Public and Private Schools Co-Exist

¶ … Public and Private Schools Co-Exist and Function within American Society?

Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations

Appropriateness of Design

Informed Consent

Sampling Frame

Confidentiality

Geographic Location

Validity and Reliability

TRANSCRIPTS of INTERVIEWS

CITI COURSE CERTIFICATES

INFORMED CONSENT

How Should Public and Private Schools Co-Exist and Function within American Society?

The fundamental purposes of the public schools in the United States have not changed in substantive ways in recent years, but their effectiveness has become the focus of an increasing number of studies that seek to determine why the enormous resources being devoted to their support have not paid better dividends in terms of academic performance. A number of researchers have pointed to private schools as examples of what can be accomplished with fewer resources that most public schools enjoy today. According to Petersen and Llaudet (2006), "The most influential study of student achievement ever conducted was based upon data collected at only a single point in time. Half a century ago, a team of researchers led by James S. Coleman (1966) reported the results of a congressionally mandated, nationwide study of public school performance. In addition to reporting variation in school resources (per pupil expenditures, class size, teacher credentials, the quality of school facilities, and so forth), they identified the factors affecting student achievement. To everyone's surprise, the analysts discovered that school resources had little effect on student performance, which they found to be shaped mainly by the young person's family background.

Although the Coleman study was fundamentally flawed, it represented a useful benchmark for future studies. In this regard, Petersen and Llaudet note that the Coleman study used data from only a single battery of tests, and it was unable to measure the growth in student performance from one year to the next, even though that is what schools are expected to accomplish. "All Coleman and his colleagues could do was to regress levels of test performance on school resources and family background characteristics," Petersen and Llaudet advise, "With observational data of this kind, it was difficult to tease out the unique impact of the child's schooling for the reasons given above" (p. 3).

Despite these constraints, the Coleman study was nonetheless well received among academicians and educational policymakers alike. According to Petersen and Llaudet, "The University of Chicago professor was soon asked by the Department of Education to lead another large-scale research project that mounted the 'High School and Beyond' (HSB) survey, which gathered information on student performance and other student and school characteristics, this time in both public and private schools" (p. 4). In this study, when student achievement was regressed on school resources, family background, and school sector (Catholic vs. public) variables, higher levels of student performance were detected at Catholic schools (Petersen & Llaudet).

In subsequent studies, Coleman and his colleagues (1981, 1982) determined that students in private schools learn more than their public school cohorts, ceteris paribus. Their results were also based on an analysis of the "High School and Beyond" survey of high school students conducted by the National Opinion Research Center. Using standard ordinary least squares (OLS) regression techniques, they estimated the effect of private school attendance and other student characteristics on cognitive achievement. Their finding that private school students out-perform public school students has been openly questioned because of their choice of a statistical technique that does not control for the self-selectivity of the private school samples. A selectivity bias exists because students are not randomly distributed between public and private schools, but rather students and their families choose which type of institution they will attend (Grimes, 1994). Using the same "High School and Beyond" survey database as Coleman and his associates (1981, 1982), Noell (1981, 1982) reported that no significant learning differences are found between Catholic and public school students once the self-selection bias is statistically taken into account. This suggests that the "better" students are choosing to attend private schools, whereas students of lesser aptitude are found in public schools (Grimes).

In reality, though, any study that seeks to measure student performance will be fraught with opportunities for misinterpretation or will be unable to capture the robust quality of data needed to make such comparisons meaningful. For example, parents that make their children's education a high priority may make significant economic and personal sacrifices in order to send their children to even a modestly priced religiously operated private school. These parents may be more likely to also devote the additional time and effort needed to help pupils and students succeed in an increasingly high-stakes environment. In this regard, Simon and Lovrich (1996) report that, "The education policy literature contains ample evidence of disagreement regarding the effects of private school competition. While privatization advocates are convinced of their belief in the benefit of competition, critics believe that such competition will have a deleterious effect on public school performance through the loss of fiscal resources and through the phenomenon of 'creaming'" (p. 667). In this regard, Rees (1999) reports that competition is in fact good for the nation's public schools: "Though still in their infancy, school choice programs have improved overall student academic achievement in public schools. Evidently, competition is good for learning. Programs that include religious schools and those limited to public institutions alone have both demonstrated that choice leads to higher quality education. When public schools are faced with the possibility of large student transfers, and a corresponding loss of funding, they have shown a willingness to make improvements both in how and what they teach" (p. 37).

