What is presently called “reform” consists of market-based policies such as school choice, high-stakes testing, evaluating teachers by test scores, and closing schools.

The Broader Bolder Approach to Education just released a report on what they call “market-oriented reforms.” The report analyzes performance data in three “market-oriented” cities–Washington, D.C., Chicago, and New York City–and concludes that in these districts, the rhetoric trumps the reality. Non-market-oriented districts consistently outperformed the three “market reform” districts.

The authors say in summary:

“Top-down pressure from federal education policies such as Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind, bolstered by organized advocacy efforts, is making a popular set of market-oriented education “reforms” look more like the new status quo than real reform. Reformers assert that test-based teacher evaluation, increased access to charter schools, and the closure of “failing” and under-enrolled schools will boost at-risk students’ achievement and narrow longstanding race- and income-based achievement gaps. This new report from the Broader, Bolder Approach to Education examines these assertions by comparing the impacts of these reforms in three large urban school districts – Washington, D.C., New York City, and Chicago – with student and school outcomes over the same period in other large, high-poverty urban districts. The report finds that the reforms deliver few benefits, often harm the students they purport to help, and divert attention from a set of other, less visible policies with more promise to weaken the link between poverty and low educational attainment.”