Harvard Report Finds Greater Mathematics Progress in EdisonLearning Schools

Tuesday, 24th March, 2009

Researchers at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University have found that schools in Philadelphia managed by for-profit companies outperform district-managed schools in maths, and for-profits fare better in both reading and maths when compared to schools under nonprofit management.

The Peterson-Chingos study, published in the peer-reviewed research section of the forthcoming issue of Education Next (Spring 2009), confirms that the effect of for-profit management of schools is positive relative to district schools, with maths impacts being statistically significant. Over the last six years, students learned each year an average of 25 percent of a standard deviation more in maths -- roughly 60 percent of a year's worth of learning -- than they would have had the school been under district management. In reading, the estimated average annual impact of for-profit management is a positive 10 percent of a standard deviation -- approximately 36 percent of a year's worth of reading. Only the maths differences are statistically significant, however.

The researchers found the difference between the effects of for-profit and nonprofit management even more stark. In maths, students in for-profits gained between 70 percent and greater than a year's worth of learning more each year than in schools under nonprofit management. In reading, students learned approximately two-thirds of a year more in a for-profit than a nonprofit. Both maths and reading impacts were statistically significant.

Peterson and Chingos used state and nationally normed test-score data as well as demographic
and school enrolment information supplied by the Philadelphia school district for students enrolled in grades 2 to 8 betwee 2001 and 2008 to compare the performance of the for-profit, nonprofit and traditional schools.

"Year after year, students learned substantially more in reading and math if they attended a
school under for-profit rather than one under nonprofit management," Peterson and Chingos explain.

As part of a district-wide reform effort in 2002, the Philadelphia School Reform Commission (SRC) arranged for EdisonLearning to take over management of 20 of the city's low-performing schools and the for-profit Victory Schools to take over management of five. Sixteen of the low-performing schools were to be managed by nonprofit entities - the University of Pennsylvania (3 schools), Temple University (5 schools), Foundations (5 schools), and Universal, a community development corporation (3 schools).

In 2008, the Philadelphia School Reform Commission (SRC) terminated the contracts of five
schools under for-profit management (four from EdisonLearning and one from Victory Schools) for failing to meet the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) requirement of No Child Left Behind. Only one school was removed from nonprofit management (Temple). The six schools were returned to district control.

Peterson and Chingos examined whether the SRC's decision to terminate the contracts for the
five schools under for-profit management had a strong educational basis in the district's own test-score database.

The Harvard Kennedy School researchers found that the five for-profits had strongly positive
impacts in maths in all years (as compared to district schools), while the nonprofits had decidedly negative ones, leading to very large, statistically significant differences between the two groups of schools. In reading, the nonprofits fared slightly better than the for-profits but in no year were the differences statistically significant. Peterson and Chingos conclude that the large differences in maths clearly offset the statistically insignificant differences in reading.

"If maths and reading are given equal weight in evaluating a school, these results provide no
support for the district's decision to terminate the for-profit management contracts," Peterson and Chingos explain.

Back to news list