Do accountability and voucher threats improve low-performing schools?

David N. Figlio; Cecilia Elena Rouse

doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.08.005

Do accountability and voucher threats improve low-performing schools?

David N. Figlio, Cecilia Elena Rouse

School of Education and Social Policy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

149 Scopus citations

Abstract

We study the effects of the threat of vouchers and stigma in Florida on the performance of "low-performing" schools. Estimates of the change in raw test scores from the first year of the reform are consistent with the early results which claimed large improvements associated with the threat of vouchers. However, we also find that much of this estimated effect may be due to other factors. The relative gains in reading are largely explained by changing student characteristics and the gains in math - though larger - appear limited to the high-stakes grade. We also find some evidence that these improvements were due more to the stigma of receiving the low grade rather than the threat of vouchers.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	239-255
Number of pages	17
Journal	Journal of Public Economics
Volume	90
Issue number	1-2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.08.005
State	Published - Jan 2006

Keywords

Florida A+ Plan
No Child Left Behind
School accountability
School voucher threat

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Finance
Economics and Econometrics

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.08.005

Cite this

@article{e14769a83ca0402e94d2a61dfb228760,

title = "Do accountability and voucher threats improve low-performing schools?",

abstract = "We study the effects of the threat of vouchers and stigma in Florida on the performance of {"}low-performing{"} schools. Estimates of the change in raw test scores from the first year of the reform are consistent with the early results which claimed large improvements associated with the threat of vouchers. However, we also find that much of this estimated effect may be due to other factors. The relative gains in reading are largely explained by changing student characteristics and the gains in math - though larger - appear limited to the high-stakes grade. We also find some evidence that these improvements were due more to the stigma of receiving the low grade rather than the threat of vouchers.",

keywords = "Florida A+ Plan, No Child Left Behind, School accountability, School voucher threat",

author = "Figlio, {David N.} and Rouse, {Cecilia Elena}",

note = "Funding Information: We thank Orley Ashenfelter, Duncan Chaplin, Dan Goldhaber, Jane Hannaway, Jeff Kling, Sunny Ladd, Mel Lucas, and Ken Mease for helpful conversations, and seminar participants at the National Bureau of Economic Research, New York University, Northwestern University, Ohio State University, Princeton University, Syracuse University, the University of British Columbia, the University of California at Davis, the University of Florida, the University of Oregon, and the University of Toronto, as well as two anonymous referees, for insightful comments. We also thank Nina Badgaiyan, Jennifer Graff, Radha Iyengar, and Alice Savage for expert research assistance; the Annie E. Casey, Smith Richardson, and Spencer Foundations, the Atlantic Philanthropic Services Corporation, and the National Institutes for Child Health and Human Development for financial support; and the participating school districts for historical data. Any errors in fact or interpretation are ours. ",

year = "2006",

month = jan,

doi = "10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.08.005",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "90",

pages = "239--255",

journal = "Journal of Public Economics",

issn = "0047-2727",