Abstract
The fundamental goal of the OSP is to improve academic outcomes for children from low-income families, with a specific focus on students who previously were attending low-performing public schools. Measurement of the progress and achievement of students participating in the program, however, was not a straightforward matter. There is considerable debate surrounding the role and responsibility of schools in driving student achievement and how to objectively assess and measure student progress. The controversy surrounding this is reflected in the movement behind standardized testing, site-based accountability, teacher merit pay, the Common Core National Standards, and a growing number of reforms that many commentators feel are necessary to improve traditional public and public charter schools. Although it is less commonly discussed, private schools face their own particular challenges in terms of defining, monitoring, and reporting student progress, particularly in light of the frequently cited claim that differences between the performance of private and public schools disappear when analysts control for student socioeconomic characteristics.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Christopher Lubienski and Sarah T. Lubienski, “Charter, Private, Public Schools and Academic Achievement: New Evidence from NAEP Mathematics Data,” Columbia University: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education (2006), http://www.ncspe.org/publications_files/OP111.pdf.
See especially Harry P. Hatry, Performance Measurement: Getting Results, Second edition (Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press, 2006).
For examples see William G. Howell, Patrick J. Wolf, David E. Campbell, and Paul E. Peterson, “School Vouchers and Academic Performance: Results from Three Randomized Field Trials,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 21 (April 2002): 191–217;
John F. Witte, The Market Approach to Education: An Analysis of America’s First Voucher Program (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000);
Eric Hanushek, John Kain, Steven Rivkin, and Gregory Branch, “Charter School Quality and Parental Decision Making with School Choice,” Journal of Public Economics 91, nos 5–6 (June 2007): 823–48;
Caroline M. Hoxby, Sonali Murarka, and Jenny Kang, “How New York City’s Charter Schools Affect Achievement,” New York City Charter Schools Evaluation Project, September 2009, http://users.nber.org/~schools/charterschoolseval/how_NYC_charter_schools_affect_achievement_sept2009.pdf.
Thomas Stewart et al., “Family Reflections on the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program,” University of Arkansas: School Choice Demonstration Project, Fourth-Year Report (2009): 28–9.
George A. Akerlof and Rachel E. Kranton, “Identity and Schooling: Some Lessons for the Economics of Education,” Journal of Economic Literature 40 (2002): 1167–201;
Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, “The Moral Economy of Communities: Structured Populations and the Evolution of Pro-social Norms,” Evolution and Human Behavior 19 (January 1998): 3–25.
James P. Kelly, III, and Benjamin Scafidi, “More Than Scores: An Analysis of Why and How Parents Choose Private Schools” (Indianapolis, IN: Friedman Foundation, 2013).
For a review, see Brian P. Gill, P. Michael Timpane, Karen E. Ross, and Dominic J. Brewer, Rhetoric Versus Reality: What We Know and What We Need to Know About Vouchers and Charter Schools, (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Education, 2001), 128–34.
Julie Trivitt and Patrick J. Wolf, “School Choice and the Branding of Catholic Schools,” Education Finance and Policy 6, no. 2 (Spring 2011): 202–45.
Thomas Stewart, Juanita Lucas-McLean, Laura I. Jensen, Christina Fetzko, Bonnie Ho, and Sylvia Segovia, “Family Voices on Parental School Choice in Milwaukee: What Can We Learn from Low-income Families?” School Choice Demonstration Project at University of Arkansas, SCDP Milwaukee Evaluation Report #19, April 2010, 5–6, http://www.uark.edu/ua/der/SCDP/Milwaukee_Eval/Report_19.pdf.
Joshua M. Cowen, David J. Fleming, John F. Witte, and Patrick J. Wolf, “Going Public: Who Leaves a Large, Longstanding, and Widely Available Urban Voucher Program?” American Educational Research Journal 49, no. 2 (Spring 2012): 231–56.
Thomas Stewart and Patrick J. Wolf, “Parent and Student Experiences with Choice in Milwaukee, Wisconsin,” School Choice Demonstration Project at University of Arkansas, March 2009, Milwaukee Evaluation Report #13, 24, http://www.uaedreform.org/downloads/2009/03/report–13-parent-and-student-experiences-with-choice-in-milwaukee-wisconsin.pdf.
Greg Forster and Christian D’Andrea, “An Empirical Evaluation of the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program,” The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice (August 2009), http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/downloadFile.do?id=383.
Thomas Stewart, Patrick J. Wolf, and Stephen Q. Cornman, “Parent and Student Voices on the First Year of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program,” School Choice Demonstration Project at Georgetown University, SCDP 05-01, October 2005, vi, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED508628.pdf.
For example, see Greg Forster and Christian D’Andrea, “An Empirical Evaluation of the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program,” The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice (2009), http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/downloadFile.do?id=383;
Thomas Stewart and Patrick J. Wolf, “Parent and Student Experiences with Choice in Milwaukee,” University of Arkansas: School Choice Demonstration Project Report #13 (2009), http://www.uark.edu/ua/der/SCDP/Milwaukee_Eval/Report_13.pdf.
For example: Joe Soss, “Lessons of Welfare: Policy Design, Political Learning, and Political Action,” The American Political Science Review 93, no. 2 (June 1999): 363–81;
Helen Ingram and Anne L. Schneider, “The Social Construction of Target Populations: Implication for Politics and Policy,” The American Political Science Review 87, no. 2 (1993): 334–47.
Mark Schneider, Paul Teske, and Melissa Marschall, Choosing Schools: Consumer Choice and the Quality of American Schools (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 107.
Copyright information
© 2014 Thomas Stewart and Patrick J. Wolf
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stewart, T., Wolf, P.J. (2014). How Do Families Measure Student Progress, Satisfaction, and Success?. In: The School Choice Journey. Education Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137442666_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137442666_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-68444-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-44266-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Education CollectionEducation (R0)