Voucher Students Show Few Gains in First Year

 

 

 

The DOE released a report yesterday on the DC voucher plan (the entire 160-page report, which I haven't yet read, is at: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/2007_dc_evaluation.pdf).  In the first year of the program, voucher students showed no gains relative to other students, which is consistent with the first year of other voucher programs:

In studies of those programs and others funded with private money, researchers tended to find little improvement in test scores after one year, said Paul Peterson, director of Harvard University's program on education policy and governance. He said it takes time for students to adjust to new surroundings.

"Kids lose ground when they change schools. Even if they may be in a better school, they're not going to adjust to that right off the bat," he said. "It doesn't happen overnight. It's a slow process."

Nevertheless, the critics are trying their best to make hay out of this (too bad to see this quote from George Miller -- I had higher hopes for him):

"Vouchers have received a failing grade," said Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.). "This just makes the voucher program even more irrelevant."...

"This report offers even more proof that private school vouchers won't improve student achievement and are nothing more than a tired political gimmick," Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House education committee, said in a statement.

A nice quote from DFER chairman Kevin Chavous:

Former D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) and former Ward 7 D.C. Council member Kevin P. Chavous, early advocates of the program, reiterated their support.

"We welcome the release of this 'early look' at the program's performance," they said in a statement signed by community and business leaders. "Although these findings reflect just seven months of schooling -- typically far too short a time period to see any significant academic progress -- there is an early indication of gains in math, particularly for students who had less academic ground to make up."

Finally, here's a valid comment by my friend James Forman

(from his blog at: http://extracredit.wordpress.com/2007/06/22/voucher-results-in-dc-how-will-we-measure-school-success/):

Some voucher supporters are arguing that because parents are satisfied with the program that is enough to vindicate the experiment.

Wait a minute. Let's get very clear on what metrics we are going to use to evaluate vouchers, or any educational reform for that matter.

The dominant view in education policy–enshrined in No Child Left Behind–is that schools will be judged by how students do on reading, math, and science tests. A public school that would otherwise be labeled failing does not get a pass, no matter how satisfied the parents say they are. So if parental satisfaction measures are sufficient to justify a voucher program with mediocre test score results, they should be good enough for a public school. Which would mean re-writing NCLB, among other accountability laws.

---------------------------

Voucher Students Show Few Gains in First Year
D.C. Results Typical, Federal Study Says

By Amit R. Paley and Theola Labbé
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 22, 2007; B01

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101295_pf.html

Students in the D.C. school voucher program, the first federal initiative to spend taxpayer dollars on private school tuition, generally performed no better on reading and math tests after one year in the program than their peers in public schools, the U.S. Education Department said yesterday.