1 / 22

School Choice at Federal and Local Levels

School Choice at Federal and Local Levels. Jae Hee Park Michael Gaddis. Market base approach. Voucher Charter school- public funded and publicly regulated schools that are privately operated and enrolled by student/parent choice. Market base approach.

arleen
Download Presentation

School Choice at Federal and Local Levels

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. School Choice at Federal and Local Levels Jae Hee Park Michael Gaddis

  2. Market base approach • Voucher • Charter school- public funded and publicly regulated schools that are privately operated and enrolled by student/parent choice.

  3. Market base approach • Will parents and students choose the most effective schools? • Whether public purposes (student integration and the education of citizen) will be served through the pursuit of private ends. • Some parents are passive choosers • School is effective selector of students • School choice may actually undermine schools’ political responsiveness by promoting exit over voice for the most active families.

  4. Empirical evidence • Competition can increase school productivity • Competition may produce stratification, sectarianism, and inequity • Whether market competition can serve those values as well as publicly operated schools can

  5. Competitive effects of charter schools • Competitive pressure induces conventional public schools to increase their educational productivity. • Competitive pressure may simply encourage a narrow focus on raising test scores. • Peer effect • Conventional public schools may experience an increase in per pupil resources

  6. Competitive effects of voucher program • Evidence on the competitive effects of vouchers remains limited. • Importance of examining differential impacts for different groups of schools and students, as well as average impacts.

  7. Tiebout competition • Tibout choice describes residential choices made by parents, which may be based partly on the quality of the public schools in that neighborhood. • Indirect competition among school districts, as they compete for additional local property tax revenues and per student funding • It is impossible to conduct a randomized experiment or even to observe changes in student achievement before and after an intervention occurs.

  8. Competition, Integration, And Civic Socialization • Assumption: the school is the appropriate unit of analysis. • Student sorting can occur within schools as well as between schools.

  9. Competition, Integration, And Civic Socialization • Compared charter school and conventional public schools in terms of students’ attainment of civic skills and knowledge. • “Buckley and Schneither used result from telephone surveys of students in grades seven through twelve to compare the values, civic participation, and knowledge of charter students and students inconventional public schools in the district of columbia.”

  10. Policy implication • The specific design of a program of educational competition is likely to matter. The effect of school choice on integration will depends on what students and schools are eligible to participate in the program. • Voucher programs that are targeted to low-income students vs. Voucher programs that are open to all students. • Information is a fundamental component of a competition-based system.

  11. Positives of School Choice Theory • Better match a student’s educational needs with school • Better match parents’ beliefs on what education should be with school • Allow more variation in schooling • Create competition for students (among schools)

  12. Negatives of School Choice Theory • Social Cohesion? • Peer Effects? • Increased Inequality?

  13. School Choice Report Card “In other words, in its ideal form, school choice replaces the current system of school stratification based on race and class with one governed by merit, measured by test scores, effort, grades, or some other criteria.” (207)

  14. School Choice & NCLB Schools which receive Title I funds that miss AYP two years in a row must allow students to transfer to a school which is not in improvement status

  15. School Choice & NCLB School districts have responsibilities: • Identify improvement status schools • Identify possible receiving schools • Notify parents • Set-up assignment system • Provide transportation and tutoring

  16. NCLB ChoiceReport Card What are some potential problems with this system? Is it a fair system to all districts?

  17. Chicago Case Study • 1980s – “Options for Knowledge” • 1990s – Mayoral Management • 2000s – NCLB Choice Policies

  18. NCLB ChoiceFailures in Chicago • Many of the options for transfer are only marginally better than the original schools • State law forbids transfers to an already overcrowded school • High local resistance • Lack of funds

  19. NCLB ChoiceReport Card “The choice provisions are difficult for many, if not most, districts to implement, give struggling schools only one year to improve before facing sanctions, and penalize too many schools for the sanction to be effective. The vast majority of students who desire a school transfer are not being allowed one.” (221)

  20. Group Activity Think about having your child in a public school system. We have given you information (your race, your income, your child’s academic performance, you child’s current school, and the school options for your family) to help you decide where to send your child to school.

More Related