Based on New York State Department of Education data, researchers compared metropolitan districts where parents, through residential decisions, can choose from a range of public schools to districts where parents have limited choices (Rees, 1999). A comparison of school districts where parents could easily afford to send their children to private schools (and where there were many public and private schools to choose from) with districts with less or no public/private school competition showed that in areas where public schools compete heavily for the same students, overall student test scores increased 3 full percentile points, students' wage gains after graduation increased by 4%, and the probability of college graduation increased by 0.4% (Rees). In areas where public and private schools compete for the same students, research showed even more pronounced academic improvements. Among students transferring from public to private school, there was a 12% increase in future wage gains and a 12% increase in the probability of college graduation; moreover, there was an 8 percentile point improvement in the test scores of the students in these areas who remained in public schools (Rees). Based on these findings, Rees concludes that public schools respond positively to competition from private schools by improving their curricular offerings.

According to the U.S. Center for Education Statistics (U.S. Department of Education 1992), about one in ten high school students attend private educational institutions (Grimes, 1994). The author of the seminal study on student performance in private and public schools in 1966 reports that today, "American education is and has been overwhelmingly public education. Throughout this century, the percentage of American children in private schools has remained at about 10% of the total school population, and most of those children have been in Catholic schools. Despite the lack of growth in the percentage of students in private schools, perceived problems with the public schools have focused increased attention on private schools" (Coleman, 1990, p. 37).

This increased attention on private schools has resulted in a growing body of evidence, much of which supports the conclusion that private schools are doing a better job of educating the nation's youth, but there is much more involved in this analysis than an across-the-board comparison of academic achievement. Indeed, public schools districts across the country are saddled with a number of federal and state mandates that may not apply to their private school counterparts, and many school districts have authorized charter schools for at-risk students where academic achievement may lag behind private schools, but where students manage to receive a high school diploma where they might not otherwise be able to do so.

Generally speaking, Catholic schools today appear to be characterized by both higher quality, on the average, and greater equality than the public schools. This appears anomalous because public schools are far more expensive which should result in higher quality and public schools are mandated to increase the equality of educational opportunities in the United States. While there may be no one answer to this anomaly, Coleman suggests that the reason is due, at least in part, to the organization of public education in the United States, and that organization in turn is grounded in several fundamental assumptions that reinforce this dichotomy in the delivery of educational services today.

In this environment, identifying what cost-effective aspects of private schools tend to contribute to improved academic performance and what respective roles should be played by public and private schools has assumed new importance and relevance, and these issues are discussed further below in the study's statement of the problem to be considered.

Statement of the Problem

In the business world, when a small company manages to bring a superior product to market in a more cost-effective fashion than their larger counterparts, analysts sit up and take notice. Likewise, according to Wilensky (2002), "With the decline of K- 12 quality in most public schools in the United States since 1970, the average quality of parochial and public schools has converged" (p. 76). Because resources are by definition scarce, and the costs associated with the American public school system are truly enormous, it just makes good business sense to identify best practices and determine what works best under what conditions and private schools typically spend far less than their public school counterparts (Coleman). Nevertheless, the nation's schools are not factories and its pupils and students are not so many widgets to be churned out according to a standard cookbook approach to academic development. As Lavy (2007) emphasizes, "In the private sector, market mechanisms discipline firms into providing products that consumers value, but public schools lack market discipline. Schooling is compulsory and public, and students are simply assigned to attend their neighborhood school. Parents and students who are unhappy with what their schools offer generally have no alternative except to attend a private school or move to another neighborhood or city -- alternatives that are too costly for many" (p. 87).

On the one hand, the increased focus on private schools has resulted in a number of national- and state-level studies comparing the performance of private and public schools according to various metrics. On the other hand, though, the vast majority of these studies have been characterized by various flaws or constraints that make meaningful comparisons difficult or impossible. As Willms (1992) emphasizes, "In many cases comparisons between schools are made without making statistical adjustments for the types of pupils entering schools. Thus, the findings frequently suggest that the best-performing schools are those with the most favorable pupil intakes. These conclusions are often unwarranted" (p. 7). Certainly, complex problems require complex solutions and as Grimes points out, "Examination of economic education across public and private schools should provide clues to the effectiveness of third-party support. Further, by focusing on student performance in a specific discipline, rather than on general measures of student achievement, potential biases may be avoided" (p. 18). Therefore, identifying what works best in both private and public school settings requires a more comprehensive assessment of both the purpose of the nation's schools and how success is being measured in these respective settings, an initiative that represents the purpose of the instant study which is discussed further below.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the proposed study is to identify how public and private schools should co-exist and function within American society as defined by the research questions discussed further below.

