ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
Author NamesDate PublishedJournalType of article (e.g., empirical, review, theoretical)Total NMethodYears StudiedDependent VariableGeographic Region StudiedFindings (did this differ by SES or other factors?Positive, Negative, or Neutral towards Vouchers
2
epple and romano1998the american economic reviewtheoretical NAcomputational modellingNA% of population that would shift to private school, if freeNAShifting to private school depends on quality of public schoolInconclusive
3
Cecilia Rouse1998The Quarterly Journal of EconomicsEmpirical1544quantitative - regression1990-1996Math and Reading Standardized test scoresMilwaukee1-2 percentile higher in math than those not selected, no difference in readingpositive to neutral on standardized math test scores, but high proportion of test scores are estimated. Results are inconclusive
4
Levin1998Journal of Policy Analysis and Managementreview50+ research articlesreview of empirical research articlesthe voucher implicationsUS statesmixed findings on the institutions impacted by vouchers, but overall does not have a finite conclusion"In what follows, I will not take a stand on vouchers as much as try to read the present evidence on the three aforementioned issues." (Positive to neutral.)
5
Nechyba 1999Journal of Public Economic TheoryTheoretical Utilized computational model, relies on theoryQuantitative (General Equilibrium Model)Theoretical ObservationMultiple (Theoretical Model)New JerseyMigration patterns in general would case vouchers to benefit public schools in poor communities while hurting public schools in wealthy communities. Neutral
6
Jay P. Greene, Paul E. Peterson, Jiangtao Du1999Sage Social Science Collectionsempirical758 studentsUsing a fixed-effects model to estimate the effects of enrollment in choice schools on test scores1990-1993student performance in reading and mathematics US Central Cities (Millwaukee)Positive
7
Carnoy2000Educational ResearcherReviewReview article of previous literatureUS and Chile"A privatization reform would likely increase educational inequality without improving educational effectiveness. In terms of our core values of social equity and separation of church and state, privatization could also leave the educational system worse off than it actually is, despite all its flaws."Negative
8
Nechyba2000American Economic ReviewEmpirical750General-equilibrium simulations/Quant1990-1995residential mobilityNYpositive
9
Mcarthy 2000Phi Delta Kappa International Review litigation over vouchersReview article of legal activity 1990sNAUS statescalling for more research about the implications of voucher programs due to the implications of charter schools that have already been seen neutral to negative
10
Paul Teske and Mark Schneider2001Journal of Policy Analysis and ManagementReviewanalysis of 43 articlesReview article - analysis of others' methods 1992-2000parental satisfaction, parental involvementUSMixed evidence about test scores, evidence that parental involvement and motivation is doing much of the workInconclusive - Positive, Neutral, Negative are all represented (dependent on outcome variable)
11
howell, wold, peterson, campbell2001quarterly journal of economicsempirical 8000 studentsquantitative- statistical modellingStudent test scores new york, washinton, dayton and montgomery(ohio)no effect on student test scores even among different racenegative
12
Angrist, Bettinger, Bloom, King, Kremer2002The American Economic ReviewEmpirical 1,618Survey1993-1997Graduation ratesColombia"Our findings suggest that demand-side programs like PACES can be a cost-effective way to increase educational attainment and academic achievement, at least in countries like colombia with a weak public school infrastucture and a well developed private-education sector." (p.1556)Positive
13
Howell et al. 2002Journal of Policy Analysis and ManagementEmpirical3 cities Quantitative- Randomized Field Trials2 years, but specific years not stated. Student test scores New York, Ohio, and Washington, D.C.African American students who switched from public to private schools using school vouchers gained, on average, 6.3 national percentile ranking points on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills across the three cities after 2 years. No other ethnic groups had statistically significant effects. Positive
14
Ladd2002Journal of Economic PerspectivesreviewN/AReview various research about vouchers ?students receiving vouchers USA, Chile, New Zealand,Economically disadvantaged families can provide their children with a good education if they receive vouchers. However, policymakers should be aware of the arguments over vouchers in a way that can help children attain a good education (p.22). Positive
15
