Useful But Flawed Analysis of Impact of Charter Schools on Traditional Public Schools

A “Think Twice” review of a think tank report from the folks at the National Education Policy Center.  The charter school and school choice aspects are important for readers of this space.

May 18, 2023

Contact: Alex Molnar: (480) 797-7261, nepc.molnar@gmail.com Faith Boninger: (480) 390-6736, fboninger@gmail.com Huriya Jabbar: (512) 475-8586, jabbar@austin.utexas.edu An NEPC Review funded by the Great Lakes Center Key Takeaway: Report fairly assesses existing empirical evidence but ultimately makes claims and recommendations that are not supported by the research. GRAND RAPIDS, MI (May 18, 2023) – A recent report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute considers whether charter schools increase or decrease traditional public school districts’ total revenues, instructional spending per pupil, and efficiency. Though the report has useful starting points in looking at the impact of charters, its policy recommendations are flawed. Huriya Jabbar of the University of Texas at Austin reviewed Think Again: Do Charter Schools Drain Resources From Traditional Public Schools? and found its claims to be largely unsupported by evidence. Based on its review of literature, the report finds that charter schools have mixed impacts on district finances; additionally, it suggests that while short-term effects may be negative, traditional public schools facing charter competition see improved efficiency over time. The report references most of the relevant literature and fairly assesses the evidence. However, it makes claims and policy recommendations that are untested empirically and unwarranted based on the research. For example, it concludes that districts’ higher expenditures in a charter environment are due to policies protecting traditional public schools from revenue fluctuations caused by charter competition. In doing so, it fails to consider other possible explanations, such as charters strategically enrolling relatively few students who are particularly costly to educate. The report also suggests that public school closures resulting from unsupportable enrollment decline are a positive outcome of competition-downplaying how severely closures disrupt and negatively impact marginalized students and communities. Professor Jabbar concludes that while the report may be a good resource for identifying studies related to the important questions it asks, its unsupported claims and recommendations make its advice of little use to policymakers. Find the review, by Huriya Jabbar, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org/post-page/?id=3135&type=think_twice Find Think Again: Do Charter Schools Drain Resources From Traditional Public Schools?, written by David Griffith and published by the Fordham Institute, at: https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/research/think-again-do-charter-schools-drain-resources-traditional-public-schools NEPC Reviews (https://nepc.colorado.edu/reviews) provide the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC Reviews are made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: https://www.greatlakescenter.org The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), a university research center housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education, sponsors research, produces policy briefs, and publishes expert third-party reviews of think tank reports. NEPC publications are written in accessible language and are intended for a broad audience that includes academic experts, policymakers, the media, and the general public. Our mission is to provide high-quality information in support of democratic deliberation about education policy. We are guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence and support a multiracial society that is inclusive, kind, and just. Visit us at: http://nepc.colorado.edu About The Great Lakes Center The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org. Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent. Find us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/GreatLakesCenter. – ### –

Friend on Facebook  Follow on Twitter The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center website at https://www.greatlakescenter.org/

ReplyForward

Report ignores existing evidence while arguing for eliminating school district boundaries

A “Think Twice” review of a think tank report from the folks at the National Education Policy Center.

