This article presents the findings of research focused on schools’ responses to competitive environments. Using the Chilean education market as a case study, the article analyzes not only the responses developed by schools in different domains in the face of competitive incentives but also their diversity, as well as motivations, rationalities, and objectives behind these responses. The findings also show how different mediating factors at the school and local levels are essential to any understanding of the capacity of market-oriented policies to alter the behavior of schools and obtain the expected results in terms of equity.
ArcherM. S. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge, UK: University Press.
2.
BagleyC.WoodsP.GlatterR. (1996). Scanning the market: School strategies for discovering parental perspectives. Educational Management & Administration, 24, 125-138.
3.
BallS. J. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
4.
BallS. J.MaguireM.BraunA. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. London, England: Routledge.
5.
BelleiC.VanniX. (2015). Chile: The evolution of educational policy, 1980-2014. In SchwartzmanS. (Ed.), Education in South America (pp. 179-200). London, England: Bloomsbury Academic.
6.
Ben-PorathS. R. (2009). School choice as a bounded ideal. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 43, 527-544.
7.
CarrascoA.BogolaskyF.FloresC.GutiérrezG.San MartinE. (2014). Selección de estudiantes y desigualdad educacional en chile: ¿Qué tan coactiva es la regulación que la prohíbe? [Student selection and education inequities in Chile: How coercive is the regulation which prohibits it?] Informe para el Fondo de Investigación y Desarrollo en Educación–FONIDE. Retrieved from https://politicaspublicas.uc.cl/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/resumen.pdf
8.
Centro de Estudios Mineduc. (2017). Resumen Estadístico de la Educación 2017 [Statistical Summary of Education 2017]. Santiago, Chile: Mineduc.
9.
ChubbJ. E.MoeT. M. (1990). Politics, markets & America’s schools. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
10.
ContrerasD.BustosS.SepúlvedaP. (2010). When schools are the ones that choose: The effect of screening in Chile. Social Science Quarterly, 91, 1349-1368.
11.
FiskeE. B.LaddH. F. (2001). When schools compete: A cautionary tale. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
12.
GauriV. (1998). School choice in Chile: Two decades of educational reform. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
13.
GewirtzS.BallS.BowenR. (1995). Markets, choice and equity in education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
14.
GlatterR.WoodsP. A.BagleyC. (1997). Choice and diversity in schooling: Perspectives and prospects. London, England: Routledge.
15.
JabbarH. (2015). “Every kid is money” market-like competition and school leader strategies in New Orleans. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37, 638-659.
16.
JabbarH. (2016). Between structure and agency: Contextualizing school leaders’ strategic responses to market pressures. American Journal of Education, 122, 399-431.
17.
JenningsJ. L. (2010). School choice or schools’ choice? Managing in an era of accountability. Sociology of Education, 83, 227-247.
18.
JenningsJ. L.BearakJ. M. (2014). “Teaching to the test” in the NCLB era: How test predictability affects our understanding of student performance. Educational Researcher, 43, 381-389.
19.
LevacicR. (2004). Competition and the performance of English secondary schools: Further evidence. Education Economics, 12, 177-193.
20.
LubienskiC. (2003). School competition and promotion: Substantive and symbolic differentiation in local education markets (National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education Teachers College, Occasional Paper No. 80). Retrieved from https://ncspe.tc.columbia.edu/working-papers/OP80.pdf
21.
LubienskiC. (2006). School diversification in second-best education markets: International evidence and conflicting theories of change. Educational Policy, 20, 323-344.
22.
LubienskiC. (2007). Marketing schools: Consumer goods and competitive incentives for consumer information. Education and Urban Society, 40, 118-141.
23.
MaguireM.BraunA.BallS. (2014). “Where you stand depends on where you sit”: The social construction of policy enactments in the (English) secondary school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36, 485-499.
Ministerio de Educación. (2012). Análisis de Proyectos Educativos de los Establecimientos Educacionales Chilenos. Informe final [Analysis of Educational Projects of Chilean Schools. Final report]. Santiago, Chile: Mineduc.
26.
MizalaA. (2007). La economía política de la reforma educacional en Chile [The political economy of the educational reform in Chile] (Serie Estudios Socio/Económicos Number 36). Santiago de Chile: Corporación de Estudios para Latinoamérica (CIEPLAN). Retrieved from cieplan.cl/media/publicaciones/archivos/153/Capitulo_1.pdf
27.
OECD (2012). Public and Private Schools: How Management and Funding Relate to their Socio-economic Profile. París: OECD Publishing.
28.
OplatkaI. (2002). The emergence of educational marketing: Lessons from the experiences of Israeli principals. Comparative Education Review, 46, 211-233.
29.
OplatkaI.Hemsley-BrownJ. (2004). The research on school marketing. Journal of Educational Administration, 42, 375-400.
30.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2016). PISA 2015 results (volume II): Policies and practices for successful school. Paris, France: Author.
31.
StecherB. (2002). Consequences of large-scale, high-stakes testing on school and classroom practices. Tests and their use in test-based accountability systems. In HamiltonL.StecherB.KleinS. (Eds.), Making sense of test-based accountability in education (pp. 79-100). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
32.
ValenzuelaJ. P. (2008). Segregación en el sistema escolar chileno: en la búsqueda de una educación de calidad en un contexto de extrema desigualdad [School segregation in the Chilean education system: in the search for quality education in a context of extreme inequality]. In PooX.VelascoP. (Eds.), Transformaciones del Espacio Público. Segunda Escuela Chile-Francia (pp. 131-155). Santiago de Chile, Chile.
33.
van ZantenA. (2009). Competitive arenas and schools’ logics of action: A European comparison. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39, 85-98.
34.
VergerA.FontdevilaC.ZancajoA. (2016). The privatization of education: A political economy of global education reform. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
35.
VillalobosC.SalazarF. (2014). Proyectos educativos en el sistema escolar chileno: una aproximación a las libertades de enseñanza y elección [Educational projects in the Chilean education system: an approach to the freedoms of instruction and choice] (Informes para la Política Educativa No 2). Centro de Políticas Comparadas en Educación. Retrieved from http://cpce.udp.cl/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/IPE2.pdf
36.
WaslanderS.PaterC.van der WeideM. (2010). Markets in education: An analytical review of empirical research on market mechanisms in education (OECD Education Working Paper No. 52). Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
37.
WilsonT. (2016). Interest, not preference: Dewey and reframing the conceptual vocabulary of school choice. Education Theory, 66, 147-163.
38.
WoodsP. A. (2000). Varieties and themes in producer engagement: Structure and agency in the schools public-market. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21, 219-242.
39.
WoodsP. A.BagleyC.GlatterR. (1998). School choice and competition: Markets in the public interest?New York, NY: Routledge.
