There ought to be a law
It can be tricky evaluating whether school choice policies improve student outcomes. In Ontario, for example, the government is boasting about (slightly-) improved test scores - but the provincial tests are very subjective and vulnerable to manipulation. Similarly, the government is crowing about its improved graduation rates - but it has put in place all kinds of measures to make it easier to graduate.
So here’s an ingenious way of evaluating whether school choice is improving student outcomes in North Carolina, one that cannot be manipulated. In the school district of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, the district has conducted an open-enrollment lottery for the last ten years, and the researchers compared the criminal activity of students who had “won” the lottery, gaining admission to their preferred school, to the students who had “lost” the lottery. Here are the results.
“In this study, I find that winning a lottery for admission to the school of choice greatly reduces criminal activity, and that the greatest reduction occurs among youth at the highest risk for committing crimes. The impact persist beyond the initial years of school enrollment, seven years after the school-choice lottery was held. The findings suggest that schools may be an opportune setting for the prevention of future crime.”
If other studies replicate these findings, it seems that open-enrollment policies may be a no-cost measure that results in significant financial and social savings in later years.




Malkin,
Your subjectivity is showing.
When someone finds a 2-5% increase in student scores in private schools, you hail it as a complete success and a mandate for privatization. When the government shows a 16% increase in the graduation rate, you say “... the government is boasting about (slightly-) improved test scores.” If that is slight, then the other is insignificant. A little perspective, please.