School Choice Policies

I am pleased to share our new publication, "Navigating centralized admissions: The role of parental preferences in school segregation in Chile," recently published in the International Journal of Educational Research (co-authored with Macarena Kutscher). https://lnkd.in/gAyJ8iTR The question we investigated: Why doesn't equal access lead to equal outcomes in school choice? In 2015, Chile enacted the Ley de Inclusión, eliminating school screening practices—no more entrance exams, parent interviews, or income verification. Every family gained equal access through a centralized, algorithm-based system. Key objective: reduce school segregation. The result: Recent evidence by Kutscher and Urzua found minimal impact on integration. Our paper confirms and extends these findings. We analyzed 133,000+ prekindergarten applications to understand why equal access hasn't translated into more integrated schools. By examining families' rank-ordered school choices using discrete choice models, we uncovered systematic differences in how low-SES families navigate school selection. Key findings: Low-income families systematically choose different schools—not because of barriers, but due to distinct preferences: 🔹 They prioritize safety, climate, and belonging over test scores 🔹 They're significantly less likely to apply to high-SES schools 🔹 They strongly favor schools with fewer violent incidents and lower discrimination 🔹 They avoid previously selective schools, even when entitled to fee waivers 🔹 Distance matters far more—they're much less willing to travel The deeper story: Disadvantaged families seek schools where their children will feel welcomed and safe. They rely on observable signals—student behavior, familiar environments, community connections. These choices reflect legitimate concerns about belonging, but may also reflect information gaps about school quality. What this means for policy: Simply removing barriers isn't enough. Effective centralized choice systems need: ✓ Comprehensive information on both academic quality AND school climate ✓ Clear data on safety, inclusiveness, and well-being ✓ Better platform design—parents often spend only minutes applying ✓ Personalized guidance, not just generic rankings ✓ Explicit explanation of how matching algorithms work The opportunity: Pioneering work by Jishnu Das and colleagues in Pakistan and Chris Neilson and colleagues in Chile demonstrated that targeted information interventions can dramatically improve parental choices. We've replicated these approaches in Haiti, Ecuador, and Peru with similar findings. We're now testing these insights on choice platforms in Recife, Brazil, with promising early results. The welfare gains from improving school access for disadvantaged students are substantial. This research points toward specific design features that could help centralized choice systems deliver on their promise of integration.

The current debate between Jane Caro and the ISA presents as a far more important conversation than the usual shallow “public versus private” nonsense it's too often reduced to. And if we’re being intellectually honest, both sides are commencing with arguments comprising truth. Margery Evans rightly points out that many independent schools are not elite enclaves filled with wealthy children arriving by helicopter. Plenty of low-fee independent schools serve migrant communities, regional communities and families making significant financial sacrifices because they genuinely believe they’re doing the best thing for their children. Pretending otherwise weakens the credibility of the broader argument. And … there are also schools receiving government funding that aren’t all that far away from that cartoonish mental image either. But Caro’s position is ultimately the stronger one because she speaks less about individual families and more about what happens structurally to a nation when education provision is commoditised. Parents acting rationally within a market system is not the issue here. Parents will always seek opportunity, safety and aspiration for their own children. Why wouldn't they? The OECD has repeatedly warned that increased school choice deepens social segregation between schools without significantly improving whole-system performance. Systems become more stratified socially and economically while complexity increasingly pools in public schools. Australia is hardly immune from this phenomena and I suspect most school leaders know this instinctively, even if many feel professionally or politically uncomfortable discussing it too openly. Once education starts operating via market logic, schools inevitably begin competing for enrolments, reputation and social capital. Over time, some schools strategically accumulate advantage while others accumulate disproportionate complexity around disability support, behaviour support, trauma and poverty. This is not about villainy. It’s about incentives and systems doing precisely what they were designed to do. That’s why I think Jane Caro’s argument carries more substance. She is asking us to think systemically rather than tribally. I work with brilliant schools across every sector and many independent schools are deeply values-driven places doing wonderful work for young people. But Australia does need to reckon honestly with what happens when public education is decreasingly viewed as a collective democratic institution and rather the fallback option for families unable to enter an increasingly competitive schools market. #PublicEducation #EducationPolicy #SchoolChoice #AustralianEducation

