Public money and privatization in K-12 education

Education Finance in the New Millenium

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 173-191

  Nelson, F Howard ^a   Drown, Rachel ^a   Muir, Ed ^a   Van Meter, Nancy ^a  

^a American Federation of Teachers   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85130799711     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Ascher, Carol, Fruchter, Norm, & Berne, Robert. (1996). Hard lessons: Public Schools and Privatization. New York: Twentieth Century Fund Press.
2. American Federation of Teachers. (1999). Beacon educational management. Washington, DC: Author.
3. American Federation of Teachers. (1995). How private managers make money off pub lic schools: Update on the EAI experience in Baltimore. Washington DC: Author.
4. American Federation ofTeachers. (1994). EAI's mismanagement of federal education programs: The special education and Chapter I track records in Baltimore. Washington, DC: Author.
5. Bezruki, Don, McKim, Karen, Holbert, Rachel, Lecoanet, Robin, Miller, David, & Smith, Joshua. (2000). Milwaukee parental choice program. Madison, WI: Legislative Audi Bureau.
6. Cerasoli, R. J. 1999. A management review of commonwealth charter schools. Boston: Office of the Inspector General. (Visited 3/30/00) Executive Summary: http://www.state.ma.us/ig/publ/chscx.htm; full text: http://www.state.ma.us/ig/publ/chscrpt.pdf.
7. Clune, Eleanor. (1998, June 29). Special report: Outcomes debated as school district resumes control of Turner Elementary. Pittsburgh Gazette.
8. Edison Project. (1998). Second annual report on school performance. New York: Edison Project. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.edisonproject.com/annualframe.html.
9. Edison Project. (1998). Response to the AFT report on student achievement in Edison schools. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.aft.org/research/edisonproject/edrespnd/edresp2.htm.
10. Edison Project. (1997). Annual report on school performance. New York: Edison Project.
11. Evereen Securities. (1999). Educational services industry. Chicago: Author.
12. Hassel, B., & Lin, M. (1999). Contracting for charter school success: A resource guide for clear contracting with school management organizations. St. Paul, MN: Charter School Friends National Network. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.charterfriends.org/partnerships.html.
13. Horn, J., & Miron, G. (1999). Evaluation of the Michigan public school academy initiative. Kalamazoo, MI: Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.mde.state.mi.us/reports/psaeva19901/wmu_finalrpt.pdf.
14. KPMG-Peat Marwick. (1998). Tuition rate study: Study of charter school tuition rate calculations. Boston: Massachusetts Department of Education. (Visited 3/30/00) http://finance1.doe.mass.edu/charter/tuition_study.html.
15. Marsh-Huggins, A. (2000). Report: Ohio's charter schools get poor grades. The Associated Press.
16. Metcalf, Kim K., Muller, Pat, Boone, William, Tait, Polly, Stage, Frances, & Stacey, Nicole. (1998a). A comparative evaluation of the Cleveland scholarship and tutoring grant program. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Center for Education, Indiana University.
17. Metcalf, Kim K., Muller, Pat, Boone, William, Tait, Polly, Stage, Frances, & Stacey, Nicole. (1998b). Evaluation of the Cleveland scholarship program: Second-year report (1997-98), Bloomington, IN: Indiana Center for Education, Indiana University.
18. Montgomery Securities. (1997). The emerging investment opportunity in education. New York: Montgomery Securities.
19. Muir, E, Drown, R., & Nelson, F. H. (2000, March 10). Special education enrollment in charter schools: Implications for a market based education system. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Finance Association, Austin Texas.
20. Mulholland, L. (1999). Arizona charter school progress evaluation. Tempe, AZ: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, Arizona State University. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.ade.state.az.us/charterschools/info/CharterSchoolStatusMainReport3-15-99.pdf.
21. Murphy, Dan, Rosenberg, Bella, & Nelson, F. Howard. (1997, July). The Cleveland voucher program: Who chooses? Who gets chosen? Who pays? Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.aft.org/research/reports/clev/contents.htm.
22. National Center for Education Statistics. (1999). The Digest of Education Statistics, 1998. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. (Visited 3/30/00) .
23. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Characteristics of stayers, movers and leavers: Results from the teacher follow-up survey: 1994-95. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. (Visited 3/30/00) http://nces.ed.gov/pubs97/97450.html.
24. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). The digest of education statistics, 1995. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
25. National Center for Education Statistics. (1991). The digest of education statistics, 1990. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
26. National Education Association. (1997). Status of the American public school teacher, 1995-96. Washington, DC: Author.
27. Nelson, F. Howard. (2000). Setting the record straight: Trends in student achievement for Edison Schools, Inc. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.
28. Nelson, F. Howard. (1998a) Trends in private school cost and tuition: No immunity from the cost disease. Paper presented at American Educational Finance Association, Mobile, Alabama, March. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.aft.org/research/reports/private/privcost/index.htm.
29. Nelson, F. Howard. (1998b). Student achievement in Edison schools: Mixed results in an ongoing enterprise. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.aft.org/research/edisonproject.
30. Nelson, F. Howard. (1997, Spring). How private management firms seek to make money in public schools. Journal of School Business Management. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.aft.org/research/reports/private/jsbm/jsbm.htm.
31. Petro, Jim. (1998). Cleveland scholarship and tutoring program: Special audit report. July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1998. Columbus, OH: Auditor of the State of Ohio.
32. Prince H. (1999). Follow the money: An initial view of elementary charter school spending in Michigan. Journal of Education Finance, 175-194.
33. Public Sector Consultants, Inc., and MAXIMUS, Inc. (PSC/MAXIMUS) (1999). Michigan's charter school initiative: From theory to practice. East Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Education. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.mde.state.mi.us/reports/psaeva19901/pscfullreport.pdf.
34. RPP International, Nelson, B., Berman, P, Ericson, J., Perry, R., Perry, R., Silverman, D., & Soloman, D. (2000). A national study ofcharter schools: Fourth-year report. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.ed.gov/pubs/charter4thyear/.
35. Richards, Craig E., Shore, Rima, & Sawicky, Max B. (1996). Risky business: Private management of public schools. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
36. Tyack, David. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. Williams, Lois C., & Leak, Lawrence E. (1995). The UMBC evaluation of the Tesseract program in Baltimore City. Baltimore, MD: Center for Educational Research, University of Maryland Baltimore Campus.
38. Wood, Jennifer. (2000). Early examination of the Massachusetts charter school initiative. Dartmouth, MA: Donahue Institute, University of Massachusetts. (Visited 3/30/00) http://www.donahue.umassp.edu/.
39. Zollers, N., & Ramanathan, A. (1998). "For-profit charters and students with disabilities: The sordid side of the business of schooling." Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 297-304.