Levin2002Sage Social Science Collectionsstudy relies upon data from five total sources.stats and demographics every 2 years from 1990racial stratificationLousiana. Overall, we find large, positive reductions in racial stratification in public schools that are consistent across our samples and small increases in racial stratification in private schools that are not consistent across our samples as a result of this school voucher program.positive
16
Atila Abdulkadiroğlu and Tayfun Sönmez2003The American Economic ReviewEmpiricalTwo student assignment mechanismsIntroducing examples of the school choice model, analyze two proposed admission mechanisms, modify mechanisms with controlled choice.NAStudent assignment decisionsUS cities (including Boston, Columbus, Minneapolis, and Seattle)The Gale-Shapley student optimal stable mechanism or the top trading cycles mechanism are two mechanisms found to be best for students and their families who find it difficult to find optimal admissions strategies.Neutral
17
Barnard et al 2003Journal of the American Statistical Association empirical1050Quantitative methods- case study 1997-?Families/children who are offered the scholarship New York CityParents who have children in low-performing schools might still put their children in private schools regardless of scholarships. Neutral to negative
18
Peterson et al. 2003University of Chicago PressEmpirical2023baseline data collection1990sschool vouchersMilwaukee, Cleveland, Indianapolis, and San AntonioNeutral to positive
19
Hoxby 2003University of Chicago PressEmpirical110 schools (98 Milwaukee Elementary and 12 Wisconsin Elementary)Quantitative (Regression Analysis)1970s-2000School Achievement and School ProductivityWisconsinSchool choice can significantly boost school productivity by creating competitive pressures. Schools most exposed to voucher competition showed the highest productivity growth. Positive
20
McEwan2004Peabody Journal of Educationreview article of research40+ journal articlesreview of 5 years of past research1998-2004ishNAUS statesmixed findings on if research can predict the future of voucher plansneutral
21
Krueger & Zhu 2004American Behavioral Scientist empirical 960 students Quantitative1997-2000?students receiving vouchers new york cityAccording to previous research, in this study, the researchers found that the vouchers on the achievements for African Americans (positive effect) are less robust that in previously mentioned (p.693)Positive to neutral
22
James Forman2005Georgetown Law JournalReview173 articlesReview article - historical analysis50 yrs after Brown v. Board (1954)politicalization of vouchersUSmixed but: a proper voucher program has the potential to increase educational opportunitiesInconclusive - Positive, Neutral, Negative are all represented (dependent on outcome variable)
23
Sandstrom and Bergstrom2005Journal of Public EconomicsEmpirical 27,996?Student results; student performanceSweden"student results are better with higher degrees of competition this does not necessarily imply that the better results are due to competition." (p.379)Neutral
24
Angrist, Bettinger, Kremer2006The American Economic AssociationEmpiricalregression using ICFES data1991-1997Graduation ratesColombia"Our results suggest a substantial gain in both high-school graduation rates and achievement as a result of the voucher program." (p.859)Positive
25
Hsieh and Urquiola2006Journal of Public EconomicsEmpirical150 municipalitiesQuantitative- OLS regression1980-1995Educational outcomesChileSchool choice does not improve average educational outcomesNeutral to negative
26
Maria Marta Ferreyra2007the American Economic ReviewEmpirical68Equilibrium Model/Quant1990-Private school enrollment, household residential choiceNY, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, PhiladelphiaPoorer individuals benefit less from non-sectarian vouchers. Catholic individuals gain the most under universal vouchers and lose the most under non-religious vouchers.Neutral
27
Bruner et al 2008Journal of Urban Economics empirical12 counties Quantitative methods ?change in peer composition and housing valuesCalifornia "We find that in markets with relatively little Tiebout choice, high-income, highly-
educated and white households are more supportive of vouchers than low-income, less-educated
and non-white households." p.277 "Thus, our results suggest that, in low choice markets, the intro-
duction of universal vouchers may lead to more racially and economically segregated schools
as a disproportionate number of high-income, highly-educated and white families opt out of the
public sector."		Negative
28
Patrick Wolf 2008BYU Law ReviewReview56285Review article - analysis of others' methods 2001-2008varied, but mostly standardized test scoresNC, OH, DC, WI, NYSchool choice/voucher use within the same district (only to public schools) is useful for disadvantaged studentspositive based on test scores
