State Takeover, School Restructuring, Private Management, and Student Achievement in Philadelphia

Abstract

PrefaceFrustrated by a history of low student achievement and financial crises, the state of Pennsylvania took charge of the Philadelphia public schools in 2002. Within months of the takeover, a newly created School Reform Commission had launched the nation's largest experiment in the private management of public schools. The commission, which replaced the local school board, turned over 45 elementary and middle schools to seven private for-profit and nonprofit managers. In addition, the school district, under a new CEO, implemented wide-ranging and ambitious reforms in district-managed schools. This monograph examines student achievement outcomes for the district as a whole and for privately managed and district-managed "restructured" schools during the first four years after the takeover (through spring 2006).

The effect of school closings on student achievement

“…4 The literatures on desegregation and peer effects also investigate the effect of shifting students from one school to another. 5 All of these policies differ from school closings in that they do not include the mobility of teachers that is typically generated 1 A related literature that explores the effects of school turnarounds and reconstitutions (i.e., replacing school staff without shifting students to other schools) finds mixed results for student outcomes (Gill et al, 2007;Hess, 2003;Brady, 2003;Malen et al, 2002).…”

Turnaround and Closure Rates in the Charter and District Sectors

“…Loveless (2003) examined the performance of conversion charter schools in California and found conversions performed at about the same level as regular public schools, despite serving populations of children historically associated with low test scores. Gill, Zimmer, Christman, and Blanc (2007) used longitudinal data to examine the achievement of Philadelphia public school students from before and after they were taken over by private management companies and did not find a statistically significant effect in math or reading in any of the first four years after takeover.…”

Understanding site selection of for-profit educational management organization charter schools

“…Government Accountability Office, 2012;Zollers & Ramanathan, 1998). A number of studies indicate that students in profit-oriented EMO charter schools have mixed, or often worse, academic growth (Byrnes, 2009;Educational Policy Institute, 2005;Garcia, Molnar, & Barber, 2009;Gill, Zimmer, Christman, & Blanc, 2007;M. A. Mac Iver & Mac Iver, 2006;Miron, 2008;U.S.…”