Nigeria’s education policies are accidentally creating the inequality they claim to solve. Here’s the contradiction: 𝗪𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 “𝗳𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮𝗹𝗹” 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀. We spend resources regulating private schools but barely invest in public alternatives. The result we are getting is a two-tier system where family income determines educational opportunity. The reality in many public schools: 📍 Irregular salary payments drive away qualified teachers 📍 Students face overcrowded classrooms with insufficient desks 📍 Science labs lack basic equipment 📍 Libraries contain outdated materials Meanwhile, private schools nearby: 📌 Offer modern facilities and smaller class sizes 📌 Attract quality teachers with better compensation 📌 Provide resources that make learning engaging But here’s the policy contradiction nobody talks about: We spend enormous resources regulating private schools, doing all manner of inspections and compliance checks. Yet we barely invest in making public schools competitive alternatives. We’re essentially using government resources to monitor the schools that work while neglecting the ones that don’t. This creates a vicious cycle: 🔹 Quality teachers leave public schools for better conditions elsewhere. 🔹 Parents who can afford it abandon public schools entirely. 🔹 Public schools lose community support and political pressure for improvement. The gap widens every year. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱𝘆 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁. It’s that our policies make them the only viable option for quality education. Other countries have thriving public school systems alongside private alternatives. But they invest in public education while regulating private options not the reverse. What if Nigerian education policy focused on: ✅ Making public schools so good that private schools had to compete on quality, not just by default ✅ Using successful private school models to improve public education delivery ✅ Creating partnerships instead of false competition between sectors 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱𝗻’𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀. It should be ensuring every Nigerian child has access to quality education, regardless of their parents’ economic status. 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝘀𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗲𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝘀. 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹, 𝘄𝗲 𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮 𝘀𝗼𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘁𝘆 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵.w

Idaho's $50 million education gamble has parents cheering. But educators are furious—warning it bankrupts schools. Here's how it reshapes education—and why 49 states are watching: Governor Little signed Idaho's first-ever school choice program—giving families up to $5,000 per child (or $7,500 for special needs). The refundable tax credit helps all eligible families. They can design custom education plans with funds for private schools, online programs, textbooks, tutoring, and transportation. Imagine when learning adapts to the child, not the other way around! This puts parents in control of their child's education. Struggling with math? Access specialized tutoring. Have unique talents? Find programs that nurture those gifts. Families can choose environments that match their values and learning styles. For homeschool families, it's especially helpful. After years of financial self-reliance, they'll have resources for quality curriculum, innovative materials, and specialized learning tools. This validates their choice and recognizes their contribution to educational diversity. Private schools across Idaho are preparing for this educational renaissance. Many are developing expansion plans and innovative programs. This healthy competition will drive advancement in all learning environments. When schools must earn their students, quality and innovation naturally accelerate. We must admit that some schools in America (largely low-income) are failing our students. To continue to do nothing fails these kids forever. But programs like this allow states to fund public schools while still creating a chance to do what's right for kids who aren't served well because of their unique needs. This unlocks incredible educational diversity: • Cutting-edge STEM programs • Arts-focused immersive learning • Specialized learning environments • Dynamic online education platforms Every child deserves an education as unique as they are! And when education adapts to them, we'll see more children blossom. But let's talk practicalities: Property taxes could increase if public school funding shifts dramatically. Wisconsin faced tax adjustments after implementing something similar. The full financial impact will emerge over time and we should all keep an eye on it as things develop. The program thoughtfully supports unique learning needs: The $7,500 credit for students with disabilities recognizes their specialized requirements. This transforms options for families seeking programs matched to specific learning styles. It looks like the future is here. This $50 million investment opens new educational possibilities. Will it improve learning outcomes? Create personalized options? Spark innovation? Or will financial hurdles emerge? 49 states are watching as Idaho tests what's possible.

For decades, public funds have been used to subsidize private schooling, but recent debates over the practice have been reinvigorated as the scope of these programs has soared. Historically, the majority of this funding was only available to students who were low income, had special needs or attended poorly performing public schools. Over the past three years, that’s shifted: Today, at least 33 states offer private school choice programs, and of those 12 are “universal,” meaning any student, regardless of income or need, can apply for government funding to subsidize private, religious and — in some cases — home schools. Comprehensive analysis of the scale of these initiatives and their implications — both for students and state budgets — has been sparse. But a report released earlier this month by FutureEd, a research think tank based at Georgetown’s School of Public Policy, looks to change that. https://lnkd.in/gWh28v-g