“…However, research has found positive relationships between expenditures and student outcomes (Summers & Wolfe, 1977;Greenwald, Hedges, & Laine, 1996;Jacques & Brorsen, 2002;Ram, 2004;Li & Tobias, 2005;Hogrebe, KyeiBlankson, & Zou, 2008), though Ilon and Normore (2006) concluded that per-pupil expenditures were the least cost-effective means of resource input for student achievement. While some research (Hanushek, 1986;Hanushek, 1989;Okpala, Okpala, & Smith, 2001) concluded that there was no relationship between expenditures and achievement, Ismail and Cheng (2005) have argued that the results from Hanushek (1986Hanushek ( , 1989 were based on poor data and inappropriate methodology. Archibald (2006) found positive effects of per-pupil expenditures on reading achievement throughout primary and secondary education, while Eide and Showalter (1998) used quantile regression to show that per-pupil expenditures are important for the tail end of the performance distribution, in other words, students at the lowest end of test score distributions benefit significantly from greater expenditures.…”