Quote:
Originally Posted by Solidus  This is laughable considering that in every other situation choice has lead to the exact opposite. More opportunity, less segregation, and higher general quality. |
Do you have evidence to support that view? For example, on a thread about vouchers I made the following use of published sources:
Prasch and Sheth (2000, What Is Wrong with Education Vouchers?, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 34, pp 509-516) conclude: "education vouchers are not the ‘magic bullet’ that will ‘empower’ parents while efficiently selecting out the lazy, corrupt, and unqualified among the nation's schools and teachers. On the other hand, there is compelling evidence that vouchers will result in less equality of opportunity, less social mobility, and the further exacerbation of social stratification along the lines of race and class." Levin (1998, Educational Vouchers: Effectiveness, Choice, and Costs, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol 17, pp 373-392) writes: “Most of the policy discussion on the effects of educational vouchers has been premised on theoretical or ideological positions rather than evidence. This article analyzes a substantial body of recent empirical evidence on achievement differences between public and private schools; on who chooses and its probable impact on educational equity; and on the comparative costs of public and private schools and an overall voucher system. The findings indicate that: (1) results among numerous studies suggest no difference or only a slight advantage for private schools over public schools in student achievement for a given student, but evidence of substantially higher rates of graduation, college attendance, and college graduation for Catholic high school students; (2) evidence is consistent that educational choice leads to greater socioeconomic (SES) and racial segregation of students; and (3) evidence does not support the contention that costs of private schools are considerably lower than those of public schools, but the costs of an overall voucher infrastructure appear to exceed those of the present system.”
How would you discount this evidence?
Quote:
|
This is hardly an argument for government monopoly of the education service industry. The private education service industry could be subsidized to account for the social benefits not already captured by the profit motive. A voucher system could include this.
|
Given the evidence shows that vouchers encourage inequities, they will not fully capture the available social benefits (nor would more straight-forward subsidies). It is the visible hand of planning, rather than the invisible hand of the market, that will maximise the potential of the education system.