Dynamic Participation in Interdistrict Open Enrollment

Abstract

Interdistrict open enrollment is the nation’s largest and most widespread school choice program, but our knowledge of these programs is limited. Drawing on 5 years of student-level data from the universe of public school attendees in Colorado, we perform a three-stage analysis to examine the dynamics of student participation in the state’s interdistrict open enrollment program. First, we explore the characteristics of students who open enroll in a defined baseline year. Second, we analyze the characteristics of students who continue to participate in the program in subsequent years. Finally, we examine the characteristics of students who—conditional on not open enrolling in the defined-baseline year—choose to participate in the program in one or more subsequent years.

Keywords

policy politics of education educational policy educational reform

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alexander

K. L.

Entwisle

D. R.

Dauber

S. L.

(1996). Children in motion: School transfers and elementary school performance. Journal of Educational Research, 90, 3-12.

Armor

D. J.

Peiser

B. M.

(1998). Interdistrict choice in Massachusetts. In Peterson

P. E.

Hassel

B. C.

(Eds.), Learning from school choice (pp. 157-186). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Ballou

Teasley

Zeidner

(2006, September 29). Charter schools in Idaho. Presented at the National Conference on Charter School Research at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.

Beales

Wahl

(1995). Private vouchers in Milwaukee: The PAVE program. In Moe

(Ed.), Private vouchers (pp. 41-73). Stanford, CA: Hoover Institute.

Betts

Fairlie

R. W.

(2001). Explaining Ethnic, Racial and Immigrant Differences in Private School Attendence. Journal of Urban Economics, 50 (1), 26-51.

Bifulco

Ladd

H. F.

(2006). The impacts of charter schools on student achievement: Evidence from North Carolina. Education Finance and Policy, 1, 50-90.

Boyd

W. L.

Hare

Nathan

(2002). What really happened? In Hubert

(Ed.) Minnesota’s experience with statewide public school choice programs (pp. 1-77). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Center for school change, Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs.

Buckley

Schneider

(2007). Charter schools: Hope or hype? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Campbell

D. E.

West

M. R.

Peterson

P. E.

(2005). Participation in a national, means-tested school voucher program. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24, 523-541.

10.

Carlson

Cowen

J. M.

Fleming

D. J.

(2013). Life after vouchers: What happens to private school students when they return to the public sector. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35, 179-199.

11.

Carlson

Lavery

Witte

J. F.

(2011). The determinants of interdistrict open enrollment flows. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 76-94.

12.

Chakrabarti

(2011). Vouchers, responses, and the test-taking population: Regression discontinuity evidence from Florida (Staff Reports No. 486). New York: Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

13.

Cowen

(2010). Who chooses, who refuses? Learning more from students who decline private school vouchers. American Journal of Education, 117, 1-24.

14.

Cowen

J. M.

Fleming

D. J.

Witte

J. F.

Wolf

P. J.

(2012). Going public: Who leaves a large, longstanding, and widely available urban voucher program? American Educational Research Journal, 49, 231-256.

15.

Cowen

J. M.

Winters

M. A.

(2013). Do charters retain teachers differently than traditional public schools? Evidence from elementary schools in Florida. Education Finance and Policy, 1, 14-42.

16.

Engberg

Gill

Zamarro

Zimmer

(2012). Closing schools in a shrinking district: Do student outcomes depend on which schools are closed? Journal of Urban Economics, 71, 189-203.

17.

Figlio

Hart

Metzger

(2010). Who uses a means-tested scholarship, and what do they choose? Economics of Education Review, 10, 301-317.

18.

Figlio

D. N.

Stone

J. A.

(2001). Can Public Policy Affect Private School Cream-Skimming? Journal of Urban Economics, 49, 240-266.

19.

Fossey

(1994). Open enrollment in Massachusetts: Why families choose. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 16, 320-334.

20.

Fowler

F. C.

(1996). Participation in Ohio’s inter district open enrollment option: Exploring the supply-side of choice. Educational Policy, 10, 518-536.

21.

Goldhaber

Hansen

(2009). National board certification and teachers’ career paths: Does NBPTS certification influence how long teachers remain in the profession and where they teach? Education Finance and Policy, 4, 229-262.

22.

Hanushek

E. A.

Kain

J. F.

Rivkin

S. G.

(2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39, 326-354.

23.

