New Study Release Tomorrow

July 7, 2008

Keep your eyes peeled for the release tomorrow by the Manhattan Institute of a new study on the effect of high-stakes testing on achievement in low-stakes subjects. The study, led by Marcus Winters and co-authored by me and Julie Trivitt, examines whether achievement in math and reading comes at the expense of science on Florida standardized tests.  Because there are meaningful consequences for performance in math and reading, but not for the rest of the curriculum, many people have worried that schools would improve their math and reading results by skimping on science and other subjects.

These concerns are not just coming from the usual critics of school accountability.  Even accountability advocates have expressed second thoughts.  For example, Chester Finn writes in the National Review Online: “Do the likely benefits exceed the ever clearer costs? Boosting skill levels and closing learning gaps are praiseworthy societal goals. But even if we were surer that NCLB would attain them, plenty of people — parents, teachers, lawmakers, and interest groups — are alarmed by the price. I don’t refer primarily to dollars. (They’re in dispute, too, with most Democrats wrongly insisting that they’re insufficient.) I refer to things like a narrowing curriculum that sacrifices history, art, and literature on the altar of reading and math skills…”

Diane Ravtich has similarly stepped on the high-stakes brakes, expressing concern about the crowding out of other academic subjects and activities: “a new organization called Common Core was launched on February 26 at a press conference in Washington, D.C., to advocate on behalf of the subjects that are neglected by the federal No Child Left Behind legislation and by pending STEM legislation. These subjects include history, literature, the sciences, the arts, geography, civics, even recess (although recess is not a subject, it is a necessary break in the school day that seems to be shrinking or disappearing in some districts). I serve as co-chair of CC with Toni Cortese, executive vice-president of the American Federation of Teachers.”

To find out whether these concerns are supported by the empirical evidence from Florida, tune into the Manhattan Institute web site tomorrow to see the study.


More Special Ed Voucher Study

May 3, 2008

I’ll be on C-SPAN with Marcus Winters Monday morning at 9 am ET to discuss our new study on special education vouchers.  The show is Washington Journal, which has a call-in format.  We look forward to hearing from you!

You can find links to the study and some op-eds in the announcement below:

New Report by Jay Greene and Marcus Winters
 Manhattan Institute senior fellows Jay P. Greene and Marcus Winters have released a new report entitled, “The Effect of Special Education Vouchers on Public School Achievement: Evidence from Florida’s McKay Scholarship Program.” The authors conclude that the McKay program has had a positive effect on the quality of education that public schools provide to disabled students.
To read the report, click here.


WASHINGTON TIMES SERIES:Winters and Greene have been featured in a three part series for The Washington Times, read their articles below.The Politics of Special-Ed Vouchers Jay P. Greene and Marcus Winters, Washington Times,05-01-08
Vouchers for special-ed students Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters, Washington Times, 04-30-08
Vouchers and Special Education Marcus A. Winters and Jay P. Greene, Washington Times, 04-29-08


OP-ED:
A Special-Ed Fix, Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters, New York Post, 04-30-08
INTERVIEW:
An Interview with Marcus Winters: Special Education Vouchers, EdNews.org, 4-30-08       

UPDATE

Here’s another op-ed in an Arizona newspaper.


New Special Ed Voucher Study

April 29, 2008

Marcus Winters and I have a new study out today on the effects of special education vouchers in Florida on the academic achievement of disabled students who remain in public schools.  As we write in an op-ed in this morning’s Washington Times: “we found that those students with relatively mild disabilities —the vast majority of special-education students in the state and across the nation — made larger academic gains when the number of private options nearby increased. Students with more severe disabilities were neither helped not harmed by the addition of McKay scholarship-receiving private schools near their public school.” The findings are based on an analysis of individual student data using a fixed effects model.

The results of this analysis of Florida’s special education voucher program have important implications for the four other states (Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, and Utah) that have similar programs.  It also suggests ways that federal legislation governing special education, the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA), could be reformed.  We have two more op-eds coming out this week in the The Wash Times that will explore these issues.

Lastly, this new study speaks to the general question of whether expanded choice and competition improve achievement in public schools.  Like the bulk of previous research, including Belfield and Levin, ChakrabartiGreene and Forster, Hoxby, Rouse, et al , and West and Peterson (as a partial list), the new study finds that student achievement in public schools improves as vouchers expand the set of private options.

UPDATE

There is also an editorial endorsing continuation of the voucher program in DC in the Washington Post and another embracing vouchers in the Wall Street Journal