Teacher Practical Guidance:
School Choice
Category: External
Rank Order
88
Effect Size
0.02
Achievement Gain %
1
How-To Strategies
Positive Findings:
- School choice produces, on average, small positive impacts on student achievement;
- Modest positive effects in math, with more mixed or neutral results in reading; link
- Show neutral to small positive test-score effects;
- Over time, some syntheses suggest that students who remain longer in programs may see their test scores improve, but the average effect across many programs is very small. link
- Higher high school graduation or college enrollment rates for some participating groups, even when test score gains are modest;
- Choice may matter more for engagement, fit, and longer-term trajectories than for short-run test performance alone. link
Negative Findings:
- Consensus is emerging that many forms of school choice, especially when unregulated, tend to increase racial and socioeconomic segregation in schools;
- Unconstrained choice to higher levels of racial and economic isolation, which are in turn associated with widening achievement gaps because high-poverty, racially isolated schools have fewer resources and opportunities. link
- Studies also show large variation within each sector, suggesting that some choice schools significantly outperform traditional public schools while others underperform, so program quality controls and accountability matter greatly.
References
Angrist, Joshua D., Parag A. Pathak, and Christopher R. Walters. 2013. “Explaining Charter School Effectiveness.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 5 (4): 1–27.
Betts, Julian R. and Y. Emily Tang. 2011. “The Effect of Charter Schools on Student Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature,” National Charter School Research Project, Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education.
Booker, Kevin, Tim R. Sass, Brian Gill, and Ron Zimmer. 2011. “The Effects of Charter High Schools on Educational Attainment.” Journal of Labor Economics 29 (2): 377–415.
Hanushek, Eric A., John F. Kain, Steven G. Rivkin, and Gregory F. Branch. 2007. “Charter School Quality and Parental Decision Making With School Choice.” Journal of Public Economics 91: 823–848.
Miron, Gary, Anne Cullen, Brooks Applegate, and Patricia Farrell. 2007. “Evaluation of the Delaware Charter School Reform: Year One Report.” Kalamazoo, MI: The Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University. http://www.doe.k12.de.us/files/pdf/sbe_decseval.pdf.
Jabbar, Fong, Germain, Li, Sanchez, Sun, & Devall. (2017). The competitive effects of school choice on student outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Conference paper.
Zimmer, Ron, Brian Gill, Kevin Booker, Stephane Lavertu, Tim R. Sass, and John Witte. 2009. “Charter Schools in Eight States: Effects on Achievement, Attainment, Integration, and Competition.” Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
School Choice
DEFINITIONS
School choice is premised on the belief that parents should have control over the kind of school their child attends, often via the use of vouchers: government funding that can be withdrawn from a particular public school and follow a child to a charter school or academy. link
School choice is an approach to K–12 education policy that lets families select from multiple schooling options instead of being limited to a single neighborhood-assigned public school. The core idea is that public education funding can follow the student to whichever approved education setting the family chooses.
Research finds that the academic and equity impacts of school choice are mixed and highly dependent on program design, local context, and which outcomes you look at. Overall, effects on test scores tend to be small, with clearer positive results for some charter programs and longer-term attainment, and more troubling findings for segregation and some voucher programs.
DATA
-
1 meta-analysis
-
22 research studies
-
1 Confidence level. Hattie (2023) p. 155
1 meta-analysis
22 research studies
1 Confidence level. Hattie (2023) p. 155
QUOTES
Supporters’ main arguments:
-
Empowers parents to match schools to their children’s needs, interests, or values, especially when local schools are underperforming.
-
Increases competition among schools, which they believe can raise quality and expand access to better schools for low-income students.
Critics’ main concerns:
-
Pull money and motivated families away from traditional public schools, potentially deepening inequities for students who remain.
-
May not adequately serve students with disabilities or other specialized needs, and can reduce transparency and accountability in how public funds are used.