Hanushek

E. A.

Kain

J. F.

Rivkin

S. G.

Branch

G. F.

(2007). Charter school quality and parental decision making with school choice. Journal of Public Economics, 91, 823-848.

24.

Hastings

J. S.

Kane

Staiger

(2008). Heterogeneous preferences and the efficacy of public school choice. NBER Working Paper, 2145).

25.

Holme

J. J.

Richards

M. P.

(2009). School choice and stratification in regional context: Examining the role of inter-district choice. Peabody Journal of Education, 84, 150-171.

26.

Howell

W. G.

(2004). Dynamic selection effects in means-tested, urban school voucher programs. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23, 225-250.

27.

Howell

W. G.

Peterson

P. E.

(2006). The education gap: Vouchers and urban schools (2 ed.). Brookings Institution Press.

28.

Ingersoll

G. M.

Scamman

J. P.

Eckerling

W. D.

(1989). Geographic mobility and student achievement in an urban setting. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 143-149.

29.

Kerbow

Azcoitia

Buell

(2003). Student mobility and local school improvement in Chicago. Journal of Negro Education, 72, 158-164.

30.

Lankford

Wyckoff

(2001). Who would be left behind by enhanced private school choice? Journal of Urban Economics, 50, 288-312.

31.

Lash

A. A.

Kirkpatrick

S. L.

(1990). A classroom perspective on student mobility. The Elementary School Journal, 91, 176-191.

32.

Lash

A. A.

Kirkpatrick

S. L.

(1994). Interrupted lessons: Teacher views of transfer student education. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 813-843.

33.

Long

J. E.

Toma

E. F.

(1988). The Determinants of Private School Attendance, 1970-1980. Review of Economics and Statistics, 351-357.

34.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Charter schools: Fast facts. Retrieved from http://Nces.Ed.Gov/Fastfacts/Display.Asp?Id=30

35.

Paul

K. M.

Legan

N. A.

Metcalf

K. K.

(2007). Differential entry into a voucher program: A longitudinal examination of families who apply to and enroll in the Cleveland scholarship and tutoring program. Education and Urban Society, 39, 223-243.

36.

Plank

S. B.

DeLuca

Estacion

(2008). High school dropout and the role of career and technical education: A survival analysis of surviving high school. Sociology of Education, 81, 345-370.

37.

Podgursky

Monroe

Watson

(2004). The academic quality of public school teachers: An analysis of entry and exit behavior. Economics of Education Review, 23, 507-518.

38.

Reback

(2008). Teaching to the rating: School accountability and the distribution of student achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1394-1415.

39.

Rouse

C. E.

(1998). Private school vouchers and student achievement: An evaluation of the Milwaukee parental choice program. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 553-602.

40.

Rumberger

R. W.

Larson

K. A.

Ream

R. K.

Palardy

G. J.

(1999). The Educational Consequences of Mobility for California Students and Schools. Berkeley, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education.

41.

Sass

T. R.

(2006). Charter schools and student achievement in Florida. Education Finance and Policy, 1, 91-122.

42.

South

S. J.

Haynie

D. L.

Bose

(2007). Student mobility and school dropout. Social Science Research, 36, 68-94.

43.

Temple

J. A.

Reynolds

A. J.

(1999). School Mobility and Achievement: Longitudinal Findings from an Urban Cohort. Journal of School Psychology, 37 (4), 355-377.

44.

Weiher

G. R.

Tedin

K. L.

(2002). Does choice lead to racially distinctive schools? Charter schools and household preferences. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 21, 79-92.

45.

Welsch

D. M.

Statz

Skidmore

(2010). An examination of inter-district public school transfers in Wisconsin. Economics of Education Review, 29, 126-137.

46.

Witte

(2000). The market approach to education: An analysis of America’s first voucher program. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

47.

Witte

J. F.

Weimer

Shober

Schlomer

(2007). The performance of charter schools in Wisconsin. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26, 557-573.

48.

Wolf

Gutmann

Puma

Kisida

Rizzo

Eissa

Carr

(2010). Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Final Report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

49.

Hannaway

D’Souza

(March 2009). Student transience in North Carolina: The effect of school mobility on student outcomes using longitudinal data (Working Paper, 22). Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.

50.

Zimmer

Buddin

(2009). Is charter school competition in California improving the performance of traditional public schools? Public Administration Review, 69, 831-845.