I am reposting this because the earlier version lacked a link and the conclusion of the study.
The study is called “Charter Schools and Labor Market Outcomes.”
Click to access texas_charters.pdf
(Note: the source has been deleted. Google the title to find it. This seems to be the latest iteration: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/charters_appendix_aej_11.26.2017.pdf)
This is an astonishing study, not just because of its findings but because of its authors. Will Dobbie and Roland Fryer are economists who have frequently studied charters, incentives and their effects on test scores. Fryer’s research institute at Harvard was started with several millions from the Broad Foundation. Fryer is a member of the Massachusetts State Board of Education.
Here is the abstract of their study of charter schools in Texas and labor market outcomes:
“We estimate the impact of charter schools on early-life labor market outcomes using administrative data from Texas. We find that, at the mean, charter schools have no impact on test scores and a negative impact on earnings. No Excuses charter schools increase test scores and four-year college enrollment, but have a small and statistically insignificant impact on earnings, while other types of charter schools decrease test scores, four-year college enrollment, and earn- ings. Moving to school-level estimates, we find that charter schools that decrease test scores also tend to decrease earnings, while charter schools that increase test scores have no discernible impact on earnings. In contrast, high school graduation effects are predictive of earnings effects throughout the distribution of school quality. The paper concludes with a speculative discussion of what might explain our set of facts.”
The paper concludes with this speculation:
“Charter schools, in particular No Excuses charter schools, are considered by many to be the most important education reform of the past quarter century. At the very least, however, this paper cautions that charter schools may not have the large effects on earnings many predicted. It is plausible this is due to the growing pains of an early charter sector that was “building the plane as they flew it.” This will be better known with the fullness of time. Much more troubling, it seems, is the possibility that what it takes to increase achievement among the poor in charter schools deprives them of other skills that are important for labor markets.”
Apparently, the obedience and conformity taught in No Excuses charter schools do not help people in jobs where initiative and independent thinking are valued.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I could have saved them the money, but their source is probably a grant anyway.
I guess the joke’s on the states’ taxpayers. A cross-section of Ohioans could have forecast that our charter schools would not improve education. Ohioans wouldn’t need research to tell them that, when, the “schools” are on-line, and students log in (if, at all), for an hour or two, the educational result will be butkus.
I know. I know. It’s the campaign contributions that matter not, the kids, not the taxpayers, not the communities that lose the economic multiplier effect of local dollars spent, locally. But, in a perfect world, the charter school pushers would be run out-of-the-state, on a rail.
I wish it mattered but it doesn’t. They will expand charter schools until public schools are gone, because once these people go a tear and reach a kind of critical mass in elite opinion there’s no stopping them.
You know, it’s a lie that no one warned them when they deregulated financial markets. They ignored every warning. Democrats and Republicans joined hands and jumped off a cliff. If you were following it at the time you watched them do it.
The elite consensus was financial markets should be deregulated and it was like standing in front of a train if you thought that was reckless or unwise or would end badly. It will be the same for public schools.
Politicians should have to forced to examine evidence before they inflict a program or a charter school on our students. They should not be making decisions based on how many campaign contributions they get from lobbyists. Our corrupt system needs an overhaul.
And, the taxpayers will continue to bleed a 10-18% return on charter school debt, to Wall Street.
It doesn’t matter because the Republicans want it for the benefit of the richest 0.1% and, Presidents Clinton and Obama, Hillary’s campaign manager and all but one Democratic senator want it. The Podesta Group, Squared Communications (new home of the former DNC CEO) and Albright Stonebridge, among others, provide the explanation. The beltway black belts make money by delivering policies that make the rich, wealthier.
And the lesson learned ?
“This country has socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor.”MLK .
And I am voting for Hillary why .That’s right to protect my pension. Oh God.
It seems as it the post was truncated (ended with a colon), no?
Link missing in addition to closing.
