Public School Response to Special Education Vouchers: The Impact of Florida's Mckay Scholarship Program on Disability Diagnosis and Student Achievement in Public Schools

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 138-158

  Winters, Marcus A ^a   Greene, Jay P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

competitive effects; McKay Scholarship Program; school choice; special education; vouchers

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958145755     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: 19351062     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0162373711404220     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Abowd J.,Kramarz F.,Margolis D.High-wage workers and high-wage firms.Econometrica. 1999;67:251-333.
2. Andrews M. J.,Schank T.,Upward R.Practical estimation methods for linked employer-employee data. 2004;:.
3. Bettinger E. P.The effect of charter schools on charter students and public schools.Economics of Education Review. 2005;24:133-147.
4. Bifulco R.,Ladd H. F.The impact of charter schools on student achievement: Evidence from North Carolina.Journal of Education Finance and Policy. 2006;1:50-90.
5. Booker K.,Gilpatric S. M.,Gronberg T.,Jansen D.The effect of charter schools on traditional public school students in Texas: Are children who stay behind left behind?.Journal of Urban Economics. 2008;64:123-145.
6. BuddinR.ZimmerR. (2004). Is charter school competition in California improving the performance of traditional public schools?Unpublished manuscript.
7. Caucutt E.Peer group effects in applied general equilibrium.Economic Theory. 2001;17:25-51.
8. Chakrabarti R.Impact of voucher design on public school performance: Evidence from Florida and Milwaukee voucher programs. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University; 2005:.
9. Cullen J. B.The impact of fiscal incentives on student disability rates.Journal of Public Economics. 2001;87:1557-1589.
10. CullenJ. B.RebackR. (2002). Tinkering toward accolades: School gaming under a performance accountability system. Unpublished manuscript.
11. DhueyE.LipscombS. (2008). The effects of fiscal incentives in special education: Evidence from finance reform. Unpublished manuscript.
12. Epple D.,Romano R.Competition between public and private schools, vouchers and peer group effects.American Economic Review. 1998;88:33-62.
13. Epple D.,Romano R.Educational vouchers and cream skimming. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2002:.
14. Figlio D. N.,Getzler L. S.Accountability, ability, and disability: Gaming the system. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2002:.
15. Figlio D.,Rouse C. E.Do accountability and voucher threats improve low-performing schools?.Journal of Public Economics. 2006;90:239-255.
16. Florida Department of Education. (2009). John M. McKay Scholarship Program, June Quarterly Report, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/Information/McKay/quarterly_reports/mckay_report_june2009.pdf.
17. Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services. (n.d.). Students with disabilities enrollment, ages 6-21, 2008-09. Retrieved from http://www.fldoe.org/ese/pdf/b-621.pdf.
18. Gill B.,Booker K.Handbook of research in education finance and policy. Ladd H. F.Fiske E. B., ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2008:183-202.
19. Greene J. P.,Forster G.Effects of funding incentives on special education enrollment. Manhattan Institute; 2002:.
20. Greene J. P.,Winters M. A.When schools compete: The effects of vouchers on Florida public school achievement. Manhattan Institute; 2003:.
21. Greene J. P.,Winters M. A.An evaluation of the effect of D.C.'s voucher program on public school achievement and racial integration after one year. 2006;:.
22. Hoxby C. M.School choice and school productivity (Or could school choice be a tide that lifts all boats?). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2002:.
23. Hsieh C.,Urquiola M.Paper presented at the UCLA/RAND Joint Labor and Population Workshop; 2001Santa Monica, CA; 2001.
24. Jacob B.Accountability, incentives and behavior: Evidence from school reform in Chicago.Journal of Public Economics. 2005;89:761-796.
25. KwakS. (2008). The impact of intergovernmental incentives on disability rates and special education spending. Unpublished manuscript.
26. Macmillan D. L.,Siperstein G. N.Paper presented at the 2001 LD Summit: Building a Foundation for the Future; 2001Washington, DC; 2001.
27. Mahitivanichcha K.,Parrish T.The implications of fiscal incentives on identification rates and placement in special education: Formulas for influencing best practice.Journal of Education Finance. 2005;31:1-22.
28. McEwan P. J.,Carnoy M.The effectiveness and efficiency of private schools in Chile's voucher system.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2000;22:213-239.
29. Nechyba T.School finance induced migration patterns: The impact of private school vouchers.Journal of Public Economic Theory. 1999;1:5-50.
30. Nechyba T.Mobility, targeting and private school vouchers.American Economic Review. 2000;90:130-146.
31. Nechyba T.The economics of school choice. Hoxby C., ed. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2003:145-194.
32. SassT. R. (2005). Charter schools and student achievement in Florida. Unpublished manuscript.
33. Shepard L. A.,Smith M. L.,Vojir C. P.Characteristics of pupils identified as learning disabled.American Educational Research Journal. 1983;20:309-331.
34. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Table 50: Children 3 to 21 years old served under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part B, by type of disabil0ity: Selected years, 1976-77 through 2007-08. In U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (Ed.), Digest of Education Statistics (2009 ed.). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_050.asp.
35. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Table 51: Percentage distribution of students 6 to 21 years old served under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part B, by educational environment and type of disability: Selected years, fall 1989 through fall 2007. In U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (Ed.), Digest of Education Statistics (2009 ed.). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_051.asp.
36. West M. R.,Peterson P.The efficacy of choice threats within school accountability systems: Results from legislatively induced experiments.Economic Journal. 2006;116:C46-C62.
37. Ysseldyke J.,Algozzine B.,Epps S.A logical and empirical analysis of current practice in classifying students as handicapped.Exceptional Children. 1983;50:160-166.
38. Ysseldyke J. E.,Algozzine B.,Shinn M. R.,McGue M.Similarities and differences between low achievers and students classified learning disabled.Journal of Special Education. 1982;16:73-85.