Inside Look Great Lakes Center’s exclusive subscriber email featuring key points, information and social media content about reviews and research May 11, 2023READ IN BROWSER Hello, Great Lakes Center subscriber: Supporters of school “choice” cast it as the key to improving the American education system. Opponents of school “choice” frame it as an existential threat to public education that increases segregation and adds inefficient, redundant systems while privatizing a public good. Groups like EdChoice and the Manhattan Institute have been strong advocates of school choice, producing reports that attempt to show its presumed benefits. A recent report from EdChoice, published by the Manhattan Institute, makes a typical argument that expanding school choice by eliminating or diminishing school district boundaries can increase “educational opportunity” for all. However, a review of the report shows it makes illogical leaps and assumptions without providing evidence. Read on to learn more. Maddie Fennell Executive Director Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice REPORT REVIEWED Christopher Lubienski of Indiana University and T. Jameson Brewer of the University of North Georgia reviewed “K-12 Without Borders: Public School Students, Families and Teachers Shut in by Education Boundaries.” WHAT THE REVIEWER FOUND Lubienski and Brewer found the report makes illogical assumptions, lacks evidence and shows improbable leaps of logic. The report’s main argument is that diminishing or eliminating school district boundaries and expanding school choice will allow for three outcomes: Students will attend better schools. Homeowners will move to cheaper housing or see their property values rise. Teachers will enjoy improved pensions. The reviewers found a lack of reliable evidence to support these claims. Despite noting the mixed research on how school choice impacts housing patterns, the report assumes eliminating school zone boundaries will result in wealthy families voluntarily relocating to lower-income neighborhoods. This doesn’t address the documented reality that areas with the most preferred schools will have higher housing prices. The report also offers no solutions to other issues, such as transportation for students choosing more distant schools or housing for residents displaced by gentrification. The report assumes someone, somewhere, will somehow find solutions. The report’s assumptions and lack of evidence make it useless to policymakers who want to address serious and critical issues in our education system. Read the full review on the Great Lakes Center website or on the National Education Policy Center website. WHY YOU SHOULD CARE As with many reports published by school choice proponents, this one is based on the agenda of the organizations promoting it. It’s free of evidence and driven by the ideals of EdChoice and the Manhattan Institute, and if its recommendations are implemented by policymakers, could likely increase segregation and low achievement. TALKING POINTS TO REMEMBER A report from EdChoice, published by the Manhattan Institute, argues for expanding school choice by eliminating district boundaries, but offers no evidence to support its reasoning. A review of the report found its arguments ignore the consequences of school choice expansion, including increased segregation and educational inequality. Policymakers should not use the report. SOCIAL SHARES Want to share this Think Twice Review with your social networks? We drafted some sample social media posts for your use. A report from @edchoice argues that expanding #SchoolChoice will decrease segregation and housing costs, but that’s not reality. Read a review of the report: Eliminating school district boundaries won’t help increase educational equity. In fact, it may further harm students. Read more: #SchoolChoice #SchoolChoice proponents argue for eliminating district boundaries and ignore the evidence of harm caused by expanding choice. Learn more: Follow Us

Think Twice, a project of the National Education Policy Center, provides the public, policymakers and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. The project is made possible by funding from the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice. Copyright © 2019 Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.Our mailing address is: Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice PO Box 1263 East Lansing, MI 48826-1263

Virtual Schools Continue to Underperform, Have Little Research Support, and Lack Adequate Regulation

Note the announcement of the latest National Education Policy Center virtual schools report.

