6 ms·

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

by lsb 18y ago

tallanvor 18y ago
Very true. And don't forget that everyone is entitled to a public "education". --Including kids who are vegetables and have to have someone watching them all the time. Editing to add more detail: Based on my reading, they're spending more then $300 million on special education, around 25% of their budget. $62 million goes to the university $46 million goes to the public libraries ~$100 goes to early education and ESL initiatives. Those are all expenses private schools never have to worry about.
- davetufts 18y ago
  "entitled"? That implies a choice. In the US, education is compulsory for certain age groups.
  - tokenadult 18y ago
    Rather, school attendance is compulsory absent a government-approved alternative, but one can attend school throughout childhood without ever being educated.
    - davetufts 18y ago
      Very true -- I should have said compulsory attendance.
- ckinnan 18y ago
  Vouchers are a public education. It is just the delivery mechanism that is private.
  - raleec 18y ago
    Nope. "Public" education implies that everyone can have it. Vouchers don't provide admission, just a means to pay tuition if you are accepted.
    - surfmike 18y ago
      Public schools can't guarantee admission to everyone either. Admissions are restricted to people in a certain geographic area. To go to a nice public school, instead of tuition, you pay the premium for a house in an area with good schools.
ryanwaggoner 18y ago
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 18y ago
  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_chart4.gif http://www.heritage.org/research/Education/images/b2179_char...
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
- Alex3917 18y ago
  "From a fiscal perspective, why spend 4x if the kid is going to get the same performance via voucher?" Same performance as (presumably) measured by one standardized reading test and one standardized math test...
  - jacoblyles 18y ago
    Good point. The parents of students that participate in school choice programs also report much higher satisfaction with the education their children receive. That ought to be taken into consideration as well when considering how education is produced.
DanielBMarkham 18y ago
If your parents care enough to send you somewhere, they'll care enough to make you do your homework That statement may or may not be true. It's simply speculative. It also seems specious to me. Making a commitment for an hour or two that involves signing a couple of papers is nowhere near the level of making a commitment to follow and monitor schoolwork.
- grandalf 18y ago
  I think the issue is even a bit more subtle -- if you have no choice then why bother caring even if you would care. One great example is this: I never cared about china patterns until I got engaged and was asked which one I preferred. Suddenly I had all sorts of strong opinions. With vouchers people would start caring a lot more about what they were getting, and schools would have to frame their role less as daycare and more as a value proposition... as in "come to school A and our research shows you will earn $10K more per year after college", or "our students learn three languages fluently during grades 6-10", or "we offer all vegan food and teach set theory before algebra, and 50% of our students end up majoring in math in college".
karl11 18y ago
I think better teachers is more likely than selection bias. Teachers who are rewarded on merit will always outperform those rewarded for their seniority.
- misuba 18y ago
  How do you measure merit?
  - grandalf 18y ago
    By seniority, of course! Or that is what the teachers' unions would have us believe. Is measuring merit all that hard? It's done successfully higher ed. The bottom line is that we shouldn't worry so much about the concept of merit b/c we don't need a one-size-fits-all system. For example, some people prefer to go to a large public university where profs are "meritorious" if they publish and are at the cutting edge of research -- while others prefer to go to smaller schools with more of a focus on teaching and small class sizes. Chances are with widespread voucher availability, K-12 education would become less cookie-cutter and would better address the diverse definitions of merit that exist. Of course, states/cities could require certain curriculum, teacher SAT scores, etc., but such things would represent a floor rather than a ceiling on what "merit" is.
  - tokenadult 18y ago
    How do you measure merit? I would let the learners have power to shop, and we will know soon enough which teachers are doing a good job.
mattchew 18y ago
Blithely asserted. But suppose it is correct. Do you think parents might start caring more about managing their kids' educations if they could see that caring more actually made a difference?
- grandalf 18y ago
  I'd say that the converse is also true: If one has no choice then even if one cares there is no reason to care.
MaysonL 18y ago
This is also indicated by the fact that those who were offered vouchers but didn't use them seem to have had similar increases in reading scores, compared to the applicants who were not offered vouchers. Sounds like voodoo science to me (or some variation of the Westinghouse effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_effect#Westinghouse_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_effect#Westinghous... )
- grandalf 18y ago
  Not at all. There is both a market-based and a psychological explanation: Market based: If the student didn't use the voucher but might use it next year, then the school will try harder to meet the student's needs this year. Psychological: If you perceive something as simply mandatory, you will take it for granted. While if you had a voucher and choose a public school, then you have made the decision that you have the best opportunity in the environment you chose, and you'll try to extract value from it.
jacoblyles 18y ago
While it is impossible to isolate variables in social data, each new study does add a drop to the ocean of evidence in support of school choice initiatives. I thought this overview of available evidence was also illuminating: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/03/17/american-prospect-strikes-mother-lode-of-falsehood/ http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/03/17/american-prospect-... When you add that a priori economic reasoning is firmly on the side of school choice over public monopoly - well I'm convinced. I'm a little surprised popular wisdom isn't on my side.
- grandalf 18y ago
  Good point. Popular wisdom is biased by the fact that most people went to public school and tend to think things like "well I went to public school and I turned out just fine". That's like saying "well wikipedia didn't exist when I was a kid and I turned out just fine" to argue that Wikipedia should be banned -- after all voucher proponents don't want vouchers to be mandatory, just optional!
snewe 18y ago
Read the article: "The evaluation is based on a randomized controlled trial design that compares the outcomes of eligible applicants randomly assigned to receive (treatment group) or not receive (control group) a scholarship through a series of lotteries." Now, given lottery status parents might help their kids with HW or otherwise (b/c they don't want to waste an opportunity). I am still reading on how they control for that, but I suspect they have a TON of observables on the parents, income, location, etc. School voucher studies these days -- particularly those read and "approved" by those in the list of acknowledgements -- will go nowhere without either randomization or a suitable instrumental variable that correlates with the voucher, but not with educational outcomes. No need to throw around econometric criticisms until you read at least part of the article.
Radix 18y ago
That's part of the argument! That is: Parents who care to look into a selection of schools will be more involved in the schools they send their children to and will raise children who are better students. Involved parents will force schools, public and voucher backed, to compete producing better students and curriculum. The idea that parents should be able to choose where their children go to school should be a given in America. I understand and accept everyone paying into the education system as a good idea, I don't understand or accept that people with school aged children have to pay into the school system even when they have chosen to send their children to private schools.

