Since the arrival of the first charter school in Minnesota in 1991, charter schools have become one of the largest movements in educational reform. In recent years, research has emerged that has compared the effectiveness of charter schools with their traditional school counterparts. The purpose of this study was to compare the extent of music offerings between charter schools and traditional public schools in the same urban district and geographic location within the city. Results indicated that while all schools in the sample offered significantly less music than national averages, significantly more charter schools offered music during the school day. Charter schools were more likely to offer traditional music (band, choir, orchestra) as electives. Schools with music programs, regardless of school type, had higher test scores and higher attendance rates even when controlling for differences in socioeconomic status between music and non music schools. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for the charter school movement, arts education policy, and suggestions for future research.
AbrilC. R.GaultB. M. (2006). The state of music in the elementary school: The principal’s perspective. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54, 6–20. doi:10.1177/002242940605400102
2.
AbrilC. R.GaultB. M. (2008). The state of music in secondary schools: The principal’s perspective. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56, 68–81. doi:10.1177/0022429408317516
3.
AustinJ. R.RussellJ. A. (2008). Charter schools: Embracing or excluding the arts? In ThompsonL. K.CampbellM. R. (Eds.), Diverse methodologies in the study of music teaching and learning (pp. 163–182). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
4.
BifulcoR.BulkleyK. (2008). Charter schools. In LaddH. F.FiskeE. B. (Eds.), Handbook of research in education finance and policy (pp. 425–446). New York, NY: Routledge.
5.
BifulcoR.LaddH. F. (2007). School choice, racial segregation and test score gaps: Evidence from North Carolina. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(1), 31–56. doi:10.1002/pam.20226
6.
BookerK.GilpatricS. M.GronbergT. J.JansenD. W. (2004). Charter school performance in Texas. Unpublished paper, Texas A&M University.
7.
BuckleyK.FislerJ. (2002). A review of the research on charter schools. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.
8.
BuddinR.ZimmerR. (2003). Academic outcomes. In ZimmerR.. (Eds.), Charter school operations and performance: Evidence from California (pp. 37–62). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
9.
BuddinR.ZimmerR. (2006). Charter school performance in two large urban districts. Journal of Urban Economics, 60, 307–326. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2006.03.003
DemorestS. M.MorrisonS. J. (2000). Does music make you smarter?Music Educators Journal, 87(2), 33–36, 58. doi:10.2307/3399646
14.
EcclesJ. S.BarberB. L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band: What kind of extracurricular involvement matters?Journal of Adolescent Research, 14, 10–43. doi:10.1177/0743558499141003
15.
ElpusK. (2012). Music education and school choice reform: Music programs in New York City charter schools. In ThompsonL. K.CampbellR. M. R. (Eds.), Situating inquiry: Expanded venues for music education research (pp. 79–98). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
16.
ElpusK.AbrilC. R. (2011). High school music ensemble students in the United States: A demographic profile. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59, 128–145. doi:10.1177/0022429411405207
17.
FeldmanA. F.MatjaskoJ. L. (2007). Profiles and portfolios of adolescent school-based extracurricular activity participation. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 313–332. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.03.004
18.
FitzpatrickK. R. (2006). The effect of instrumental music participation and socioeconomic status on Ohio fourth-, sixth-, and ninth-grade proficiency test performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 54, 73–84. doi:10.1177/002242940605400106
19.
GravesC. (2007). Lifting charter school cap essential for quality public education choices in underserved communities. New York Amsterdam News, 98, 12.
20.
GronbergT. J.JansenD. W.TaylorL. L. (2012). The relative efficiency of charter schools: A cost frontier approach. Economics of Education Review, 31, 302–317. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.07.001
KellyA. P.LovelessT. (2012). Comparing new school effects in charter and traditional public schools. American Journal of Education, 118, 427–453. doi:10.1177/0022429408322530
24.
KinneyD. W. (2008). Selected demographic variables, school music participation, and achievement test scores of urban middle school students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56, 145–161.
Lacireno-PaquetN.HolyokeT. T.MoserM.HenigJ. R. (2002). Creaming versus cropping: Charter school enrollment practices in response to market incentives. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 145–158. doi:10.3102/01623737024002145
27.
LovelessT.FieldK. (2011). Perspective on charter schools. In BerendsM.SpringerM. G.BallouD.WalbergJ. H. (Eds.), Handbook of research on school choice (pp. 99–114). London, England: Routledge.
MikszaP. (2007). Music participation and socioeconomic status as correlates of change: A longitudinal analysis of academic achievement. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 172, 41–58.
ParsadB.SpiegelmanM. (2012). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–2010. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from: nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012014.pdf
PrestonC.GoldringE.BerendsM.CannataM. (2012). School innovation in district context: Comparing traditional public schools and charter schools. Economics of Education Review, 31, 318–330. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.07.016
34.
RiveroV. (2009). Turning around schools in need. District Administration, 48(8), 56–61.
35.
SassT. R. (2006). Charter schools and student achievement in Florida. Educational Finance and Policy, 1, 91–122. doi:10.1162/edfp.2006.1.191
36.
SolmanL. C.GoldschmidtP. (2004). Comparison of traditional public schools and charter schools on retention, school switching, and achievement growth. Phoenix, AZ: The Goldwater Institute.
37.
SouthgateD. E.RoscignoV. J. (2009). The impact of music on childhood and adolescent achievement. Social Science Quarterly, 90(1), 4–21. doi:10.1111/j.15406237.2009.00598.x
38.
TienkenC. H.OrlichD. C. (2013). The school reform landscape: Fraud, myth, and lies. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
39.
Vander ArkT. (2002). The case for small high schools. Educational Leadership, 59(5), 55–59.
40.
VeblenK. K. (2007). The many ways of community music. International Journal of Community Music, 1(1), 5–21.
41.
WallickM. (1998). A comparison study of Ohio proficiency test results between fourth-grade string pullout students and those of matched ability. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46, 237–247. doi:10.2307/3345626
42.
ZimmerR.GillB.BookerK.LavertuS.WitteJ. (2012). Examining charter student achievement effects across seven states. Economics of Education Review, 31(2), 213–224.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