29
Cecilia Elena Rouse and Lisa Barrow2008Annual Review of Economics Review articleFour articles reviewing various articles from almost every staterelatively small achievement gains for students offered education vouchers,
most of which are not statistically different from zero		neutral
30
Michael Klitgaard2008Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and InstitutionsTheoreticalLiterature reviewSecondary Analysis1990s to early 2000sNAUS vs. SwedenSweden has within public schools vouchers, US does notneutral
31
JOSHUA COWEN2010American Journal of EducationReview347quant - data analysis1999-2000 voucher declinersCharlotte, NCeffects included intention-to-treat (ITT) and instrumental variables
(IV) analyses as separate attempts to account for nonrandom selection within
the group of lottery win		neutral to negative
32
Bruner et al 2010The Review of Economics and Statisticsempirical12 countiesQuantitative methods ?If white families with vouchers would enroll their children in private schools with predominantly nonwhite children. California Race/ethnicity is not the reason why white families are moving their children to private schools but rather other factors such as English proficiency, student achievement, or student performance. Negative to neutral
33
rangvid2010european sociological reviewempirical 35,000quantitative- regression modelthe voucher system increase segregation of immirant studentscopenhagenDanes flee schools when offered vouchers when schools have more than 35% immigrantsNegative
34
Jennings2010Sociology of EducationEmpirical3 schools examined, 29 interviewsQualitative- ethnographic study, particiant observation, and semi-structured interviews2004-2005how principals use their networks for school choice processesNew YorkThe principals used their networks to try to recruit students to their schools to give their schools the best chance at success.Neutral
35
Atila Abdulkadirog˘lu, Yeon-Koo Che, and Yosuke Yasuda2011The American Economic ReviewEmpiricalNAComparison of the Boston Mechanism to the mechanism with the student-proposing deferred acceptance mechanism.NASchool choice incentivesUSThough there are certain trade offs between the Boston mechanism and the DA, the paper is hesitant to advice a rejection of the Boston mechanism even with its criticisms of the deficiency in incentives and welfare. Neutral
36
Usher and Kober 2011Center on Education Policy*Reviewreview of 27 articlesReview article - analysis of others' methods 2003-2011grad rates, fiscal cost, student achievement scoresWI, FL, DC, OHVouchers don't have a strong effect on academic achievement. Rationales have shifted over time from academic achievement to value of choice and parental satisfaction.negative based on test scores and outcomes for disadvantaged students
37
JOSHUA COWEN2013Policy Studies JournalEmpirical1091sample matching 2006-2010student attainmentMilwakeehe results nonetheless do notsupport a comprehensive conclusion that the Milwaukee voucher program neces-
sarily provides a better learning environment than its public school counterpart		Inconclusive - Positive, Neutral, Negative are all represented (dependent on outcome variable)
38
Patrick Wolf, Brian Kisida, Babette Gutmann, Michael Puma, Nada Eissa, Lou Rizzo2013Journal of Policy Analysis and Managementempirical2881ordinal regression2004-2008high school grad rates, math standardized test scores, reading standardized test scoresWashington DCpositive on high school grad rates and maybe reading. No evidence it helped mathneutral to positive
39
Matthew M. Chingosa,⁎, Paul E. Peterson2014Journal of Public Economics Empirical2637intent-to-treat (ITT) effect,2007-2008degree attaiment New York Cityno overall impact of the voucher intervention inNew York City on college enrollment and attainment is apparent. ButNeutral, but negative when race is involved
40
David Figlio & Cassandra Hart2014American Economic ReviewEmpirical2,787,158Regression/Quant1998-99; 2006-7Student Test scoresFloridaCompetitive pressures & vouchers improve school performance. Predominantly in lower income schools.Positive
41
Carlson and Cowen2015Education Policy Analysis ArchivesEmpirical3,652Quant- compared descriptive stats btwn neighborhoods with voucher students and those without2006-2011Neighborhood type and transfer out of voucher program to public schoolsWisconsinNeighborhoods with more vouchers are more disadvantaged and lower performing students and African Americans are more likely to leave the voucher program after any given t, our general finding that neighborhoods whose children
attended lower quality public schools send more students to the voucher program, while the lowest
performing individual students leave it.		Negative
