Notes on: Witte, J. 1999. “The Milwaukee Voucher Experiment: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.”

 Prepared by Ariadna73    Page 1 of 2 

Brief description of the MPCP program

The program started in 1990

Requisites to participate Incomes 175%of the poverty line or less Students could not have been in private schools in the previous year Only secular private schools could participate Schools had to select students randomly if they had more demand Number of voucher students in a school were limited (49% initially, and then 65% in 1993) Vouchers were worth $2,500 initially and then raised to $4,900 per child

The writer of this article evaluated this program for five years. His findings were used in legislative debates leading to the expansion of the program to include religious schools

The good Targeted toward poor families Many previously bankrupt schools benefited from economic advantages and are now

solvent Teacher turnover declined

The bad Some public school lost their more active parents

• Low-income parents that really cared for their children's education went over to private schools and left the public schools without their support

• The children showed achievements for the private schools and the children of uncaring parents stayed in public schools driving the achievements to the bottom

• Of course, the private schools said that it was all their doing, but the parents are a strong influence!

• This was an argument used by the supporters of the expansion of the program

Student attrition from the private schools

• Approximately 30% of the students left the choice schools each year • However, the schools continued to show off good academic achievements and the

researchers wonder how they do it without students!

Closure of four private schools

• Three schools filed for bankruptcy and one ceased operation in the third year of the program

Notes on: Witte, J. 1999. “The Milwaukee Voucher Experiment: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.”

 Prepared by Ariadna73    Page 2 of 2 

• Two of the principals were indicted and one was in prison at the time of the article was written.

Achievement test scores

• Both public and private schools held their own in terms of national achievement gains

The results of the tests show volatility and change, but no specific tendency Supporters focused in the differences in math and language and rejecters focused

in the dropping of the test scores. There were arguments at each side's disposal

• The studies have many problems, and the analysts used them at their convenience, but in the end, nobody really could relay on those numbers

Many rejected students disappeared The remaining rejected students were less able students So, how come the numbers show improvement?

Because the tests of the rejected students have their names, but the bubbles (where they should respond) are empty, so they received the lowest score, and those scores were compared to the students that were not rejected, and the not rejected showed at least a point (because the bubbles were filled), so the study was able to show improvement!

The ugly The use of highly dubious research findings to support the expansion of the program Politicians expanded the program to parochial schools based on studies that were not

valid • And took care on eliminating the annual evaluations, so there is no way of determining

how the new program and schools are doing

The expansion will lead to middle-class families benefiting from the program, and increasing the social gap. The ugliest is yet to come :-(