scholarly journals The impact of school choice on student outcomes: an analysis of the Chicago Public Schools

2005 ◽  
Vol 89 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 729-760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Berry Cullen ◽  
Brian A. Jacob ◽  
Steven D. Levitt
2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (9) ◽  
pp. 1372-1396
Author(s):  
Beth Wright-Costello ◽  
Kate Phillippo

Many urban districts use a portfolio management model, hoping to promote school choice and improve school performance. This model requires school closure, which has predominantly impacted lower income families. In 2013, Chicago Public Schools relocated Granger Elementary into one of 48 schools it closed, placing its middle-class parents in the unusual position of resisting a school closure-related decision. Our case study explores parents’ resistance from a perspective of capital use and parental agency. Interview participants leveraged extensive capital in response to the proposed closure–relocation. When their efforts failed to halt the directive, they used their resources as consumers, largely finding their children spaces in other schools. Parents were unable to effectively exercise agency to influence district-level policy, but they secured educational advantages for their own children by leveraging their capital. Findings inform implications for market-based policy theory, equity, and democratic control of public schools.


2002 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Goldhaber ◽  
Eric Eide

In this article, Dan Goldhaber and Eric Eide consider what we do and do not know about the impact of school choice, focusing particularly on the potential impact of choice on minority students in urban school settings. They observe that many argue that school choice is a necessary component of any educational reform designed to improve educational outcomes for students. While public pressure has yielded a tremendous expansion of choice options, Goldhaber and Eide contend that the empirical evidence on the academic effects of school choice reforms is mixed. They propose that relatively little evidence exists that these schools are having a clear-cut positive or negative impact on the achievement of either the students who attend them or those who remain in traditional public schools. They conclude that the mixed evidence on choice suggests that choice in and of itself is unlikely to be the solution that revolutionizes urban school systems.


2020 ◽  
Vol 122 (14) ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Eliza Moeller ◽  
Alex Seeskin

Background/Context There is a body of evolving research on how educators use data for improvement, with many examples in the literature about how educators learn to use a routine of data-driven cycles of inquiry to make smart improvements to their practice. This article is not an alternative structure for engaging in cycles of inquiry, but rather a series of critical considerations for school leaders about how, why, and with what supports they can best organize their schools to use data for improvement. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study The study addresses the research question, “What are the conditions necessary for school leaders to use data to improve student outcomes?” To demonstrate our concept of practice-driven data, we use Chicago Public Schools as a case study of school district that worked and continues to work with its research and practice partners to implement a process using data-based indicators with the goal of improving practice and ultimately student outcomes. Research Design In this article, as authors we are participant observers of the work of bringing data to schools across various projects and many years. We write this article as leaders that are based in the University of Chicago and work with Chicago Public Schools, but are independent of the district. We rely on notes from our daily practices, observations from our experiences, and documents from the practices supporting Chicago Public School leaders. Conclusions/Recommendations We build the article around five lessons that form an approach to the use of practice-driven data: First, it is important to build capacity to facilitate hard conversations that use data to spur collective action, which requires an emphasis on trust, collaboration, and culture. Second, the preponderance of available data and the scarce resource of time require that educators and leaders prioritize research-based indicators that matter most for student success. Third, educators at all levels of the school system can use relevant research evidence to make meaning of the data to guide their practice, and to develop shared ownership over the implications of the research on improving student outcomes. Fourth, using data effectively to guide practice requires that educators and leaders use the right data at the right time of the school year. Finally, there is no more important use of data in public schools than as a tool to identify and stop inequities that continue to leave the most vulnerable students further and further behind.


2015 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 358-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Irmak Sirer ◽  
Spiro Maroulis ◽  
Roger Guimerà ◽  
Uri Wilensky ◽  
Luís A. Nunes Amaral

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 10-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Dettori ◽  
Ronald I. Greenberg ◽  
Steven McGee ◽  
Dale Reed

Author(s):  
Michael Blackowicz ◽  
Daniel Hryhorczuk ◽  
Kristin Rankin ◽  
Dan Lewis ◽  
Danish Haider ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 130 (3) ◽  
pp. 1011-1066 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karthik Muralidharan ◽  
Venkatesh Sundararaman

Abstract We present experimental evidence on the impact of a school choice program in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh that provided students with a voucher to finance attending a private school of their choice. The study design featured a unique two-stage lottery-based allocation of vouchers that created both student-level and market-level experiments, which allows us to study the individual and the aggregate effects of school choice (including spillovers). After two and four years of the program, we find no difference between test scores of lottery winners and losers on Telugu (native language), math, English, and science/social studies, suggesting that the large cross-sectional differences in test scores across public and private schools mostly reflect omitted variables. However, private schools also teach Hindi, which is not taught by the public schools, and lottery winners have much higher test scores in Hindi. Furthermore, the mean cost per student in the private schools in our sample was less than a third of the cost in public schools. Thus, private schools in this setting deliver slightly better test score gains than their public counterparts (better on Hindi and same in other subjects), and do so at a substantially lower cost per student. Finally, we find no evidence of spillovers on public school students who do not apply for the voucher, or on private school students, suggesting that the positive effects on voucher winners did not come at the expense of other students.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document