Recent studies have suggested that performance-related differences between private and public schools disappear once student background characteristics are accounted for. However, given the sometimes significant variation in economic, social and cultural norms across countries these findings may not have universal relevance. The main purpose of this study was to determine whether or not literacy in private and public schools in Qatar differs in key areas such as mathematics, reading and science, and if such differences exist then whether or not they persist after controlling for student demographic characteristics such as age, gender, parental occupation, parental education, family wealth, cultural possessions and availability of educational resources at home. Our results indicate that there is indeed a significant mean difference in literacy between private and public schools in Qatar, and that this difference does not disappear even after controlling for student background characteristics. Implications were discussed.
BerrebiCMartorellFTannerJ (2009) Qatar's labor markets at a crucial crossroad. The Middle East Journal63(3): 421–42.
2.
BraunHJenkinsFGriggW (2006) Comparing Private Schools and Public Schools Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling (NCES 2006-461), Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
3.
BrewerDAugustineCZellmanG (2007) Education for a New Era: Design and Implementation of K-12 Education Reform in Qatar, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
4.
CaldwellB (2010) Is private schooling becoming the preferred model of school choice in Australia?Journal of School Choice4(4): 378–97.
5.
CarbonaroW (2006) Public-private differences in achievement among kindergarten students: differences in learning opportunities and student outcomes. American Journal of Education113(1): 31–65.
6.
ChakrabartiR (2008) Can increasing private school participation and monetary loss in a voucher program affect public school performance? Evidence from Milwaukee. Journal of Public Economics92(5/6): 1371–93.
7.
CohenJ (1992) Quantitative methods in psychology: a power primer. Psychological Bulletin112(1): 155–9.
8.
ConstantLGoldmanCZellmanG (2010) Promoting quality and variety through the public financing of privately operated schools in Qatar. Journal of School Choice4(4): 450–73.
9.
DarrajS (2010) Milestones in Modern World History: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, New York, NY: Infobase Publishing.
10.
EspinozaOGonzálezL (2013) Access to higher education in Chile: a public vs. private analysis. Prospects43(2): 199–214.
11.
FilerRMünichD (2013) Responses of private and public schools to voucher funding. Economics of Education Review34: 269–85.
12.
FriedmanM (1955) The role of government in education. In: SoloR (eds) Economics and the Public Interest, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
13.
GlennCDe GroofJ (2012) Balancing Freedom, Autonomy and Accountability in EducationVol. 3, Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Wolf Legal Publishers.
14.
GonzalezGLeVBroerM (2009) Lessons from the Field: Developing and Implementing the Qatar Student Assessment System, 2002–2006, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
15.
GreenwaldRHedgesLLaineR (1996) The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research66(3): 361–96.
16.
GuarinoCTannerJ (2012) Adequacy, accountability, autonomy and equity in a middle eastern school reform: The case of Qatar. International Review of Education58(2): 221–45.
17.
HeynemanS (2005) Student background and student achievement: what is the right question?American Journal of Education112(1): 1–9.
18.
International Monetary Fund (2013) World Economic Outlook, October 2013, Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
19.
KenayathullaH (2013) Higher levels of education for higher private returns: new evidence from Malaysia. International Journal of Educational Development33(4): 380–93.
20.
KhalafSAlkobaisiS (1999) Migrants’ strategies of coping and patterns of accommodation in the oil-rich gulf societies: evidence from the UAE. British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies26(2): 271–98.
21.
KnightJMorshidiS (2011) The complexities and challenges of regional education hubs: focus on Malaysia. Higher Education62(5): 593–606.
22.
LaneJKinserK (2011) Reconsidering privatization in cross-border engagements: the sometimes public nature of private activity. Higher Education Policy24: 255–73.
23.
LevyD (2012) How important is private higher education in Europe? A regional analysis in global context. European Journal of Education47(2): 178–97.
24.
LevyD (2013) The decline of private higher education. Higher Education Policy26(1): 25–42.
25.
LubienskiCLubienskiS (2006) Charter, Private, Public Schools and Academic Achievement: New Evidence from NAEP Mathematics Data, New York, NY: Columbia University.
26.
LubienskiCLubienskiS (2013) The Public School Advantage: Why Public Schools Outperform Private Schools, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
LubienskiSLubienskiCCraneC (2008) Achievement differences and school type: The role of school climate, teacher certification, and instruction. American Journal of Education115(1): 97–138.
28.
McEwanP (2000) The potential impact of large-scale voucher programs. Review of Educational Research70(2): 103–49.
29.
ModarresA (2010) Migration and the persian gulf: demography, identity and the road to equitable policies. Anthropology of the Middle East5(1): 1–17.
StitzleinS (2013) For-profit charter schools and threats to the publicness of public schools. Philosophical Studies in Education44: 88–99.
36.
TabachnickGFidellL (2007) Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
37.
ThapaA (2013) Does private school competition improve public school performance? The case of Nepal. International Journal of Educational Development33(4): 358–66.
38.
UNESCO (2005) Children Out of School: Measuring Exclusion From Primary Education, Montreal, Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
39.
UNESCO (2012) Global Education Digest 2012, Montreal, Canada: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
40.
WuM (2005) The role of plausible values in large-scale surveys. Studies in Educational Evaluation31(2): 114–28.
