
D.C. (School) Vouchers: Better Results at a Quarter the Cost - chaostheory
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/04/03/dc-vouchers-better-results-at-a-quarter-the-cost/
======
briansmith
* Read the executive summary. Half of the subgroups did not have improved performance. Math performance did not improve. Reading scores did improve, but this specific improvement cannot be meaningfully be attributed to the public vs. private nature of the schools. And, the study does attempt to figure out if the reading improvements could be replicated within the public school system by copying the reading programs used in the private schools.

* In the third year, over 83% of the participating students were attending schools where they were forced to endure continuous daily religious indoctrination. This is completely unethical.

* No attempt was made to measure the performance of students that attended a school designed for religious indoctrination against the students who attended a school designed expressly for education.

* According to the study, many parents (19%) turned down the vouchers they received after their students were accepted to public charter schools. It seems like parents are showing a strong preference for charter schools over private schools. IMO, this warrants further investigation into the funding of public charter schools instead of public funding of private education.

* According to the study, many parents of special needs students were not able to use their vouchers because the private schools were not able to provide the necessary services. The public schools are bearing nearly all of the costs of caring for special needs students whereas private schools are mostly punting on the issue. Similarly, if you get kicked out of a public or private school for behavioral or criminal reasons then you will be sent to a _public_ alternative high school. Cost comparisons need to be made using comparable student populations.

* All measurements in this study suffer heavily from selection bias. Much of the data comes from voluntary surveys that were filled out by parents. It was basically a competition between political groups to convince the most parents on their side to return the surveys. Parents and students who were not interested in their students' education and/or the political ramifications of the survey are likely severely under-represented.

It is silly to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of private schools vs.
the effectiveness of public schools by Cato's summary or my summary of the
study. A summary of a summary of a study can be easily spun however the writer
wants to spin it. AFAICT, the study report itself has very little actionable
information in it; at best, it points out areas that need more study before
any conclusions can be drawn.

~~~
grandalf
Perhaps but your conclusions are equally silly (and not based on logic).

Voucher programs are very new and rare. Why would you expect them to function
at the same level as established (and well funded) public schools after a very
short time.

For comparison, imagine if FedEx were allowed to deliver residential mail --
would you expect 100% coverage of every US address overnight? Of course not.
The ramp-up will take time, and with voucher money entrepreneurs will invent
better schools and existing schools will be able to ramp up due to network
effects long enjoyed by the public monopoly.

Also, you are right that parochial schools enjoyed a bump in enrolment that
they may not have deserved, but they benefit from having had (for a long time)
other sources of funding, namely donations. Also, I think you exaggerate the
"indoctrination" quite a bit. Are public school students not indoctrinated
that FDR and Henry Kissinger were great men? I'm not sure why you have to draw
the line and say that only indoctrination about the supernatural is
distasteful!

~~~
briansmith
Cato's article claimed that this study showed that private schools were
clearly better at educating students than private schools. My point about
performance was to show that the study itself says that isn't the case, based
on the executive summary of the study itself. How was that silly or illogical?

My point regarding special ed and alternative schools is that these programs
make averge-cost-per-student and average-performance-per-student metrics
incomparable between public and private schools. The statements are derived
directly from the study report. How is that silly or illogical?

I didn't say that only indoctrination about the supernatural is distasteful.
Indoctrination--religious or otherwise--is unethical. You bring up FDR and
Henry Hissinger as examples of public school indoctrination, but there are
many public schools (like mine) that presented those men in an objective
manner. There is no doubt that some teachers in some public schools may
engadge in some kinds of (often religious, nationalistic, or otherwise
political) indoctrination. However, it is something that can be identified and
corrected within the public school program without changing any fundamental
aspect of the public education system. The only way to rid religious schools
of the indoctrination--for which they were created and which is one of their
main selling points--is to close them or transfer them from religious
organizations to secular organizations (which is something I fully support).

~~~
grandalf
Cato meant better per dollar -- one can only imagine the outcome if the kids
were able to keep the extra $20K per year of savings and apply it to future
college tuition, room and board, travel around the world, etc.

Your second point is somewhat true, but special ed represents a small enough
portion of the overall population that it doesn't inflate the numbers too
much.

I'd argue that the public schools are by design indoctrination machines --
imagine if, say, the Taliban creates an official Taliban school, would you
claim that it isn't intended to indoctrinate students in the ways of the
Taliban?

US Public schools are (with the exception of affluent suburban public schools)
mostly just factories intended to crank out vocational workers while providing
free daycare for the K-12 years so that the family can more easily sustain two
breadwinners.

Think about what is taught in public schools: Punctuality, obedience,
spelling, phys-ed, basic math, basic reading comprehension, home-ec,
government, state/local history, US history, etc. Huge emphasis is placed on
sports and athleticism, and in the typical high school the "jocks" rule the
halls, abusing and intimidating anyone they choose.

The food served in most public schools is below the quality served in fast
food restaurants, and many feature soda and candy machines in abundance.

For all but the few who are extremely academically gifted, public school is
little more than minimum security prison through the 12th grade, at which
point most individuals either join the military or go to work at Wal-Mart.

~~~
briansmith
Below, another commenter said that special education consumed 25% of the
public budget. I don't know where he got that statistic, but if it is true
then clearly we can't consider it to be a "small portion" of anything.