May 11, 2023

Contact: Alex Molnar: (480) 797-7261, nepc.molnar@gmail.com Faith Boninger: (480) 390-6736, fboninger@gmail.com Gary Miron: (269) 599-7965, gary.miron@wmich.edu Key Takeaway: Full-time virtual schools continue to yield very poor outcomes. GRAND RAPIDS, MI (May 11, 2023) – Virtual school performance, research, and policy have changed very little since 2013 when the National Education Policy Center began publishing regular comprehensive reports on virtual schooling. Virtual school performance remains poor, little if any research supports the claimed benefits of virtual schooling, and state regulatory policies are still inadequate. Nonetheless the unsupported claims are widely believed and virtual schools continue to proliferate. Virtual Schools in the U.S. 2023 provides a scholarly analysis of the characteristics and performance of publicly funded K-12 virtual schools. It reviews the available research on virtual school practices, examines recent state legislative efforts, and provides policy recommendations. Organized into three sections: (1) Full-Time Virtual Schools: Enrollment, Student Characteristics, and Performance; (2) Assessing Virtual Schools After a Global Pandemic: A Reality of Unfulfilled Promises; and (3) Key Policy Issues in Virtual Schools: Finance and Governance, Instructional Quality, and Teacher Quality, the brief’s recommendations to policymakers include: Require federal and state education agencies to accurately identify and monitor full-time virtual schools, remedying gaps in information transparency on performance measures and accountability. Establish requirements for reduced student-to-teacher ratios and regular contact between teachers and online students. Slow or stop the growth of virtual schools until substantial academic and/or non-academic outcomes improve and benefits are comparable with brick-and-mortar public schools. Require Individualized Education Plans for all students in virtual schools, akin to those special education students receive. The plans should indicate if students need standardized or personalized programs and then deliver content according to these plans. Require virtual school graduation rates to align with statewide averages. If the virtual school fails to meet these benchmarks, assign it probationary status after a year and close after five years of probationary status. Require virtual schools to maintain a within-school-year student mobility threshold equal to the mobility rate of brick-and-mortar schools. Develop new accountability structures for virtual schools, calculate the revenue needed to support them, and provide adequate funding. Require high-quality curricula, aligned with applicable state and district standards, and monitor changes to digital content. Delineate the definitions of adequate quantity of instruction to ensure subject mastery. Examine the work and responsibilities of virtual school administrators and ensure that those hired for these roles are prepared with the knowledge and skills to be effective, particularly with respect to evaluating teachers and promoting best practices. Find Virtual Schools in the U.S. 2023, by Alex Molnar, Gary Miron, Shelby Hagle, Charisse Gulosino, Bryan Mann, Luis Huerta, Jennifer King Rice, Amanda Glover, and Kayla Bill, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org/post-page/?id=3079&type=policy_brief This research brief was made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: https://www.greatlakescenter.org The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), a university research center housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education, sponsors research, produces policy briefs, and publishes expert third-party reviews of think tank reports. NEPC publications are written in accessible language and are intended for a broad audience that includes academic experts, policymakers, the media, and the general public. Our mission is to provide high-quality information in support of democratic deliberation about education policy. We are guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence and support a multiracial society that is inclusive, kind, and just. Visit us at: http://nepc.colorado.edu About The Great Lakes Center The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org. Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent. Find us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/GreatLakesCenter. – ### –

Friend on Facebook  Follow on Twitter The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center website at https://www.greatlakescenter.org/

Report Warning About the Teaching of “Critical Social Justice” Wanders Far Beyond Its Evidence

A “Think Twice” review of a think tank report from the folks at the National Education Policy Center.

May 2, 2023

Contact: Alex Molnar: (480) 797-7261, nepc.molnar@gmail.com Faith Boninger: (480) 390-6736, fboninger@gmail.com Christine Sleeter: (831) 915-3876, csleeter@gmail.com An NEPC Review funded by the Great Lakes Center Key Takeaway: Report’s methodological structure is insufficient to measure causality between the teaching of “CSJ theory” and the political indoctrination of students. GRAND RAPIDS, MI (May 2, 2023) – A recent report from the Manhattan Institute presents results of a survey of U.S. adults aged 18-20 to determine the extent to which eight concepts the report equates with what it calls “critical social justice” (CSJ) theory-which the report frowns upon-are taught in schools. The first of the eight concepts, for instance, is, “America is a systemically racist society.” The report finds the concepts to be pervasive. Faulty assumptions and methodology cast doubt on the report’s conclusions, however, according to Christine Sleeter of California State University Monterey Bay and David Garcia of Arizona State University, who reviewed School Choice Is Not Enough: The Impact of Critical Social Justice Ideology in American Education. The report finds that the eight concepts are widely taught, even in private schools and homeschooling. Because these CSJ concepts are being taught beyond public schools, the report argues that school choice is an ineffective option for shielding children from this presumed peril. Further, Sleeter and Garcia note, the report puts forward several conclusions that do not find support from the survey: (a) teachers rather than others outside the classroom are the primary source of exposure, (b) CSJ concepts are being indoctrinated as “truth,” and (c) policy attitudes and political party affiliation are influenced by exposure to CSJ concepts. Given that the methods do not adequately isolate exposure in school from the many other sources in which young people encounter these eight concepts, and given that no causal relationships are established, Sleeter and Garcia conclude that there is no support for the report’s highly intrusive policy recommendations – even setting aside the underlying ideological assumptions. Find the review, by Christine Sleeter and David R. Garcia, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org/post-page/?id=3134&type=think_twice Find School Choice Is Not Enough: The Impact of Critical Social Justice Ideology in American Education, written by Zach Goldberg and Eric Kaufmann and published by the Manhattan Institute, at: https://manhattan.institute/article/school-choice-is-not-enough-the-impact-of-critical-social-justice-ideology-in-american-education NEPC Reviews (https://nepc.colorado.edu/reviews) provide the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC Reviews are made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: https://www.greatlakescenter.org The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), a university research center housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education, sponsors research, produces policy briefs, and publishes expert third-party reviews of think tank reports. NEPC publications are written in accessible language and are intended for a broad audience that includes academic experts, policymakers, the media, and the general public. Our mission is to provide high-quality information in support of democratic deliberation about education policy. We are guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence and support a multiracial society that is inclusive, kind, and just. Visit us at: http://nepc.colorado.edu About The Great Lakes Center The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org. Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent. Find us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/GreatLakesCenter. – ### –

