In recent years, Israel has seen the growth of a movement calling for greater parental choice and more diversity in the public school system. This article examines the state-supported TALI (or reinforcing Jewish studies) schools, which were created in response to the public demand for an alternative to the public orthodox and secular schools. The study on which this article is based looked at the motives behind parental choice and at the effects of parental choice on the social and cultural composition of student populations. The Israeli case is compared with characteristics and outcomes in the Netherlands, Japan, and Australia.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boyd, W. L.
(1987). Balancing public and private schools: The Australian experience and American implications. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 183-197.
2.
Central Bureau of Statistics.
(1987). Statistical abstracts of Israel. Jerusalem: Government Printing Office.
3.
Chubb, J. E.
, & Moe, T. E. (1986). No school is an island: Politics, markets, and education. Brookings Review, 4, 21-28.
4.
Coleman, J. S.
(1987). Families and schools. Educational Researcher, 16, 32-38.
5.
Doyle, D. P.
(1989). Family choice in education: The case of Denmark, Holland and Australia. In W. L. Boyd & J. G. Cibulka (Eds.), Private schools and public policy: An international perspective (pp. 43-62). New York: Falmer.
6.
Erickson, D. A.
(1986). Choice and private schools: Dynamics of supply and demand. In D. C. Levy (Ed.), Private education: Studies in choice and public policy (pp. 82-109). London: Oxford University Press.
7.
Foon, A. E.
(1988). Nongovernment school systems: Funding policies and their implications. Comparative Education, 32, 197-212.
8.
Glenn, C. L.
(1989). Choice of schools in six nations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
9.
Holmes, B.
(1989). Japan: Private education. In G. Walford (Ed.), Private schools in ten countries (pp. 200-217). London: Routledge.
10.
Inbar, D.
(1989). A "back door" process of school privatization: The case of Israel. In W. L. Boyd & J. G. Cibulka (Eds.), Private schools and public policy: An international perspective (pp. 269-284). New York: Falmer.
11.
James, E.
(1984). Benefits and costs of privatized public services: Lessons from the Dutch educational system. Comparative Educational Review, 28, 605-624.
12.
James, E.
(1986). Comment on public-private school research and policy. Paper presented at the conference "Research on Private Education: Private Schools and Public Consensus. What We Know and What We Need to Know,"Catholic University, Washington, DC.
13.
James, E.
(1989). Public and private education in international perspective. In W. L. Boyd & J. G. Cibulka (Eds.), Private schools and public policy: An international perspective (pp. 213-236). New York: Falmer.
14.
James, E.
, & Benjamin, G. (1988). Public policy and private education in Japan. New York: St. Martin.
15.
McPartland, J. M.
, & Crain, R. L. (1987). Evaluating the tradeoffs in student outcomes for alternative school organization policies. In M. T. Hallinan (Ed.), The social organization of schools (pp. 131-156). New York: Plenum.
16.
Smart, D.
, & Dudley, J. (1989). Australia: Private schools and public policy. In G. Walford (Ed.), Private schools in ten countries (pp. 105-132). London: Routledge.
17.
Walford, G.
(1989). Private schools in policy and practice in comparative perspective. In G. Walford (Ed.), Private schools in ten countries. London: Routledge.