The Taliban is a religious organization that indoctrinates people similar to
other religious organizations. What does it have to do with public schools?
Are you suggesting that public schools are not secular enough and not
objective enough? If so, I totally agree with you. But, it can be fixed.
Religious schools are fundamentally broken as they have indoctrination of
children at their core.

You make a lot of unsubstantiated claims in the rest of your message. I don't
even know how to respond to them. If you have a claim with some substance then
maybe I can respond to it.

~~~
jibiki
I think the point you keep missing here is that all education is
indoctrination. Even teaching kids to think rationally is indoctrination in
the rational method. It's fine to say, "I think we should indoctrinate kids
only in rationality," but most people will disagree with you. There is a sort
of truce in our society: people don't hate each other for holding different
viewpoints (as long as those viewpoints are societally acceptable, which
varies from place to place.) Part of this truce is that people are allowed to
shape the beliefs of their own children.

You can't say "we should never indoctrinate kids." That would be the same as
saying "we should never educate kids." You can say "we should only tell kids
the truth," but then, whose truth do we tell? The problem is not so simple.
It's dishonest to say "no indoctrination" when what you mean is
"indoctrination should be more along my lines."

~~~
briansmith
It is not true that "all education is indoctrination." If I teach you how to
make a fire then have I somehow coerced you into a fire-based belief system?
If I teach you how to add two numbers then have I introduced you to the
religion of numbers? No, I've just given you some facts. If I teach you a
process by which you can educate yourself then have I somehow brainwashed you?
I don't see how.

It is hard to keep indoctrination seperate from education. But, it isn't
impossible.

~~~
jibiki
You're right, and I'm wrong, of course. The problem is that it's hard to know
who gets to decide what a fact is. There are many people for whom creationism
is a fact. Is it okay for them to teach it to their children? If not, why is
it okay for you to teach your children about evolution?

The fact that evolution is correct is sort of immaterial. There is no
knowledge in the absence of cognition. For something to be known, it must be
known by someone. We know that evolution is correct, but the creationist
"knows" that creationism is correct.

------
ryanwaggoner
What would be interesting is looking at the performance of specific students
who transitioned from public school to private schools or charter schools.

------
lsb
Selection bias. If your parents care enough to send you somewhere, they'll
care enough to make you do your homework.

~~~
ryanwaggoner
That might be true, but that doesn't make them a bad idea. From a fiscal
perspective, why spend 4x if the kid is going to get the same performance via
voucher?

~~~
jacoblyles
High spending on education is a a feature, not a bug. It buys the support of
public teachers unions, which will support the reelection of politicians whose
sole idea for school reform is "more money".

Another factoid that Cato likes to throw out is that public education spending
has doubled on an inflation adjusted basis since the early '80s, yet scores on
certain standardized tests have stayed constant. Still, listen to any
presidential debate. Every candidate calls for more money for schools, more
teachers, more computers, etc. It doesn't occur to them that the system is
broken when scaling up the input produces no additional output.

[http://www.heritage.org/research/Education/images/b2179_char...](http://www.heritage.org/research/Education/images/b2179_chart4.gif)

------
raleec
This is kinda disingenuous.

1) Vouchers do not cover the cost of most DC area private schools. They
provide approx. $7500, but most top tier schools cast approx $20k, so the
school is expected to kick in the remainder.

2) If vouchers became universally available it would simply inflate the cost
of all private schools by the voucher amount, with no increase in student
achievement.

3) A largely overlooked element is that _private schools get to /choose/ whom
they accept._ This allows them to preselect the voucher recipients that they
think would succeed.

------
nazgulnarsil
private schools are not allowed to deviate significantly from the idiot
producing processes of public schooling: * Teacher Certification: Children
instructed in private full-time day schools by "persons capable of teaching"
are exempt from public school attendance under the compulsory education law.
Cal. Educ. Code § 48222.

The California Commission on Teacher Credentialing must forward to private
schools on a monthly basis a list of all teachers who have had their state
teaching credential revoked or suspended. The Commission must also send on a
quarterly basis a complete and updated list of all teachers who have had their
teaching credentials revoked or suspended, excluding teachers who have had
their credentials reinstated, or who are deceased. Cal Educ. Code § 44237(g).
Private schools may request information regarding the fitness of any applicant
for a teaching position from the Commission. Cal Educ. Code § 44341(d).

Curriculum: Students attending private schools are exempt from California's
compulsory attendance law if the schools offer instruction in the several
branches of study required in the public schools of the state. Cal. Educ. Code
§ 48222.*

is it a shock that performance remains the same when you have the same
teachers and the same curriculum?

~~~
ryanwaggoner
On the teacher thing, I was under the impression that private schools could
hire and fire credentialed teachers as they saw fit, plus could generally
afford to pay better to attract better teachers, whereas public schools are
handicapped by powerful teachers unions. Granted, my knowledge of the subject
is pretty much limited to this paragraph :)

On the curriculum thing, it sounds like they just have to offer instruction in
the same branches of study, which I'm assuming is things like Math, Reading,
Science, etc. Not sure how that equates to the "same curriculum".

~~~
nazgulnarsil
"credentialed teachers"

see pg's essay on credentialism for my feelings.

you have state certified teachers teaching a similar curriculum in the way
that they were taught (the state certified way). This is a far cry from a
truly independent education that is accountable to no one but the customers.

------
nazgulnarsil
subsidizing private schools doesn't help as long as the taxation structure
supporting public schools are still in place. all that will happen is private
school tuitions will increase the way college tuitions have.

