IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The relative efficiency of charter schools: A cost frontier approach

  • Gronberg, Timothy J.
  • Jansen, Dennis W.
  • Taylor, Lori L.

Charters represent an expansion of public school choice, offering free, publicly funded educational alternatives to traditional public schools. One relatively unexplored research question concerning charter schools asks whether charter schools are more efficient suppliers of educational services than are traditional public schools. The potential relative efficiency advantage of charters vis-a-vis traditional publics is one of the mechanisms that supports the hypotheses that charters could improve performance for their students while using the same or fewer resources, and that the systemic effect of charters could lead to improved outcomes for traditional public students without requiring an increase in education sector resources.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027277571100104X
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Economics of Education Review.

Volume (Year): 31 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Pages: 302-317

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:31:y:2012:i:2:p:302-317
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/econedurev

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1994. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," NBER Technical Working Papers 0151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Tim R. Sass, 2006. "Charter Schools and Student Achievement in Florida," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 1(1), pages 91-122, January.
  3. Robert Bifulco & Helen F. Ladd, 2006. "The Impacts of Charter Schools on Student Achievement: Evidence from North Carolina," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 1(1), pages 50-90, January.
  4. Nelson, Charles R & Startz, Richard, 1990. "Some Further Results on the Exact Small Sample Properties of the Instrumental Variable Estimator," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 967-76, July.
  5. Ni, Yongmei, 2009. "The impact of charter schools on the efficiency of traditional public schools: Evidence from Michigan," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 571-584, October.
  6. Zivot, E & Startz, R & Nelson, C-R, 1997. "Valid Confidence Intervals and Inference in the Presence of Weak Instruments," Working Papers 97-17, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
  7. Hung-jen Wang & Peter Schmidt, 2002. "One-Step and Two-Step Estimation of the Effects of Exogenous Variables on Technical Efficiency Levels," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 129-144, September.
  8. Andrews, Matthew & Duncombe, William & Yinger, John, 2002. "Revisiting economies of size in American education: are we any closer to a consensus?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 245-262, June.
  9. Booker, Kevin & Gilpatric, Scott M. & Gronberg, Timothy & Jansen, Dennis, 2007. "The impact of charter school attendance on student performance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 849-876, June.
  10. Imazeki, Jennifer & Reschovsky, Andrew, 2004. "Is No Child Left Behind an Un (or Under) funded Federal Mandate? Evidence from Texas," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 57(3), pages 571-88, September.
  11. Conroy, Stephen J. & Arguea, Nestor M., 2008. "An estimation of technical efficiency for Florida public elementary schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 655-663, December.
  12. Randall Reback, 2006. "Teaching to the Rating: School Accountability and the Distribution of Student Achievement," Working Papers 0602, Barnard College, Department of Economics.
  13. Shawna Grosskopf & Kathy J. Hayes & Lori L. Taylor, 2009. "The Relative Efficiency Of Charter Schools," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 80(1), pages 67-87, 03.
  14. Michael P. Murray, 2006. "Avoiding Invalid Instruments and Coping with Weak Instruments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 111-132, Fall.
  15. Booker, Kevin & Gilpatric, Scott M. & Gronberg, Timothy & Jansen, Dennis, 2008. "The effect of charter schools on traditional public school students in Texas: Are children who stay behind left behind?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 123-145, July.
  16. William D. Duncombe & John Yinger, 2004. "How Much More Does a Disadvantaged Student Cost?," Center for Policy Research Working Papers 60, Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University.
  17. Gronberg, Timothy J. & Jansen, Dennis W. & Taylor, Lori L., 2011. "The Impact Of Facilities On The Cost Of Education," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 64(1), pages 193-218, March.
  18. Bettinger, Eric P., 2005. "The effect of charter schools on charter students and public schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 133-147, April.
  19. Grosskopf, Shawna & Moutray, Chad, 2001. "Evaluating performance in Chicago public high schools in the wake of decentralization," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, February.
  20. Primont, Diane F. & Domazlicky, Bruce, 2006. "Student achievement and efficiency in Missouri schools and the No Child Left Behind Act," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 77-90, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:31:y:2012:i:2:p:302-317. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.