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

by lsb 18y ago

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

Very true. And don't forget that everyone is entitled to a public "education". --Including kids who are vegetables and have to have someone watching them all the time. Editing to add more detail: Based on my reading, they're spending more then $300 million on special education, around 25% of their budget. $62 million goes to the university $46 million goes to the public libraries ~$100 goes to early education and ESL initiatives. Those are all expenses private schools never have to worry about.

davetufts 18y ago
"entitled"? That implies a choice. In the US, education is compulsory for certain age groups.
- tokenadult 18y ago
  Rather, school attendance is compulsory absent a government-approved alternative, but one can attend school throughout childhood without ever being educated.
  - davetufts 18y ago
    Very true -- I should have said compulsory attendance.
ckinnan 18y ago
Vouchers are a public education. It is just the delivery mechanism that is private.
- raleec 18y ago
  Nope. "Public" education implies that everyone can have it. Vouchers don't provide admission, just a means to pay tuition if you are accepted.
  - surfmike 18y ago
    Public schools can't guarantee admission to everyone either. Admissions are restricted to people in a certain geographic area. To go to a nice public school, instead of tuition, you pay the premium for a house in an area with good schools.

ryanwaggoner 18y ago

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 18y ago
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_chart4.gif http://www.heritage.org/research/Education/images/b2179_char...
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
Alex3917 18y ago
"From a fiscal perspective, why spend 4x if the kid is going to get the same performance via voucher?" Same performance as (presumably) measured by one standardized reading test and one standardized math test...
- jacoblyles 18y ago
  Good point. The parents of students that participate in school choice programs also report much higher satisfaction with the education their children receive. That ought to be taken into consideration as well when considering how education is produced.

