School diversification in second-best education markets: International evidence and conflicting theories of change

Educational Policy

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 323-344

  Lubienski, Christopher ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Education markets; Public education; School choice

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645660923     PISSN: 08959048     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0895904805284049     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Arrow, K. J. (1963). Social choice and individual values. New York: Wiley.
2. Becker, G. (1999, September). Competition. Paper presented for the Heritage Foundation 25th Anniversary Leadership for America Lectures, Chicago.
3. Bennett, C. (1994). The New Zealand principal post-Picot. Journal of Educational Administration, 32 (2). 35-44.
4. Borcherding, T. (1977). Budgets and bureaucrats. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
5. Brighouse, H. (2000). School choice and social justice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6. Buchanan, J. M. (2000). The limits of liberty: Between anarchy and Leviathan. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
7. Buchanan, J. M., Tollison, R. D., & Tullock, G. (1980). Toward a theory of the rent-seeking society. College Station: Texas A&M University.
8. Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1999). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
9. Cameron, D. (1997). Selling the house to pay the mortgage: What is behind privatization? Studies in Political Economy, 53, 11-36.
10. Carnoy, M. (1998). National voucher plans in Chile and Sweden: Did privatization reforms make for better education? Comparative Education Review, 42 (3). 309-338.
11. Carnoy, M., & McEwan, P. (2000, April). Private and public schools in the context of the Chilean voucher plan and voucher-like plans in Europe. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
12. Chamberlin, E. (1933). The theory of monopolistic competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). Politics, markets, and America's schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
14. Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1992). A lesson in school reform from Great Britain. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
15. Department for Education. (1992). Choice and diversity: A new framework for schools. London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.
16. Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 26 (3). 1120-1171.
17. Edwards, T., & Whitty, G. (1997). Specialisation and selection in secondary education. Oxford Review of Education, 23 (1). 5-15.
18. Espínola, V. (1993). The educational reform of the military regime in Chile: The school system's response to competition, choice, and market relations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wales, Cardiff.
19. Fiske, E. B., & Ladd, H. F. (2000). When schools compete: A cautionary tale. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
20. Fitz, J., Halpin, D., & Power, S. (1997). 'Between a rock and a hard place': Diversity, institutional identity and grant-maintained schools. Oxford Review of Education, 23 (1). 17-30.
21. Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22. Friedman, M. (1994). The case for choice. In K. L. Billingsley (Ed.), Voices on choice: The education reform debate (pp. 91-101). San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy.
23. Friedman, M. (1995). Public schools: Make them private (Briefing Paper No. 23). Washington, DC: Cato Institute. Retrieved on August 11, 1998, from http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-023.html.
24. Gauri, V. (1998). School choice in Chile: Two decades of educational reform. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
25. Gewirtz, S., Ball, S. J., & Bowe, R. (1995). Markets, choice and equity in education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
26. Gintis, H. (1995). The political economy of school choice. Teachers College Record, 96 (3). 462-511.
27. Glatter, R., Woods, P. A., & Bagley, C. (1997). Diversity, differentiation and hierarchy: School choice and parental preferences. In R. Glatter, P. A. Woods, & C. Bagley (Eds.), Choice and diversity in schooling: Perspectives and prospects (pp. 7-28). London: Routledge.
28. Gordon, L. (1994). 'Rich' and 'poor' schools in Aotearoa. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 29 (2). 113-125.
29. Gordon, L., & Whitty, G. (1997). Giving the 'hidden hand' a helping hand? The rhetoric and reality of neoliberal education reform in England and New Zealand. Comparative Education, 33 (3). 453-468.
30. Greene, J. D. (1996). How much privatization? A research note examining the use of privatization by cities in 1982 and 1992. Policy Studies Journal, 24 (4). 632-641.
31. Halpin, D., Power, S., & Fitz, J. (1997). Opting into the past? Grant-maintained schools and the reinvention of tradition. In R. Glatter, P. A. Woods, & C. Bagley (Eds.), Choice and diversity in schooling: Perspectives and prospects (pp. 59-70). London: Routledge.
32. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Hsieh, C.-T., & Urquiola, M. (2002). When schools compete, how do they compete? An assessment of Chile's nationwide school voucher program (Occasional Paper No. 43). New York: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education.
34. Kalt, J. P., & Zupan, M. A. (1984). Capture and ideology in economic theory of politics. American Economic Review, 74 (3). 279-300.
35. Kirp, D. L. (2003). Shakespeare, Einstein, and the bottom line: The marketing of higher education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36. Lauder, H., Hughes, D., Watson, S., Waslander, S., Thrupp, M., Strathdee, R., et al. (1999). Trading in futures: Why markets in education don't work. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
37. Levin, B. (1997). The lessons of international education reform. Journal of Education Policy, 12 (4). 253-266.
38. Levin, B., & Young, J. (1999). The origins of educational reform: A comparative perspective. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 12. Retrieved May 20, 2001, from http://www.umanitoba.ca/publications/ cjeap/articles/younglevin.html
39. Lipsey, R. G., & Lancaster, K. (1956). The general theory of the second best. Review of Economic Studies, 24 (1). 11-32.
40. Lubienski, C. (2001). The relationship of competition and choice to innovation in education markets. (Occasional Paper No. 26). New York: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, Teachers College, Columbia University.
41. Lubienski, C. (2003). Innovation in education markets: Theory and evidence on the impact of competition and choice in charter schools. American Educational Research Journal, 40 (2). 395-443.
