Third-Party Governance and Performance Measurement: A Case Study of Publicly Funded Private School Vouchers

Determinants of Organizational Failure in the Milwaukee School Voucher Program

“…More recent evaluations of the MPCP focused on the impact of the program on student test scores and attainment. Carlson, Cowen, and Fleming () found achievement gains for voucher users the year after the MPCP began state‐mandated standardized testing, and speculated that gains were a result of voucher schools putting an increased emphasis on standardized testing, and/or better aligning their curriculum with state tests. Cowen, Fleming, Witte, Wolf, and Kisida () found a high‐school graduation rate advantage for voucher users, but note that 56 percent of the MPCP students who began as freshman in their study went on to leave the voucher school sector.…”

High-Stakes Choice

“…Although we cannot test this assumption directly, we simply have no evidence of any other substantial policy change taking effect in that year, and the reform we have described was indeed so structural in nature-such a break with past private school operations-that we consider it the straightforward interpretation of the educational climate Carlson et al (2013b), we use the MPS panel described above as essentially a control group which, although subject to its own public sector testing policy, saw no change in those policies concurrent to the new requirements directed at voucher schools. Although we cannot test this assumption directly, we simply have no evidence of any other substantial policy change taking effect in that year, and the reform we have described was indeed so structural in nature-such a break with past private school operations-that we consider it the straightforward interpretation of the educational climate Carlson et al (2013b), we use the MPS panel described above as essentially a control group which, although subject to its own public sector testing policy, saw no change in those policies concurrent to the new requirements directed at voucher schools.…”

“…Whether these schools maximize performance on their own, or through participation in a competitive market for educational services, is the subject of intense debate, even among supporters of private school choice (Finn, Hentges, Petrilli, & Winkler, 2009), and there are important theoretical expectations both in favor of and in opposition to the administration of a high-stakes testing system on private schools serving voucher students (Carlson, Cowen, & Fleming, 2013b). Beyond rudimentary demographic data collection on the part of state and federal education agencies-and beyond the sort of program evaluations reviewed above-private schools are typically left to their own devices to monitor and ultimately improve the quality of the educational product they provide.…”

“…Because the vast majority of schools participating in the MPCP serve primarily voucher students (McShane, Kisida, Jensen, & Wolf, 2012), this implies that for most schools, failure to participate could result in closure. Carlson et al (2013b) introduces the possibility that such consequences had an impact on student outcomes, and consider the implications of the policy for outcomes in a variety of contexts in which private agencies provide publicly funded services. Such an environment dramatically raises the academic stakes faced by private schools serving voucher students.…”

Milwaukee Voucher-School Leaders’ Views on Accountability: What Are They, and Why Do They Matter?

“…Several studies have explored the impact of the MPCP on public schools (Carnoy, Adamson, Chudgar, Luschei, & Witte, 2007;Chakrabarti, 2008;Greene & Marsh, 2009;Hoxby, 2003), on taxpayers (Costrell, 2009(Costrell, , 2011, and on students using vouchers (Carlson, Cowen, & Fleming, 2014;Cowen, Fleming, Witte, Wolf, & Kisida, 2013;Witte, Carlson, Cowen, Fleming, & Wolf, 2012). However, the topic of MPCP accountability has drawn less scholarly interest, and the author is not aware of any previous studies addressing the accountability views of the individuals actually running voucher schools (Percy & Maier, 1996;Van Dunk & Dickman, 2003).…”