42
Morgan et al2015International Journal of Educational Research Review article4Review used 4 quantitative articles ?Program for vouchers in PakistanQuetta Pakistan Chile Columbia "The Pakistan program resulted in girls being educated for less than it would have cost for the government to create public school spaces, while the Colombia program cost more, but is speculated to be cost-effective in terms of long-term economic gains." (p.77) Positive
43
egalite and wolf2016peabody journal of educationreview article13 empirical researchqualitative methodsarticles up to 2015achievement effectsthe USprivate school choice has benefits to students in terms of educational attainmentpositive
44
Suzanne E. Eckes, Julie Mead, & Jessica Ulm 2016Peabody Journal of Education empirical 25 currently operating voucher programs legal research methodsanti-discriminatory and discriminatory provisionsNC, OK, UT, WI, WA, MI ETC...No states have laws that provide explicit protections for all marginalized populationsnegative
45
hatfield, kojima and narita 2016journal of economic theoryempirical research 2 citiesquantitative, pareto modelimprovement of school qualitynew york city, bostonno standard mechanism to improve school qualitynegative
46
Mark A. Gooden, Huriya Jabbar, Mario S. Torres, Jr.2016Peabody Journal of Education
reviewLiterature review Review of empirical, historical, and legal research to examine whether school vouchers create a more equitable system of education for poor students of colorNAImpact on equality of education for poor students of colorUSVoucher programs are inadequate for addressing the greater good for African American children and poor children of color.negative
47
Carnoy2017Economic Policy Institute*ReviewReview article of previous research on voucher research 1990-2013US and Chile and IndiaThe lack of evidence that vouchers significantly improve student achievement (testscores), coupled with the evidence of a modest, at best, impact on educational attainment(graduation rates), suggests that an ideological preference for education markets overequity and public accountability is what is driving the push to expand voucher programsneutral to negative
48
epple, romano and urquiola2017national bureau of economic researchreview article40 emprical researchquantitative methodimpacts of the voucherUS, Canada, india, sweden, chilevoucher competition improved public school performancepositive
49
Ford, Johnson and Partelow2017Center for American ProgressReview55 articlesReview article - historical analysis1954-2017USVoucher programs risk exacerbating segregation in schoolsNegative
50
Mark Dynarski and Austin Nichols 2017Evidence Speaks Reportsreview article4 studies reviewedReview article- comparing studiesStudies range 1990-2014N/ABritish Columbia, Louisiana, Indiana, and Ohiostudents that use vouchers to attend private schools do less
well on tests than similar students that do not attend private schools.They lack evidence in a lot of areas to determine the long term usage of vouchers. 		negative
51
Mizala & Torche2017The Annals of the American AcademyEmpirical16,369 school year observationsQuantitative (Fixed effects models)2005-2014Student test scores Chile Results suggest that moving from a flat to means-tested voucher can improve achievement and equality. The effects were much larger for schools with the most disadvantaged students. Also, effects increased over time. Neutral to positive
52
Atila Abdulkadiroğlu, Parag A. Pathak, and Christopher R. Walters2018American Economic Journal: Applied EconomicsEmpirical1,019 EnrolleesEvaluating the Louisiana Scholarship Program2013-2013Student academic acheivement LouisiannaVoucher effects are linked to lower quality private school participation in the Louisiana Scholarship ProgramNegative
53
Corey A. DeAngelis, Lindsey M. Burke & Patrick J. Wolf2020Journal of School Choice Empirical 4,825Survey- probit regressions on results 2019the private school leader’s response on survey question 11, a Likert Scale ordered from one to five, NYC & Californiaopen enrollment mandates and state standardized testing requirements both reduce the likelihood of using vouchers, Neutral
54
Ardidiacono, Muralidharan, Shim, and Singleton2021NBER Working Paper Seriestheoretical 4,251Empirical: Constrained choice, logit demand, clustered logit, random coefficient logit,2008-?Theoretically, paying for school in India has impacts on welfare later onIndiaThe poor are likely to use their vouchers to attend private schools. Neutral to positive
55
M. shakeel2021International Journal of Research, Policy and PracticeReview9443statistical meta-analysis2014-2018Private School VochersUS & many countries results are heterogeneousNegative to Positive
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100