42. Lubienski, C. (2004). Charter school innovations in theory and practice: Autonomy, R&D, and curricular conformity. In K. E. Bulkley & P. Wohlstetter (Eds.), Taking account of charter schools: What's happened and what's next? (pp. 72-90). New York: Teachers College Press.
43. Lubienski, C. (2005). Marketizing education: Implications and unintended consequences of instrumentalism on the organizational behavior of schools. American Journal of Education, 111 (4). 464-486.
44. Mansfield, E. (1970). Microeconomics: Theory and applications. New York: Norton.
45. McGeorge, C. (1995). Private and integrated schools in New Zealand: Subsidizing the illusion of choice. Journal of Education Policy, 10 (3). 259-270.
46. Mikuta, J. (1999). Education as a commodity in New Zealand. In N. Alexiadou & C. Brock (Eds.), Education as a commodity (pp. 149-163). Suffolk, UK: John Catt.
47. Mueller, D. C. (1979). Public choice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48. Niskanen, W. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government. Chicago: Aldine.
49. Oettle, K. (1997). Has there been a change of paradigm in managerial economics from the public enterprise toward the regulated (privatized) enterprise? Annals of Public and Co-Operative Economy, 68 (3). 367-377.
50. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York: Plume.
52. Parry, T. R. (1997a). Decentralization and privatization: Education policy in Chile. Journal of Public Policy, 17 (1). 107-134.
53. Parry, T. R. (1997b). How will schools respond to the incentives of privatization?: Evidence from Chile and implications for the United States. American Review of Public Administration, 27 (3). 248-269.
54. Peterson, P. E. (1990). Monopoly and competition in American education. In W. H. Clune & J. F. Witte (Eds.), Choice and control in American education, Volume 1: The theory of choice and control in education (pp. 47-78). London: Falmer.
55. Picot, B., & Taskforce to Review Education Administration. (1988). Administering for excellence: Effective administration in education. Wellington, NZ: Government Printer.
56. Power, S., Fitz, J., & Halpin, D. (1994). Parents, pupils and grant maintained schools. British Educational Research Journal, 20 (2). 209-226.
57. Power, S., Halpin, D., & Fitz, J. (1994). Underpinning choice and diversity? The grant-maintained schools policy in context. In S. Tomlinson (Ed.), Educational reform and its consequences. London: IPPR/Rivers Oram.
58. Robinson, J. (1933). The economics of imperfect competition. London: Macmillan.
59. Robson, W. (2001). Publicly funded education in Ontario: Breaking the deadlock. In C. R. Hepburn (Ed.), Can the market save our schools? (pp. 13-39). Vancouver, BC: The Fraser Institute.
60. Romer, T., & Rosenthal, H. (1979). Bureaucrats versus voters: On the political economy of resource allocation by direct democracy. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 93 (4). 563-587.
61. Schneider, M., & Buckley, J. (2002). What do parents want from schools: Evidence from the internet. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24 (2). 133-144.
62. Schumpeter, J. A. (1943). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. London: G. Allen & Unwin.
63. Stigler, G. J. (1998). The theory of economic regulation. In R. B. Ekelund (Ed.), The foundations of regulatory economics. Vol. II: Modern approaches to regulatory economics (pp. 81-99). Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar.
64. Stiglitz, J. E. (1991). The invisible hand and modern welfare economics (Working Paper No. 3641). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
65. Stout, R. T., & Garn, G. A. (1999). Nothing new: Curricula in Arizona charter schools. In R. Maranto, S. Milliman, F. Hess, & A. Gresham (Eds.), School choice in the real world: Lessons from Arizona charter schools (pp. 159-172). Boulder, CO: Westview.
66. Thrupp, M. (1999). Schools making a difference - let's be realistic! School mix, school effectiveness, and the social limits of reform. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
67. Tiebout, C. M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64 (4). 416-424.
68. Tooley, J. (1996). Education without the state. London: Institute of Economic Affairs, Education and Training Unit.
69. Treasury. (1987). Government management: Volume II - Education issues. Wellington, NZ: Government Printer.
70. Tullock, G. E. (1979). Public choice in practice. In C. S. Russell (Ed.), Collective decision making: Applications from public choice theory (pp. 27-45). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
71. Walberg, H. J., & Bast, J. L. (2001). Understanding market-based school reform. In M. C. Wang & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), School choice or best systems: What improves education? (pp. 3-38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
72. Walberg, H. J., & Bast, J. L. (2003). Education and capitalism: How overcoming our fear of markets and economics can improve America's schools. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.
73. Walford, G. (1997a). Diversity, choice, and selection in England and Wales. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33, 158-169.
74. Walford, G. (1997b). Introduction. Oxford Review of Education, 23 (1). 3-4.
75. Walford, G. (1997c). Sponsored grant-maintained schools: Extending the franchise? Oxford Review of Education, 23 (1). 31-44.
76. Waslander, S., & Thrupp, M. (1995). Choice, competition and segregation: An empirical analysis of a New Zealand secondary school market, 1990-93. Journal of Education Policy, 10 (1). 1-26.
77. West, E. G. (1982). The public monopoly and the seeds of self-destruction. In M. E. Manley-Casimir (Ed.), Family choice in schooling: Issues and dilemmas (pp. 185-198). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
78. Whitty, G. (1997). Creating quasi-markets in education: A review of recent research on parental choice and school autonomy in three countries. In W. L. Boyd & J. G. Cibulka (Eds.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 22, pp. 3-47). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
79. Whitty, G., & Power, S. (1997). Quasi-markets and curriculum control: Making sense of recent education reform in England and Wales. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33, 219-240.
80. Whitty, G., Power, S., & Halpin, D. (1998). Devolution and choice in education: The school, the state, and the market. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
81. Willms, J. D., & Echols, F. (1992). Alert and inert clients: The Scottish experience of parental choice of schools. Economics of Education Review, 11 (4). 339-350.
82. Woods, P. A., Bagley, C., & Glatter, R. (1998). School choice and competition: Markets in the public interest? London: Routledge.