Significance of the Study

Given the ongoing debate over the effectiveness of the nation's schools, studying the relative effectiveness of public and private schools and their respective roles within American society represents a timely enterprise. Historically, the success of private education has been based on a wide variety of factors. The most important of these factors include the demand for religious education and training, the perceived social status and externalities associated with private educational institutions, and the popular perception that private schools provide a higher quality service than public schools. Even though the total population of high school children has fallen, the percentage of students in private secondary schools has increased over the past 25 years. As Grimes emphasizes, "The importance of the public vs. private school debate cannot be ignored. Currently, numerous states are considering or have acted on proposals to offer 'school-choice vouchers' for public school students who desire to attend a private school. The major goals of the voucher system are to enable low-income students to choose private schools and to provide incentives for improvement in the public school systems" (the author notes that if public schools cannot produce a quality education on a par with private schools, they will lose funding and students under a voucher system) (p. 18).

Advocates of free choice for parents maintain that such competition is a powerful economic motivator on the nation's public schools to improve, but critics cite the wide range of pupils and students that public schools must accept and educate, notwithstanding some profoundly challenging learning disabilities or behavioral disorders. As Grimes points out, "Even though experimental voucher systems are being enacted, the debate concerning the qualitative differences in the performance of public and private schools continues" (p. 18).

Nature of the Study

The nature of this study was exploratory in order to answer the research questions listed below.

Research Questions

The proposed study will be guided by the following research questions:

What role, if any, should private schools play in the provision of educational services by the nation's public schools?

Are school vouchers an appropriate approach to addressing the overcrowded conditions of the nation's public schools?

Are there any cost-effective techniques being used in private schools that can be adopted by public schools without sacrificing quality or violating the mandates of the NCLB, IDEA and comparable legislation?

What type of collaborative initiatives have been used between private and public schools in the past?

Theoretical Framework

In an increasingly multicultural society, providing equitable opportunities for America's diverse young learners is not only the law of the land, it is a good investment in the nation's future. Moreover, determining the optimum approach to the provision of educational services through the nation's public and private schools is congruent with the philosophy that before schools can "make kids smart, they must first make them good citizens." In this regard, in the post-September 11, 2001 climate, America's public schools have been considered the critical institution for learning the tolerance that liberalism sees as essential to democratic citizenship. The public school, the argument goes, is the sole institution that brings together citizens of different ethnicities, cultures, genders, socioeconomic strata, and conceptions of the collective good. The experience with diversity that public schools in intended to provide students with the recognition that people who are different are not inherently dangerous (Godwin, Ausbrooks & Martinez, 2001).

Definition of Terms

IDEA: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

NCLB: The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110)

Assumptions

For the purposes of the proposed study, the respondents to the survey of private and public school students will be assumed to answer the questions truthfully and accurately. It will also be assumed that public and private school students are essentially identical in terms of capacity to learn and developmental issues.

Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations

Summary

Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature

Background and Overview.

Prior to the turn of the 20th century, there was nothing that could be termed a public "system" of education in the United States in any meaningful fashion. As Berliner and Biddle (1995) point out, "Schooling was a local affair.... And as [people] proceeded -- all across America, without plan or coordination -- to fashion the kinds of schools they wanted for themselves and their children, the great heterogeneity of the nation came to be reflected in the diversity and autonomy of its local schools. Obviously, schools and public school systems existed in the United States before the 1830s" (p. 240). Ironically, many public schools were viewed as superior to private schools during this early period in American history. According to Power (1996), "The fact that some Catholics, and other citizens as well, steered clear of private schools had nothing whatever to do with hostility toward them or what they represented. Antipathy to free private schools or to those whose tuition was modest was lodged in a residue of resentment to pauper schools that for a long time was extant in the country" (p. 127). For example, some Catholic schools that were administered by the Jesuits provided educational instruction without charging for tuition. During the early half of the 19th century, "Citizens of substance scorned such schools because of the stigma of pauperism inevitably attached to them. Catholic parents were sensitive about the appearance of pauperism, as were others, but Catholic parents had an additional reason: In many places and among many people their religious confession called up for question their patriotism. One easy way to allay suspicion of lack of allegiance to America and her values was to patronize the public school" (Power, p. 127). Indeed, the inculcation of patriotism and citizenship in the nation's schoolchildren was a fundamental precept of the pedagogy of the era.

The primary difference that characterized the common school movement in the country's public school system at that time was the establishment and standardization of state systems of education designed to achieve specific public policies. In this regard, Horace Mann, writing in the 1840s, advised, "Children in the common school were to receive a common moral education... [and] a common political creed.... " (quoted in Berliner et al. At p. 240). The outcome of the common school movement was intended to create an American society that was characterized by.".. A consensus of political and moral values.... [Moreover] common schooling was to create a common... class consciousness among all members of society. By mixing rich and poor within the same schoolhouse, social-class conflict would give way to a feeling of membership in a common social class" (quoted in Berliner et al. At p. 241).

