Page 26

ACEF Journal Vol 3 Issue 1 December 2012

Educational Equity in Rural Schools However, rural school district superintendents’ satisfaction ratings with exterior water supply show some variation by the percentage of low-income students. School district superintendents were more likely to report their exterior water supply condition as borderline for schools with 40% and above low-income students than for those more wealthy schools (schools with the lower concentration of low-income students), 16% versus 10%, 2(9, N = 126) = 20.51, p = .02. Rural school district superintendents’ satisfaction ratings with male/female restrooms show some variation by region and the percentage of low-income students. For example, school district superintendents in the Eastern areas were less likely to rate their male/female restrooms with unsatisfactory than schools in the Western and Central areas, 5% versus 9% and 17%, 2 (6, N = 126) = 17.79, p = .01. School district superintendents were more likely to report male/female restrooms were unsatisfactory for affluent schools (those with less than 20% low- income students) than for less wealthy schools (schools with the higher concentration of low- income students), 20% versus 13%, 2 (9, N = 126) = 19.50, p = .02. Building safety conditions. The Survey on Rural School Building Conditions collected information about satisfaction with building safety in: (a) fire alarms, smoke detectors, and sprinkler systems; (b) light sources; and (c) emergency lighting. About 97% of rural school district superintendents reported that the fire alarms, smoke detectors, and sprinkler system in their schools were satisfactory (36% satisfactory and 62% excellent). About 88% of rural school district superintendents reported that the light sources in their schools were satisfactory (51% satisfactory and 37% excellent). Approximately 90% of rural school district superintendents reported that the emergency lighting in their schools was satisfactory (59% satisfactory and 31% excellent). The Chi-square test results revealed that the rural school district superintendents’ satisfaction ratings with building safety did not vary significantly by school characteristics, such as instructional level, region, and percentage of low-income students (all ps > .05). Conditions of building energy efficiency. The Survey on Rural School Building Conditions collected information about satisfaction with energy efficiency in rural school buildings on: (a) fluorescent lighting, (b) building envelopes, and (c) building energy efficiency. While more than 60% of rural school district superintendents reported that the building energy efficiency in their school buildings was satisfactory, more than 30% of school district superintendents reported that building energy efficiency was unsatisfactory. The Chi-square test results revealed that rural school district superintendents’ satisfaction rating with building energy efficiency did not show any variation by school instructional level and the percentage of low-income students, (all ps > .05). However, rural school district superintendents’ satisfaction ratings with building energy efficiency show some variation by region. For example, school district superintendents in the Eastern area were more satisfied with their building energy efficiency than school district superintendents in the Western and Central areas, 68% versus 28% and 35%, 2 (6, N = 126) = 19.59, p Conditions of building accessibility. The Survey on Rural School Building Conditions collected information about satisfaction with the following building accessibility features: (a) handicapped accessibility, (b) vehicular entrances and exits, (c) pedestrian services, (d) student drop-off area, and (e) bus loading area. The majority of rural school district superintendents reported their handicapped accessibility, vehicular entrances and exits, pedestrian services, and bus loading area were satisfactory (over 40% satisfactory and over 30% excellent). Student drop-off area was rated as December 2012 / ACEF 26


ACEF Journal Vol 3 Issue 1 December 2012
To see the actual publication please follow the link above