Friend on Facebook  Follow on Twitter The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center website at https://www.greatlakescenter.org/

Solid Report Examines Expansion of Federal Facilities Funding for Public School Equity

A “Think Twice” review of a think tank report from the folks at the National Education Policy Center.

April 20, 2023

Contact: Alex Molnar: (480) 797-7261, nepc.molnar@gmail.com Faith Boninger: (480) 390-6736, fboninger@gmail.com Jeffrey M. Vincent: (510) 593-3067, jvincent@berkeley.edu An NEPC Review funded by the Great Lakes Center Key Takeaway: The Urban Institute report’s recommendations provide useful insights for how state and federal policy can move toward more progressive capital funding approaches. GRAND RAPIDS, MI (April 20, 2023) – State and local governments invest a great deal in the infrastructure of the nearly 100,000 schools across the U.S., encompassing about 8.1 billion gross square feet of buildings. Yet recent years have seen a recognition that expanded federal funding will be needed to address shortfalls and inequities. To that end, the Urban Institute recently released Assessing the National Landscape of Capital Expenditures for Public School Districts, which analyzes equity patterns of school capital investment. In a review, Jeffrey M. Vincent of the University of California, Berkeley concludes that the report’s findings and recommendations are strong and well-supported. The report relies primarily on school district annual capital outlay data reported in the U.S. Department of Education’s Common Core of Data. It also examines which state policies may promote more progressive investment patterns. Confirming other studies, the report finds that school district capital expenditures vary from year to year and from state to state, that each state has a unique approach and mix of policies governing state support for local capital outlay, and that capital outlay is rarely equal or progressive. The report also finds that states with policies that aim to equalize capital spending are more likely to provide capital outlays for students from low-income backgrounds that are equal to or greater than outlays in wealthier communities. These findings are all well-supported, and the report’s recommendations, including increasing funding, accounting for student economic need, and continuing assessment on building quality, provide useful insights for state and federal policy that will promote more progressive capital spending. Find the review, by Jeffrey M. Vincent, at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org/post-page/?id=3133&type=think_twice Find Assessing the National Landscape of Capital Expenditures for Public School Districts, written by Kristin Blagg, Fanny Terrones, and Victoria Nelson and published by the Urban Institute, at: https://www.urban.org/research/publication/assessing-national-landscape-capital-expenditures-public-school-districts NEPC Reviews (https://nepc.colorado.edu/think-tank-reviews) provide the public, policymakers, and the press with timely, academically sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC Reviews are made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: https://www.greatlakescenter.org/ The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), a university research center housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education, sponsors research, produces policy briefs, and publishes expert third-party reviews of think tank reports. NEPC publications are written in accessible language and are intended for a broad audience that includes academic experts, policymakers, the media, and the general public. Our mission is to provide high-quality information in support of democratic deliberation about education policy. We are guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence and support a multiracial society that is inclusive, kind, and just. Visit us at: http://nepc.colorado.edu About The Great Lakes Center The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center Web Site at: https://www.greatlakescenter.org. Follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/greatlakescent. Find us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/GreatLakesCenter. – ### –

Friend on Facebook  Follow on Twitter The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research & Practice is to support and disseminate high quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center website at https://www.greatlakescenter.org/