Markets in Education effects , impact and diversity

1. MarketsinEducationeffects, impactanddiversity Alexandre Homem Cristo ECNAIS, Warsaw, November 18th 2011

2. Presentation • SYSTEM - Effectsofcompetition • Effectsonstudentachievement • Effectson performance ofstateschools • PARENTS - Howparentschoosetheirchildren’sschool? • Andwhy some chooseprivateoverpublic? • SCHOOLS – How to dealwithcompetition? • Adaptationandefficiency • Reputation as a marketing strategy • Efficiency (cost) vs diversity: a dilemma • Diversity as a strategy • Whydon’tschoolmarketsworkbetter?

3. What are marketsinEducation? • In OECD, marketsineducation are a reality, evenincountrieswherethere’s no schoolchoice. • So, no use arguingaboutit, wehave to learnhow to use them to thebeneficitofstudents. • What are marketmechanisms? • Competition • Choice • Organizationalstrategy

4. Effectsonstudentsachievement • Mixedresults: a lotofresearchbutdifferentconclusions (becauseofmethodology). • No universal relationshipbetweenschoolchoiceandeffectiveness. • USA – Charter andMagnetschools • Major study (CREDO, 2009): 37% of charter schoolshaveworseresultsthanpublicschools, only 17% havebetterresults. • But, performance improvesalongtime (Saas, 2006; Booker et al., 2007). • But, trackingoflotterywinners shows very positive resultsin Charter schools (Hoxby and Murarka, 2009; Kane et al., 2009). Same for magnet schools (Bifulco, 2009).

5. Effectsonstudentsachievement • It’sallaboutlookingatdetails • Denmark: An average student would get better results in a Catholic or grammar school; equal results in Protestant or international schools; and worse results in free and Waldorf schools (Rangvid, 2008) • Denmark: students with a high socioeconomic produce better results in independent schools, while students with low socioeconomic produce better results in public schools (Andersen, 2008). • No consensus about positive or negative effects of school choice on student achievement. We have to look at the context.

6. Effectsofcompetitiononstateschools • Many argued that competition caused by the independent schools would lead to improvement of state public schools. Did it happen? • “Equilibrium problem” (Loeb et al., 2011) • Mixedresultsinthe US and UK • Positive effectsinSweden, Netherlands (primaryeducation). Barelysignificanteffects. • Negative effectsinDenmark.

7. Howparentschoose a school • Researchidentifies a 2 stages-process: • Gather a setofpossiblechoices. • Rankschoolswithinthissetbypreferredcriteria. • Whatcriteria do parentsmention as mostimportant • Qualityofeducation; Distance; Satisfactionofstudent (andalsoparents); schoolcomposition (veryfew) • Inpractice, thebestcriteria to predictparents’ choiceisschoolcomposition. • Case-studyin Chile (Elacqua et al., 2006).

8. Howparentschoose a school • Whyschoolcompositionandwhatconsequences? • Parentsmayinterpretschoolcomposition as anindicator for quality. • Whatinformation do parents use? • Itwouldbeimportant to knowwhatinformationparents use, butitisdificult to knowwhichindicatorshadgreaterimpactonthedecision. • Formal information vs informal information. • Theschool’sreputation as a summaryofinformation. • Informationhaslessimpactonschoolchoicethanitwasthought.

9. Whyparentschooseprivateschools • Reasonsvarywithnationalcontext. • UK: householdincomeand regional inequality • Australia: householdincomeandgenerationeffect • OECD: social classreproduction vs. choiceoftheoutsiders • The case in Portugal. • Securityandleadershipinschools (trustrelationship) • Earlyschoolleaving (schoolcompositionisimportant) • Reputationaboutquality (real informationisscarce)

10. Howschoolsdealwithcompetitionanddiversity • Diversityisthemainquestiononschoolchoice. • Schoolchoicehasopenedopportunities to schooldiversity: • Charter andmagnetschoolsinthe US • Academiesandfreeschoolsinthe UK • “charter schools” inSweden • One-to-oneeducation (technology) • DenmarkandNetherlands

11. Howschoolsdealwithcompetitionanddiversity • Little research on how schools respond to competition (Waslander, 2010). • 2 possibilities (the school decides): • to cooperate • to adopt a competitive behavior • It means that competitive behavior is a choice of schools, not a innate condition of markets.

12. Howschoolsdealwithcompetitionanddiversity • One consequence of competition is an investment in marketing • Loss of efficiency • Ever more complex marketing strategies (cf. UK) • In Portugal, parents choose mainly because of reputation. How do schools use it for marketing: • Opening to local community (São João de Brito) • Creating a quality brand (Grupo GPS) • Involving parents (ColégioPlanalto)

13. Efficiency (costs) and diversity • Efficiency = equal or higher achievement at a lower per-pupil cost. • The dilemma: diversity adds costs! • The first danger: inefficency (no better results) • The second danger: create diversity that students do not want/need.

14. How schools adapt to the need of diversity • Cosmetic customization • Postponing the decoupling point • Collaborations and combinations • Reducing heterogeneity • Adding resources • Digitizing learning material (e-learning)

15. Conclusion: whydon’teducationmarketsworkbetter? • Information does notreachparentsproperly. • Schoolleadersdon’thavequalityinformationabouttheschoolmarketintheirarea. • Marketing strategiesthat are more emotionalthanbasedonquality. • Schoolchoiceandaccess to schoolsisharderthanitwouldseem. • Increasinghousepricesaroundthebestschools. • Itiseasier to investin marketing thaninquality.

16. Reflection • Freedomofchoicemeans, firstofall, havingchoices to choosefrom, iediversity. • Diversityshouldbethemainidea, notquality. Manycriticsofschoolchoicequestionitbecauseithasnotimprovequality. Isthattrue? Wedon’treallyknow, butweknowthat, atleast, qualityhasnotdecreased, andthatchildrenhavenow more options for theireducation. • How do schoolsindifferentcountrieshavedevelopeddiversity?

17. Theend • Thankyou. ahcristo@gmail.com