative Trained Case Study


Eden Alternative: Better Choice for Elder Care Research Paper


Agency's Approach to Incorporating Learning Program Objectives Into Their Learning Program Plans Thesis


View 999 other related papers  >>

Cite This Term Paper:

APA Format

Alternative Approach.  (2004, September 5).  Retrieved February 23, 2019, from https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/alternative-approach-determine/4347647

MLA Format

"Alternative Approach."  5 September 2004.  Web.  23 February 2019. <https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/alternative-approach-determine/4347647>.

Chicago Format

"Alternative Approach."  Essaytown.com.  September 5, 2004.  Accessed February 23, 2019.
https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/alternative-approach-determine/4347647.