Search

A special tabulation of individual student scores from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) test allowed a ranking of Texas schools according to test score changes ("value added"). The rankings varied greatly by student subpopulation. That is, the vast majority of schools are much more effective with some kinds of students than others. The implied comparative advantages suggest possibly large academic gains just from indicated student movement, even among unchanged, traditional, "comprehensively uniform" public schools, perhaps through well-informed public school choice. Further gains from specialization are also implied by the results. (Contains 6 notes, 2 tables and 1 figure.)

Pressing questions about the merits of market accountability in K-12 education have spawned a large scholarly literature. Unfortunately, much of that literature is of limited relevance, and much of it is misleading. The studies most widely cited in the United States used intense scrutiny of a few small-scale, restriction-laden U.S. school choice programs, and a handful of larger, but still restriction-laden foreign school choice expansions, to assert general conclusions about the effects of "choice," "competition," and "markets." The most intensely studied programs lack most or all of the key elements of market systems, including profit, price change, market entry, and product differentiation--factors that are normally central to any discussion of market effects. The school choice literature is partly driven by a self-fulfilling prophesy. Large steps toward full-blown market accountability are widely seen as too radical to be worthy of study, especially in the absence of directly relevant data. The studies of small-scale school choice programs soft-pedal the large differences between the choices available now and those that could be available under conditions that are the norm in most of the economy and then compound the political feasibility problem by connecting market terminology to the modest effects of the small-scale programs. To address the need for credible evidence of effects of genuine education markets, scholars should look to simulation models, indirect evidence such as outcomes in similar industries, and school systems abroad that enjoy varying degrees of market accountability. (Contains 10 notes.)

Pressing questions about the merits of full-fledged market accountability in K-12 education, and more limited choice programs, have spawned a large scholarly literature. This article assesses what we know from the most prominent studies and the importance of those findings to school system reform discussions. The studies most widely cited in the United States based their findings on small-scale, restriction-laden U.S. programs, and a handful of larger, but still restriction-laden, foreign school choice programs. The extensive restrictions and small size of those programs make them virtually irrelevant to the widely acknowledged transformational change imperative. Because the most intensely studied programs lack most, and sometimes all, of the key elements of market systems, such as profit, price change, market entry, and product differentiation, they don't help us determine whether unleashing market forces will produce more desired than undesired effects. However, absence of the key elements of market systems did not stop numerous analysts from stating conclusions about "markets," and "competition." So we know a lot about some of the policy approaches to increased school choice, but little about many policy approaches, and less than many people think we know. We know the most about programs and policies too limited in scope to yield much insight into reform policies capable of addressing the transformation imperative implied by the repeatedly alleged "nation at risk" problem. (Contains 203 notes.)

One of the key claims of choice advocates is that it will take diverse schooling options to engage all children in learning. In a school system truly open to new providers of instruction and diverse schooling options, private schools and public schools of choice can vie for customers by trying different subject themes and pedagogies. If a school's products are inferior, poorly targeted, or if its procedures or themes are considered objectionable, parents are free to put their children elsewhere. The program described in this paper, "Core Knowledge," has seen considerable success, but since it may not be everyone's cup of tea, it may be politically challenging to implement it in schools filled through assignment. But, for the same reason, opportunities to offer it selectively through schools of choice may cause much more widespread use of the Core Knowledge curriculum. So, the immediate "news" events are the decisions to use the Core Knowledge curriculum in many New York City schools, and the "news" that will gradually unfold will be the size of the various thematic and pedagogical niches that evolve in New York and elsewhere. (Contains 19 notes.)

