On July 13, I posted the abstract from the study referenced here, showing that private schools are not better than public schools when demographic variables are controlled. If you have a school composed of kids from rich and educated families, your school will get higher test scores than a school that is open to all students.
Valerie Strauss has an extended discussion of the study here.She interviewed one of the study’s authors.
University of Virginia researchers who looked at data from more than 1,000 students found that all of the advantages supposedly conferred by private education evaporate when socio-demographic characteristics are factored in. There was also no evidence found to suggest that low-income children or children enrolled in urban schools benefit more from private school enrollment.
The results confirm what earlier research found but are especially important amid a movement to privatize public education — encouraged by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos — based in part on the faulty assumption that public schools are inferior to private ones.
DeVos has called traditional public schools a “dead end” and long supported the expansion of voucher and similar programs that use public money for private and religious school education. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 27 states and the District of Columbia have policies allowing public money to be used for private education through school vouchers, scholarship tax credits and education savings grants.
Related: [There is a movement to privatize public education in America. Here’s how far it has gotten.]
The new study was conducted by Robert C. Pianta, dean of U-Va.’s Curry School of Education and a professor of education and psychology, and Arya Ansari, a postdoctoral research associate at U-Va.’s Center for Advanced Study for Teaching and Learning.
“You only need to control for family income and there’s no advantage,” Pianta said in an interview. “So when you first look, without controlling for anything, the kids who go to private schools are far and away outperforming the public school kids. And as soon as you control for family income and parents’ education level, that difference is eliminated completely.”
Kids who come from homes with higher incomes and parental education achievement offer young children — from birth through age 5 — educational resources and stimulation that other children don’t get. These conditions presumably carry on through the school years, Pianta said…
The Pianta-Ansari study examined not only academic achievement, “which has been the sole focus of all evaluations of private schooling reported to date, but also students’ social adjustment, attitudes and motivation, and even risky behavior, all of which one assumes might be associated with private school education, given studies demonstrating schooling effects on such factors.” It said:
“In short, despite the frequent and pronounced arguments in favor of the use of vouchers or other mechanisms to support enrollment in private schools as a solution for vulnerable children and families attending local or neighborhood schools, the present study found no evidence that private schools, net of family background (particularly income), are more effective for promoting student success.”
And it says this:
“In sum, we find no evidence for policies that would support widespread enrollment in private schools, as a group, as a solution for achievement gaps associated with income or race. In most discussions of such gaps and educational opportunities, it is assumed that poor children attend poor quality schools, and that their families, given resources and flexibility, could choose among the existing supply of private schools to select and then enroll their children in a school that is more effective and a better match for their student’s needs. It is not at all clear that this logic holds in the real world of a limited supply of effective schools (both private and public) and the indication that once one accounts for family background, the existing supply of heterogeneous private schools (from which parents select) does not result in a superior education (even for higher income students).”
Pianta and Ansari note in the study that previous research on the impact of school voucher programs “cast doubt on any clear conclusion that private schools are superior in producing student performance.”
Valerie goes on to refer to an important study by Christopher and Sarah Lubienski:
A 2013 book, “The Public School Advantage,” by Christopher A. Lubienski and Sarah Theule Lubienski, describes the results of a look at two huge data sets of student mathematics performance, that found public school students outperform private school ones when adjusted for demographics.

“The results confirm what earlier research found but are especially important amid a movement to privatize public education — encouraged by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos — based in on the faulty assumption that public schools are inferior to private ones.”
I don’t think it is “important” because the moment the research came out that vouchers didn’t outperform public schools ed reformers simply moved the goalposts and said it was never about better schools, it was about choice.
It may be important to parents and others, so it is certainly worthwhile, but it won’t make a dent in the political campaign to push vouchers- that’s based on ideological beliefs, including the ed reform hostility to labor unions and employee rights.
You could bury the ed reformers in the Ohio statehouse with studies. They’d continue to cut funding for public schools and run political campaigns based on bashing public schools and public school students. They’re opposed to public schools. Ideologically. It’s a belief system.
You wonder how ed reformers get away with the lie that vouchers allow poor people to attend pricey private schools- “choose a private school like rich people do!”
That’s just not true. These are LOW VALUE vouchers. None of these voucher recipients will be attending wealthy schools. They can’t pay for it and the voucher certainly won’t cover the cost. It’s just a falt out lie to tell them they can.
LikeLike
I agree. I have always suspected academic results are similar, but I know parents who have tried to get their kids in private schools to get away from bad influences, to avoid gangs, or in an attempt to avoid bullying. The choice arguments you list above would resonate with them.
LikeLike
Z,
In the South and other places as well, charters and vouchers are facilitators of White flight.
Imagine that: the government gives you tuition money to leave an integrated school and enroll in a segregated school.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have found that many of the problems you note in schools are WORSE in charter and voucher schools. Why? Because in a public school, we have to confront them. Charter, voucher, and really wealthy public schools don’t think they have a problem, so they ignore the signs. And the problem grows worse from there. I’ve seen it happen.
LikeLike
Campaign finance laws written by Ohio’s rich, which are used to elect venal politicians, is the causal factor for the “ideology” Chiara describes.
LikeLike
The charter law in Ohio was written by charter lobbyists.