DanielBMarkham 18y ago

If your parents care enough to send you somewhere, they'll care enough to make you do your homework That statement may or may not be true. It's simply speculative. It also seems specious to me. Making a commitment for an hour or two that involves signing a couple of papers is nowhere near the level of making a commitment to follow and monitor schoolwork.

grandalf 18y ago
I think the issue is even a bit more subtle -- if you have no choice then why bother caring even if you would care. One great example is this: I never cared about china patterns until I got engaged and was asked which one I preferred. Suddenly I had all sorts of strong opinions. With vouchers people would start caring a lot more about what they were getting, and schools would have to frame their role less as daycare and more as a value proposition... as in "come to school A and our research shows you will earn $10K more per year after college", or "our students learn three languages fluently during grades 6-10", or "we offer all vegan food and teach set theory before algebra, and 50% of our students end up majoring in math in college".

karl11 18y ago

I think better teachers is more likely than selection bias. Teachers who are rewarded on merit will always outperform those rewarded for their seniority.

misuba 18y ago
How do you measure merit?
- grandalf 18y ago
  By seniority, of course! Or that is what the teachers' unions would have us believe. Is measuring merit all that hard? It's done successfully higher ed. The bottom line is that we shouldn't worry so much about the concept of merit b/c we don't need a one-size-fits-all system. For example, some people prefer to go to a large public university where profs are "meritorious" if they publish and are at the cutting edge of research -- while others prefer to go to smaller schools with more of a focus on teaching and small class sizes. Chances are with widespread voucher availability, K-12 education would become less cookie-cutter and would better address the diverse definitions of merit that exist. Of course, states/cities could require certain curriculum, teacher SAT scores, etc., but such things would represent a floor rather than a ceiling on what "merit" is.
- tokenadult 18y ago
  How do you measure merit? I would let the learners have power to shop, and we will know soon enough which teachers are doing a good job.

mattchew 18y ago

Blithely asserted. But suppose it is correct. Do you think parents might start caring more about managing their kids' educations if they could see that caring more actually made a difference?

grandalf 18y ago
I'd say that the converse is also true: If one has no choice then even if one cares there is no reason to care.

MaysonL 18y ago

This is also indicated by the fact that those who were offered vouchers but didn't use them seem to have had similar increases in reading scores, compared to the applicants who were not offered vouchers. Sounds like voodoo science to me (or some variation of the Westinghouse effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_effect#Westinghouse_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_effect#Westinghous... )

grandalf 18y ago
Not at all. There is both a market-based and a psychological explanation: Market based: If the student didn't use the voucher but might use it next year, then the school will try harder to meet the student's needs this year. Psychological: If you perceive something as simply mandatory, you will take it for granted. While if you had a voucher and choose a public school, then you have made the decision that you have the best opportunity in the environment you chose, and you'll try to extract value from it.

jacoblyles 18y ago

While it is impossible to isolate variables in social data, each new study does add a drop to the ocean of evidence in support of school choice initiatives. I thought this overview of available evidence was also illuminating: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/03/17/american-prospect-strikes-mother-lode-of-falsehood/ http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/03/17/american-prospect-... When you add that a priori economic reasoning is firmly on the side of school choice over public monopoly - well I'm convinced. I'm a little surprised popular wisdom isn't on my side.

grandalf 18y ago
Good point. Popular wisdom is biased by the fact that most people went to public school and tend to think things like "well I went to public school and I turned out just fine". That's like saying "well wikipedia didn't exist when I was a kid and I turned out just fine" to argue that Wikipedia should be banned -- after all voucher proponents don't want vouchers to be mandatory, just optional!

snewe 18y ago

Read the article: "The evaluation is based on a randomized controlled trial design that compares the outcomes of eligible applicants randomly assigned to receive (treatment group) or not receive (control group) a scholarship through a series of lotteries." Now, given lottery status parents might help their kids with HW or otherwise (b/c they don't want to waste an opportunity). I am still reading on how they control for that, but I suspect they have a TON of observables on the parents, income, location, etc. School voucher studies these days -- particularly those read and "approved" by those in the list of acknowledgements -- will go nowhere without either randomization or a suitable instrumental variable that correlates with the voucher, but not with educational outcomes. No need to throw around econometric criticisms until you read at least part of the article.

Radix 18y ago

That's part of the argument! That is: Parents who care to look into a selection of schools will be more involved in the schools they send their children to and will raise children who are better students. Involved parents will force schools, public and voucher backed, to compete producing better students and curriculum. The idea that parents should be able to choose where their children go to school should be a given in America. I understand and accept everyone paying into the education system as a good idea, I don't understand or accept that people with school aged children have to pay into the school system even when they have chosen to send their children to private schools.