In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

• Facilities Spending and Student Learning Outcomes in New Jersey
• Alyssa Rush (bio), Rafael Inoa (bio), and Soundaram Ramaswami (bio)

introduction

Racial and economic segregation throughout the United States (US) are related and lead to inequities in school quality measures. According to Rothstein (2017), racially segregated neighborhoods have continued across the US as the result of direct government involvement, laws, and public policy, and to a lesser extent, as the result of white flight, redlining practices, and other private and community practices, including families choosing to reside in neighborhoods whose residents are of their same racial backgrounds. Such segregation practices have implications for school districts. For instance, there are millions of children who attend school facilities described as "unhealthy, unsafe, educationally inadequate, environmentally unsustainable, and financially inefficient" (Filardo & Vincent, 2017, p. 1), with the majority of these negative conditions known to be most prevalent in schools serving students from economically disadvantaged communities (Filardo & Vincent, 2017; Filardo et al., 2019; Rivera, 2017).

Inequity in school infrastructure spending has also been related to racial and economic segregation. Sosina and Weathers (2019) focused on the relationship between race and infrastructure spending and found per-pupil infrastructure expenditures to be lower for Black and Latinx students when compared to White students. Additionally, a significant relationship benefiting White students was found between Latinx-White segregation and per-pupil infrastructure expenditures (Sosina & Weathers, 2019). Because "investments in school infrastructure yield modest long-term positive impacts on academic achievement" (Conlin & Thompson, 2017, p. 27), differences in infrastructure spending across racial and economic lines leads to inequitable educational experiences and academic outcomes for students. This unfortunately perpetuates [End Page 34] the long-standing notion that separate is not equal.

income-based segregation

Segregated neighborhoods lead to detrimental impacts on education and school quality. Neighboring school districts that rely more on local revenues for funding often see inequity in school spending, with high local wealth being positively related to larger school district budgets (Baker et al., 2016). Because race and wealth are strongly correlated throughout the US (Baker et al., 2016), racial segregation and economic segregation are often aligned, leading to low income, segregated schools and putting children of racial minority groups at a disadvantage when compared to their White counterparts. However, segregation negatively impacts students of all races, as students are unable to "gain experience navigating the diverse environments in which, as adults, they will have to make their way" (Rothstein, 2017, p. 196), irrespective of their race.

While income and racial inequality are often related to each other, evidence found throughout the relevant literature supports that income-based achievement gaps far exceed racially-based achievement gaps (Baker et al., 2016). There is thus a need in the relevant literature to better understand how per student allocation of funds in school infrastructure expenditure may differ, especially across school districts that predominantly serve families of one specific economic status over others.

The current study focuses on the facilities spending of 231 school districts across New Jersey's District Factor Group (DFG) classifications. There are eight DFG classifications (i.e., A, B, CD, DE, FG, GH, I, and J), with districts ranging across this continuum from more economically disadvantaged (A) to less economically disadvantaged (J). Based on the known relationship between race and economic status in the US (Sosina & Weathers, 2019), it is not surprising that more economically disadvantaged districts in NJ service mostly families and students of racial minority groups, while less economically disadvantaged districts service a disproportionately greater number of White families (Baker & Weber, 2021).

theoretical framework

The theoretical underpinnings of this study rest on an equity-oriented model where state and local wealth and income alongside fiscal effort impacts state and local revenue, which directly influences current operating expenditure. These relationships are the first part of Baker et al.'s (2016) "conceptual map of the relationship of schooling resources to children's measurable school achievement outcomes" (p. 3). The second part of Baker et al.'s model links schooling resources [End Page 35] (i.e., student-teacher ratios and class size, and competitive wages) to student outcomes, which is in line with the fact that operating expenditures are mostly used to support staff salaries and benefits (Sosina & Weather...

中文翻译：

---

新泽西州的设施支出和学生学习成果

代替摘要，这里是内容的简短摘录：

• 新泽西州的设施支出和学生学习成果
• Alyssa Rush（生物）、Rafael Inoa（生物）和 Soundaram Ramaswami（生物）

介绍

整个美国 (US) 的种族和经济隔离是相关的，并导致学校质量措施的不公平。根据 Rothstein（2017 年）的说法，由于政府的直接参与、法律和公共政策，以及在较小程度上，由于白人逃亡、红线行为以及其他私人和社区，种族隔离的社区在美国各地继续存在做法，包括选择居住在居民具有相同种族背景的社区的家庭。这种隔离做法对学区有影响。例如，有数百万儿童在被描述为“不健康、不安全、教育不足、环境不可持续且经济效率低下”的学校设施上学（Filardo & Vincent，2017 年，第 1 页），

学校基础设施支出的不平等也与种族和经济隔离有关。Sosina 和 Weathers (2019) 关注种族与基础设施支出之间的关系，发现与白人学生相比，黑人和拉丁裔学生的人均基础设施支出较低。此外，还发现拉丁裔-白人隔离与每名学生的基础设施支出之间存在使白人学生受益的重要关系（Sosina & Weathers，2019）。因为“对学校基础设施的投资对学业成绩产生适度的长期积极影响”（Conlin & Thompson，2017 年，第 27 页），不同种族和经济领域的基础设施支出差异导致学生的教育经历和学业成绩不平等。不幸的是，这一直存在[完第34页]长期以来的观念是分开不等于。

基于收入的隔离

社区隔离会对教育和学校质量产生不利影响。更依赖当地收入提供资金的邻近学区经常会发现学校支出不平等，当地富裕程度与较大的学区预算正相关（Baker 等人，2016 年）。由于种族和财富在整个美国密切相关（Baker 等人，2016 年），种族隔离和经济隔离往往是一致的，导致低收入、学校隔离，并使少数民族的孩子与他们的白人相比处于劣势同行。然而，种族隔离对所有种族的学生都产生了负面影响，因为学生无法“获得在不同环境中航行的经验，作为成年人，他们必须在这些环境中找到自己的路”（Rothstein，2017 年，第 196 页），

虽然收入和种族不平等往往相互关联，但相关文献中发现的证据支持基于收入的成就差距远远超过基于种族的成就差距（Baker 等人，2016 年）。因此，相关文献需要更好地了解每个学生在学校基础设施支出中的资金分配可能有何不同，尤其是在主要服务于具有特定经济地位的家庭而不是其他家庭的学区之间。

当前的研究重点关注新泽西州地区因素组 (DFG) 分类中 231 个学区的设施支出。有八个 DFG 分类（即 A、B、CD、DE、FG、GH、I 和 J），该连续体中的地区范围从经济上较弱势 (A) 到经济上较弱势 (J)。根据美国已知的种族与经济地位之间的关系（Sosina & Weathers，2019），新泽西州经济条件较差的地区主要为少数族裔家庭和学生提供服务，而经济条件较差的地区服务的比例不成比例，这并不奇怪更多的白人家庭（Baker & Weber，2021）。

理论框架

本研究的理论基础基于一个以股权为导向的模型，其中州和地方的财富和收入连同财政努力影响州和地方的收入，这直接影响当前的运营支出。这些关系是 Baker 等人（2016 年）“学校教育资源与儿童可衡量学业成绩之间关系的概念图”（第 3 页）的第一部分。Baker 等人模型的第二部分将学校教育资源[End Page 35]（即师生比例和班级规模，以及有竞争力的工资）与学生成绩联系起来，这与运营支出主要是用于支持员工的工资和福利（Sosina & Weather...