LikeLike
Anecdotally, private education is dangerous
(1) Given Trump as an indicator, private schools create venal leaders. (2) Given the NYT’s Leonhardt, private schooling reinforces bias (3) Given the financial sector’s GDP theft, the privately schooled rob. (4) Given Gates, the privately-schooled, extinguish democracy, in America and worldwide.
LikeLike
So another anecdote. When I attended a private school, I was privileged to take a course in Black Literature in America. My eyes were opened thereby to a host of experiences that friends of mine had possibly kept from me for cultural and social reasons. My eyes were opened in ways they never would have been had I not had the wonderful experience of James Baldwin, Richard Wright, and James Weldon Johnson. Old prejudices were stripped away, horizons extended.
LikeLike
I wish they had had my experience. My point was that each educational experience is unique. Saying that all private schools are segregation academies or that they are refuges for the rich is as wrong as saying that all public schools are failures.
That said, I do not support public money for private schools, a discussion that we have long had on this blog.
LikeLike
Your point would be better made if the privately schooled weren’t the dominating oligarchs.
LikeLike
Charles and David Koch attended private high schools.
LikeLike
Sorry. See above. I hit the wrong thing.
LikeLike
Saying that all products of a private education are oligarchs seems to violate the logical fallacy known as generalization. My point was that education is a unique experience for each person. So long as we do not fund private education, let it serve good purposes and condem the bad purposes.
LikeLike
Identify oligarchs, privately schooled, who are currently striving to build projects for or, to strengthen existing, common goods.
LikeLike
Private school preppies have NO CLUE about reality.
Here’s Michigan going stupid again and rewriting history:
http://prorevnews.blogspot.com/2018/06/michigan-plans-to-move-social-studies.html
LikeLike
“Constitutional republic” is a legitimate correction. Climate change is not fact, only probabable hypothesis. The other two should have been left in.
LikeLike
Just as all public schools are not equal, the same can be said for private schools. Poor students that use vouchers in private schools of questionable value perform worse than if they had stayed in their public school. Why are we sinking public money into a ineffective proposition?
If the goal is to get poor students to perform better in school and life, we should be working to integrate schools both racially and socio-economically. Instead of believing that an escape hatch of a charter or voucher will offer a magic elixir, which we now know is false, we should turning innovative approaches to integration, where poor students actually perform better, and middle class students continue to perform well. The social and cultural benefits of integration benefit both groups. Separate is never equal! https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/03/16/515788673/try-this-one-trick-to-improve-student-outcomes
LikeLike
The society can have equality, but only at the cost of freedom of choice. People should choose freedom because equality is a chimera. This is a very painful truth.
LikeLike
Equality in opportunity and access, within reason, not equality of ultimate circumstances. Though, the outlandish inequalities of wealth that have led to multi-billionaires halving their wealth for the greater good are just that, outlandish, should never happen. And the overall global distribution of wealth and resources must be more equitable and humane, less barbaric and insane.
Equality of freedom, opportunity and access, in some form of reasonable moderation.
LikeLike
Do you admire Russia’s freedoms, Harlan?
LikeLike
It’s important for the public to realize and accept that there isn’t something broken here, other than socioeconomic injustices and failures.
The public should also understand that the focus on bringing scores up is part of the problem, and too much focus on assessment in general is a clear and present problem. If you really want to fix something, start there, and think different. Do we want our schools to be factories or greenhouses? Do we want to actually lift and inspire or grow confidence to reap results?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The sad truth about the theory “if you say it often enough the public will believe it,” is that the testers, teacher-blamers, privatizers and profiteers have argued that our public schools are broken often and repeatedly, while there has been almost no sustained argument made to the opposite effect. Everyone from billionaires to politicians to journalists (and to a very dangerous degree, union leaders) have been happily pushing the “schools are broken” message for long years, now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, true.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The largest element of FAKERY is a category that is imputed-
that is, made up.” (test scores=achievement)
The OPT-OUT folks seem to “get it”…
“The person who does the test
has already accepted the name of the test and the measure that the test makes by the very
act of doing the test. (Wilson)
Is this too great a stretch?
A critique based on test scores, continues the false consciousness of test scores.
What will it take to get off the test score hampster wheel?
LikeLike
Can we agree that test scores say nothing about which schools are “better” period? In my case, private school is better for my kids because at our local public school they get treated like widgets. They are punished for every violation, and pretty much everything short of breathing is a violation. At the progressive school they are treated like human beings with their own unique interests, insights and emotions, which they have a right to express.
Are they getting a better “education” at the private school? I can’t really say. I know that one year at public school did some damage to the youngest’s interest in learning, but on the other hand, she did learn some actual reading/writing skills that she wouldn’t have learned in private school.
As Roy Turrentine says above, all educational experiences are different. For our family, progressive private education is better regardless of test scores. YMMV.
P.S. Our school is most definitely not a segregation academy. We actively seek out and celebrate diversity.
LikeLike
Even when assessing in the original meaning of the word (to sit by), going over work, asking questions, etc., so much can still be overlooked or misunderstood.
Assessing by test merely delivers probabilities that certain skills or knowledge have been retained or not. Almost everything important is overlooked: potential, insights, true development, special talents, etc. And the assessment itself takes up time, causes stress and is improperly regarded and used as a way to rank and sort. You don’t need Wilson to understand that.
LikeLike
Class size matters.
LikeLiked by 1 person