SCHOOL FOR THOUGHT

The Folly of Picking Winners and Losers

Here’s an interesting new study from the Cato Institute that takes note of the fact that many charitable foundations have recently been partnering with selected charter school networks in an effort to ensure the development of very successful schools. Looking at California charter school networks and controlling for individual student characteristics and peer effects, the author finds virtually no correlation between foundation funding and charter network performance.

The report supports other education research suggesting that spending more on schools will not necessarily improve their performance. The report also suggests that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for charitable foundations to pick winners and losers and that, although market forces are not perfect when it comes to rewarding high performers, they are likely to do a better job than charitable foundations (or government agencies, for that matter). 

It looks as if a better role for charitable foundations would be to fund organizations that promote the use of market forces in education. Like, for example, the Society for Quality Education. ☺