Charter High Schools' Effects on Long-Term Attainment and Earnings
Sass, Tim R.; Zimmer, Ron W.; Gill, Brian P.; Booker, T. Kevin (2016). Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, v35 n3 p683-706. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1103536
-
examining2,286Students, grades9-PS
Quick Review
Review Details
Reviewed: October 2016
- Quick Review (findings for Charter schools)
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Absence of conflict of interest: This study was conducted by staff from Mathematica Policy Research. Therefore, Mathematica reviewers were not involved in the WWC review of this study.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Attended a two-year or four-year college within six years |
Charter schools vs. Business as usual |
10 Years |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
-- |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Earned standard high school diploma within five years |
Charter schools vs. Business as usual |
10 Years |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
-- |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Persisted in college at least two consecutive years |
Charter schools vs. Business as usual |
10 Years |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
-- |
|
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Florida
Study Details
Setting
The study examined sample members in Florida.
Study sample
The study uses a quasi-experimental design (QED) using matching techniques. The study sample was first restricted to students who attended charter schools in eighth grade. Students then transitioning to a charter high school for ninth grade were placed in the intervention group and those transitioning to a non-charter high school for ninth grade were available for the comparison group. Then, students in the charter high school group were matched to the non-charter group using “…a one-to-one nearest-neighbor Mahalanobis matching approach” (p. 5) with no caliper restriction and replacement. Four cohorts of students were included in the sample, including students who were in eighth grade in the school years 1997-1998 through 2000-2001. The two groups included 1,143 students each.
Intervention Group
Students were counted as having experienced the intervention if they were enrolled in a charter school in ninth grade after having attended a charter school in eighth grade. No other information was provided about the charter schools in the study.
Comparison Group
Students were counted as being in the comparison group if they attended a charter school in eighth grade but did not enroll in a charter school in ninth grade.
Support for implementation
The article did not present information related to charter schools supports.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).