One implication of the common-school model in the U.S. has been the deliberate and complete exclusion of religion from the schools. In contrast, many (perhaps most) other countries have some form of support for schools operated by religious groups. In many countries, even including very small ones such as the Netherlands and Israel, there is a state secular school system, as well as publicly supported schools under the control of religious groups; however, the melting-pot ideology that served as a formative agent for the American educational system mandated that there would be a single set of publicly supported schools, and the reaction to European religious intolerance dictated that these be free of religious influence. It has nevertheless been true that in many religiously homogeneous communities, ordinarily Protestant, religious influence did infiltrate the schools. Only since the Supreme Court's ban on prayer in the schools has even nonsectarian religious influence been eliminated (Coleman).

The absence of social class, curriculum, or religious bases for selection of students into different schools meant that, in American schooling, attendance at a given school was dictated by location of residence. This method worked well in sparsely settled areas and in towns and smaller cities, and it was a principle compatible with a secular democracy. Two factors have, however, led this mode of school assignment to violate the assumptions of the common school. One is the movement of the U.S. population to cities with high population densities, resulting in economically homogeneous residential areas. The other is the more recent, largely post-World War II expansion of personal transportation, leading to the development of extensive, economically differentiated suburbs surrounding large cities (Coleman).

The combined effect of these two changes has been that in metropolitan areas the assumptions of the common school are no longer met. The residential basis of school assignment, in an ironic twist, has proved to be segregative and exclusionary, separating economic levels just as surely as do the explicitly selective systems of European countries and separating racial groups even more completely. The larger the metropolitan area, the more true this is, so that in the largest metropolitan areas the schools form a set of layers of economically stratified and racially distinct schools, while in small cities and towns the schools continue to approximate the economically and racially heterogeneous mix that was Horace Mann's vision of the common school in America (Coleman).

According to Godwin and his colleagues, "The 'common school' - the concept upon which our public school system was built - teaches children important lessons about both the commonality and diversity of American culture. These lessons are conveyed not only through what is taught in the classroom, but by the very experience of attending school with a diverse mix of students" (p. 542). Indeed, today, the United States in no longer the "melting pot" of Horace Mann's era, but rather a "salad bowl" of diverse student populations with an increasingly complex set of individual needs. Further exacerbating the problem for educators has been the introduction of various federal and state mandates such as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that require specialized services for these young learners to the maximum extent possible. It is little wonder that the relative effectiveness of public and private schools has come under close scrutiny in recent years, and these issues are discussed further below.

Relative Effectiveness of Public and Private Schools.

The United States is not the only country that has become concerned about the relative effectiveness of its public schools compared to its private schools. According to Berliner and his colleagues, "It may be difficult to think about everyday features of education as a source of problems simply because they are familiar and are not normally examined closely. And yet, if we compare education in different countries, we discover that American education often has features that don't appear elsewhere. Moreover, it requires a historical perspective to understand some of the common, everyday features now found in American education and their consequences" (p. 241). In this regard, the relative effectiveness of public, private government-dependent and private independent schools in 19 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries (including the United States) was studied by Dronkers and Peters (2004) using the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2000 data, which gives educational outcomes of 15-year-old students in reading and mathematics. According to the OECD, PISA is "a collaborative effort among OECD member countries, assesses youth outcomes in three domains -- "reading literacy, mathematical literacy, and scientific literacy -- "through common international tests" (PISA, 2008, p. 2).

The PISA assessment is intended to go beyond the testing of school-based curriculum in order to assess to what degree students approaching the end of their compulsory education have mastered the knowledge and skills in each of the literacy domains that are essential for full participation in society; in particular, PISA seeks to answer the following questions:

How well are young adults prepared to meet the challenges of the future?

Are they able to analyze, reason and communicate their ideas effectively?

Do they have the capacity to continue learning throughout life?

Are some kinds of teaching and school organization more effective than others? (PISA, p. 3).

These researchers used a multi-level approach to control stepwise for sociological and demographic characteristics of students and parents, behavioral and attitudinal characteristics of students and parents, school composition, teaching and learning conditions of schools and the school climate. The analysis by Dronkers and Peters shows clearly that private government-dependent schools are more effective than comparable public schools with the same students, parents and social composition. The main explanation of this higher effectiveness is the better school climate in the former, in comparison to the latter. The different learning and teaching conditions in private government-dependent and public schools do not explain differences in the effectiveness. The Dronkers and Peters' study also determined that private independent schools are less effective than public schools with the same students, parents and social composition. The main explanation of their initially higher effectiveness is the better social compositions of these schools. These effects were found to be more or less equal in the 19 OECD countries studied (Dronkers & Peters).

On July 14, 2006, the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released a study that compared the performance in reading and math of 4th and 8th graders attending private and public schools. The study had been undertaken at the request of the NCES by the Educational Testing Service (ETS). Using information from a national sample of public and private school students collected in 2003 as part of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), ETS compared the test scores of public school students with those of students in all private schools, taken together (Petersen & Llaudet, 2006).