Also get a 404 error on comments portion from this recent pos
Tom Ultican: Now THIS Is What a Gates-Funded Teacher Conference Looks Like!
Of course, “no excuses” graduates will do somewhat better than others. When “no excuses” charters cream those that are the most compliant and have the greatest learning potential, it is unfair to compare their results to the general population. It is comparing apples to oranges. Essentially, charters in Texas have made no dent in student performance, and they only accomplishment is to harm public schools, teachers and students in the state. Citizens of Texas should fight against Abbot and his misguided policies.
Hi there. I am hoping you will post a link to this study. The fight in Texas will be huge this year. The politicians are already talking about tying school funding to school “performance”, adding “education savings accounts (vouchers)”, expanding charter schools, and the dreaded online testing that is the Gates/Pearson plan. I want to share this study far and wide. Parents and teachers in Texas are going to have a war on our hands.
“Education Savings Accounts” are another area where we need to be paying attention to the medical field. More and more people who still have employer provided coverage, and more and more people getting coverage through the Obamacare exchanges, are getting 80/20 or even 70/30 high deductible plans that don’t come anywhere near to covering the cost of even a brief hospitalization. I’ve told my personal story before of completely draining my HSA for an outpatient laproscopic procedure.
ESAs will result in the same thing for education. People will essentially be saving their own money (albeit tax-free) to cover educational costs beyond what the increasingly meager vouchers will cover. Parents will need to start saving (if they can) when their child is born in order to have a chance to save enough, and even then they probably won’t. There will probably even be private insurance plans to “help” parents with these costs but which, like health insurance, will just be a giant middle man sucking the profit out of the system.
The negative earning findings may be the result of racism or the fact that these obedient students may have been conditioned to follow, not to lead or innovate.
Let me Google that for you: http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/wdobbie/files/texas_charters.pdf
Seems like what we, the anti-deformer/privateer folks, have been saying all along (not withstanding the nonsense of using test scores for anything).
Here is the conclusion:
In this paper, we estimate the impact of charter schools on early-life labor market outcomes using administrative data from Texas. We find that, at the mean, charter schools have no impact on test scores and a negative impact on earnings. No Excuses charter schools increase test scores and four-year college enrollment, but have a small and statistically insignificant impact on earnings, while regular charter schools decrease test scores, four-year college enrollment, and earnings. Using school-level estimates, we find that charter schools that decrease test scores also tend to decrease earnings, while charter schools that increase test scores have no discernible impact on earnings.
In contrast, high school graduation effects are predictive of earnings effects for both low- and high-value added schools.
The underlying mechanism that drives these results is elusive. We test four hypotheses. Students in our main specifications are in their mid-twenties, but investigating older cohorts of students only strengthens the results. High attrition rates of achievement-increasing charters also fails to explain the results. The final two mechanisms are, at least, generally consistent with the data. Some – though not all – of the estimates reported are consistent with the impact on earnings one might expect given the cross-sectional correlation between test scores and earnings documented in the literature. Finally, there is some evidence that schools may put subjects such as art and history
on the back burner when they increase test scores and the effects of this practice on labor market outcomes is unknown.
Charter schools, in particular No Excuses charter schools, are considered by many to be the most important education reform of the past quarter century. At the very least, however, this paper cautions that charter schools may not have the large effects on earnings many predicted. It is plausible this is due to the growing pains of an early charter sector that was “building the plane as they flew it.” This will be better known with the fullness of time. Much more troubling, it seems, is the possibility that what it takes to increase achievement among the poor in charter schools deprives them of other skills that are important for labor markets.
In any case, it seems to indicate that those “no excuses” students reap zero benefit in the marketplace. Taking tests does not make anyone “college and career ready.” The question we should be asking is why we should continue to fund “no excuses” schools if they fail to prepare students any better for the real world any better than public schools. They are not worth the price the taxpayers and essentially the public schools are paying for them. Perhaps students would be better off in better funded comprehensive public schools. Although this seems like a logical conclusion, Abbott and his cronies will ignore it because their goal is destruction of public education, profit and union busting.
