IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v20y2001i1p43-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The uneven playing field of school choice: Evidence from new zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Helen F Ladd

    (Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University)

  • Edward B Fiske

    (Durham, NC)

Abstract

New Zealand's 10-year experience with self-governing schools operating in a competitive environment provides new insights into school choice initiatives now being hotly debated in the United States with limited evidence. This article examines how New Zealand's system of parental choice of schools played out in that country's three major urban areas with particular emphasis on the sorting of students by ethnic and socioeconomic status. The analysis documents that schools with large initial proportions of minorities (Maori and Pacific Island students in the New Zealand context) were at a clear disadvantage in the educational market place relative to other schools and that the effect was to generate a system in which gaps between the “successful” and the “unsuccessful” schools became wider. © 2001 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Suggested Citation

  • Helen F Ladd & Edward B Fiske, 2001. "The uneven playing field of school choice: Evidence from new zealand," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 43-64.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:20:y:2001:i:1:p:43-64
    DOI: 10.1002/1520-6688(200124)20:1<43::AID-PAM1003>3.0.CO;2-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meneses, Francisco & Urzua, Sergio & Paredes, Ricardo & Chumacero, Romulo, 2010. "Distance to School and Competition in the Chilean Schooling System," MPRA Paper 66573, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Pablo González & Alejandra Mizala & Pilar Romaguera, 2002. "Recursos diferenciados a la educación subvencionada en Chile," Documentos de Trabajo 150, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    3. Levon Barseghyan & Damon Clark & Stephen Coate, 2014. "Public School Choice: An Economic Analysis," NBER Working Papers 20701, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Béatrice Boutchenik & Pauline Givord & Olivier Monso, 2020. "How do restrictive zoning and parental choices impact social diversity in schools?: A methodological contribution to the decomposition of segregation indices applied to France," Sciences Po publications 105, Sciences Po.
    5. Jeremy Clark & Susmita Roy Das, 2015. "Evaluating the Returns to Funding Different Measures of Student Disadvantage: Evidence From New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 15/10, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    6. Kertesi, Gábor & Kézdi, Gábor, 2005. "Általános iskolai szegregáció, II. rész. Az általános iskolai szegregálódás folyamata Magyarországon és az iskolai teljesítménykülönbségek [Primary-school segregation II. The process of primary-sch," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 462-479.
    7. Atsushi Yoshida & Katsuo Kogure & Koichi Ushijima, 2009. "School Choice And Student Sorting: Evidence From Adachi Ward In Japan," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 60(4), pages 446-472, December.
    8. Takashi Oshio & Shinpei Sano & Yuko Ueno & Kouichiro Mino, 2010. "Evaluations by parents of education reforms: evidence from a parent survey in Japan," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 229-246.
    9. Peter Bearse & Buly A. Cardak & Gerhard Glomm & B. Ravikumar, 2009. "Why do Education Vouchers Fail?," CAEPR Working Papers 2009-014, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
    10. Stoddard, Christiana & Corcoran, Sean P., 2007. "The political economy of school choice: Support for charter schools across states and school districts," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 27-54, July.
    11. Oscar Montes Pineda & Luis Rubalcaba, 2014. "School choice, equity and efficiency: International evidence from PISA-2012," Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación volume 9, in: Adela García Aracil & Isabel Neira Gómez (ed.), Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación 9, edition 1, volume 9, chapter 31, pages 585-614, Asociación de Economía de la Educación.
    12. Jeremy Clark & Susmita Roy Das, 2014. "Evaluating the Weights and Factors Used in the New Zealand School Decile Funding System," Working Papers in Economics 14/30, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    13. Eric Brunner & Jennifer Imazeki & Stephen L. Ross, 2006. "Universal Vouchers and Racial Segregation," Working papers 2006-01, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2008.
    14. Béatrice Boutchenik & Pauline Givord & Olivier Monso, 2020. "How do restrictive zoning and parental choices impact social diversity in schools?," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03455914, HAL.
    15. Alejandra Mizala & Pilar Romaguera & Carolina Ostoic, 2004. "A Hierarchical Model for Studying Equity and Achievement in the Chilean School Choice System," Documentos de Trabajo 185, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    16. Jean-Michel Plassard & Nhu Tran Thi Thanh, 2009. "Liberté de choix des élèves et concurrence des établissements : un survey de l'analyse du pilotage des systèmes éducatifs par les quasi-marchés," Revue d'économie industrielle, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 99-130.
    17. Carolina Ostoic & Alejandra Mizala & Pilar Romaguera, 2004. "Equity and Achievement in the Chilean School Choice Experience," Econometric Society 2004 Latin American Meetings 232, Econometric Society.
    18. Alan Woodfield & Philip Gunby, 2003. "The Marketization of New Zealand Schools: Assessing Fiske and Ladd," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(3), pages 863-884, September.
    19. Nevbahar Ertas, 2013. "Charter Schools and Student Compositions of Traditional Public Schools," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(2), pages 21582440134, June.
    20. Ricardo Paredes & Matías Fresard, 2018. "Voucher y cierre de escuelas en Chile," Estudios Públicos, Centro de Estudios Públicos, vol. 0(151), pages 7-27.
    21. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/42b5qghoam9ciavp5c1ajog86n is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Jeremy Clark & Susmita Roy Das & Andrea Menclova, 2017. "Evaluating the Effectiveness of School Funding and Targeting Different Measures of Student Disadvantage: Evidence from New Zealand," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(303), pages 576-599, December.
    23. Hans Bonesrønning & Torberg Falch & Bjarne Strøm, 2003. "Teacher Sorting, Teacher Quality, and Student Composition: Evidence from Norway," Working Paper Series 3403, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
    24. William G. Howell, 2004. "Dynamic selection effects in means-tested, urban school voucher programs," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 225-250.
    25. Anders Böhlmark & Helena Holmlund & Mikael Lindahl, 2016. "Parental choice, neighbourhood segregation or cream skimming? An analysis of school segregation after a generalized choice reform," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(4), pages 1155-1190, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:20:y:2001:i:1:p:43-64. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.