Reviews the many dramatically different forms of school choice proposals, warning against implementing sharply limited and regulated school choice plans and arguing that if the failure of school choice is wrongly attributed to too much choice rather than too little, broader and freer experiments in choice could be politically doomed. Focuses on child centered public funding and privatization. (SM)

"Measuring Competitive Effects from School Voucher Programs: A Systematic Review" by Ann G. Egalite (p443-464, this issue) concludes that, "overwhelming [U.S.] evidence supports the development of market-based schooling policies as a means to increase student achievement in traditional public schools." Here, John Merrifield writes that, while he would agree there is strong evidence that market-based schooling policies could yield significant school system improvements, the evidence he is referring to is not the studies of U.S. school choice programs assessed by Anna Egalite's article. Merrifield states that this is because U.S. school choice programs did not generate any evidence of full-fledged markets in action (Merrifield, 2008). He says that something as common as genuine market forces needs to be more thoroughly assessed. He warns against making the assumption that there exists a solid body of evidence on the productivity of market-based educational reforms, where none exists, and fears that assumption could lead to numerous, and difficult-to-reverse policy errors. Merrifield posits that school choice program effects examined by Anna Egalite qualify as "quasi-market" (Barber, 2012, p. 215) outcomes; government-controlled entry, government-set prices, often a ban on profit, and programs that do not create a level playing field (or close) between public and private schooling options. With entrepreneurs entering or exiting regions on the basis of tuition-price signals indicating profit-loss potential, Merrifield comments that since we can only measure quasi-market effects from contemporary U.S. evidence, we need to turn to historic and foreign (Coulson, 2009) evidence to gain some insight on the differences between market and quasi-market outcomes. The article then asks the question: "Are quasi-market settings good market experiments, or are they dangerously misleading?"

K-12 education reformers have often cited increases in spending with little noticeable gain in test scores, coupled with the fact that American students lag behind their foreign peers on standardized tests, as a major policy problem. School choice, specifically voucher programs, have emerged as a possible solution to the K-12 education woes. This article focuses on what is commonly referred to as the 'systemic effects' of a private voucher program in the Edgewood Independent School District (EISD) in San Antonio, Texas. Using carefully chosen control districts and a robust econometric analysis, we conclude that the CEO Horizon Scholarship Program had small, positive effects on the traditional public schools of EISD. The rate of change growth, however, does slow as the voucher program nears the end of its term indicating that traditional public school participants need to believe that these programs are long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A special tabulation of individual student scores from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) test allowed a ranking of Texas schools according to test score changes (“value added”). The rankings varied greatly by student subpopulation. That is, the vast majority of schools are much more effective with some kinds of students than others. The implied comparative advantages suggest possibly large academic gains just from indicated student movement, even among unchanged, traditional, “comprehensively uniform” public schools, perhaps through well-informed public school choice. Further gains from specialization are also implied by the results. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses reports published within the issue, including one on specific policy approach to school choice and another on the public school effects of school choice programs.

Pressing questions about the merits of full-fledged market accountability in K-12 education, and more limited choice programs, have spawned a large scholarly literature. This article assesses what we know from the most prominent studies and the importance of those findings to school system reform discussions. The studies most widely cited in the United States based their findings on small-scale, restriction-laden U.S. programs, and a handful of larger, but still restriction-laden, foreign school choice programs. The extensive restrictions and small size of those programs make them virtually irrelevant to the widely acknowledged transformational change imperative. Because the most intensely studied programs lack most, and sometimes all, of the key elements of market systems, such as profit, price change, market entry, and product differentiation, they don't help us determine whether unleashing market forces will produce more desired than undesired effects. However, absence of the key elements of market systems did not stop numerous analysts from stating conclusions about "markets," and "competition." So we know a lot about some of the policy approaches to increased school choice, but little about many policy approaches, and less than many people think we know. We know the most about programs and policies too limited in scope to yield much insight into reform policies capable of addressing the transformation imperative implied by the repeatedly alleged "nation at risk" problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the author reflects on an article by Anna J. Egaliteon, a research associate at the University of Arkansas, on the impact of school voucher programs and assessment of productivity of market-based educational reforms in the U.S. It highlights the development of market-based schooling policies to increase student achievement in public schools. He concerns about the effect of school choice program in creating a level playing field between public and private schooling options.