No Excuses behavior is not the appropriate behavior of college or career. At what university, in what business office do people walk silently on painted lines? What companies look for yes people who exhibit rigid compliance instead of people with sparks of well rounded interest, creativity, and sociability?
Charters make about as much sense as their cohort TFA, whose inexperienced, unqualified teachers have a deleterious impact on the lives of students.
Anything that gets kids out of the commie/socialist public school systems without decreasing performance is a plus, and probably accounts for the growing popularity of charters, vouchers, and otherwise. It’s political, not educational. Get used to it or reject socialism in favor of old fashioned patriotic capitalism.
Ay ay ay ay ay, HU!
LeftCoastTeacher
“No Excuses behavior is not the appropriate behavior of college or career”
I agree with you . However how much of corporate America is looking for creative people ,people fast on their feet to react to changing circumstance . Vs corporate drones to just fall in line and preform a task.
Who are our largest employers, what sectors of the economy are growing. Do these sectors require a skilled educated work force .
So should the focus of education be way more than creating drones yes. But does corporate America want that truly educated workforce or a compliant one. When they do want skilled labor, do they want that labor well educated and well rounded . Or narrowly trained to suit their needs. When Gates talks about certificate programs replacing University degrees,using M.O.C.s. Is education really the goal of the reformers?
Still no link, but the results as summarized by Duane are interesting, especially from two economists who love to make very long statistical leaps through thin air based on the “objectivity” of test scores. These economists are what someone called “edutourists” who are incapable of thinking about education without having data, usually of questionable validity but easy to dump into a formula. They looked at the cost-benefits of Harlem Success Academy and concluded that HSA could not work “at scale” unless those efforts enjoyed comparable financial support from private investors.
This seems to be the link to where this abstract is published. The total study has not yet been published. It is the first article on the list.http://scholar.princeton.edu/wdobbie/publications
RetiredTeacher, I am reposting it with the correct link.
Thanks,
I plan on sending it to my grandson’s public school in Texas. People need to understand the results of legitimate research, not the faux claims of think tanks and foundations.
“Much more troubling, it seems, is the possibility that what it takes to increase achievement among the poor in charter schools deprives them of other skills that are important for labor markets.”
And there we have it, folks! Education is not for developing a child’s interests, talents, curiosity or skills. The only focus is on what skills are important for labor markets. This is why the reformistas seek to crush traditional preparation for a teaching career – real teachers ask what students need; Economists “Two-Tier” Fryer and Dobbie and their ilk ask what the markets need.
The irony is that the markets need people who understand their own talents and temperaments, and are able to use them to pursue work they find interesting. When schooling happens in an environment of rigid conformity, how can students make the choices that would lead to self-discovery?
If the research was funded by plutocrats, expect to see a spin in media that distorts the findings in favor of “growing evidence of the value of competition in school improvement.” It’s the fallback position, when data shows something that “surprises” the agenda- driven reformers.
Any chance this research is going to find its way to the NBER?
It’s pretty depressing how this should have been obvious long ago.
By the way, I’m in the process of trying to get Relay Graduate School of Education paused or shut down. They have been obsessed with pushing the compliance part.
I was forced to go there (was one of those stupid idealistic kids that went to NYC Teaching Fellows and they placed me in Relay) and wound up dropping out in 2014 because I KNEW the insane compliance they kept asking was ridiculous and morally unacceptable. I feel terrible about how I sometimes treated the children–like dogs that should jump when I say to jump and bark when I say to bark.
Hopefully this particular study helps. If anyone else could help me with this, I’d appreciate it (you can email me at alice@edversa.org). I’m in the process of filing complaints with relevant authorities. I’d benefit greatly from people who are skilled writers and/or have legal or political skills.