Thread by @joshcowenMSU

🤬🤯😡🙄

🧵🪡
NO the evidence for #schoolvouchers isn’t “mixed.”

Voucher “empirical” research showing positive academic effects are no less a political tactic than this piece of garbage here—and by the same organizations.

#edchat
1/

Heritage, Goldwater, Cato and EdChoice form the entire favorable base of evidence for #schoolvouchers.

No reporter would consider a study like this a neutral “study”

2/

No reporter would consider this anything but a politically motivated “study”

3/

No one would say this “report” was anything but catnip and dog whistle for Right-wing talking points

4/

And yet the “#schoolvouchers help student learning!” political spin also comes from the same groups. Without them that evidence doesn’t exist.

5/

The greatest trick #schoolvouchers advocates ever pulled was convincing the world that “the evidence” favors vouchers.

That evidence doesn’t exist. Not really. It’s a phantom.

6/

A phantom propped up by dozens of so-called studies propping up #schoolvouchers from Right-wing groups, flooding the zone to confuse journalists and policymakers.

7/

When in reality there are a tiny few of (very old, very small) credible studies showing good #schoolvoucher impacts.

The rest are devastating 👇
8/
dropbox.com/s/mraoem01grf7…

Example: yesterday Heritage released that garbage woke #schoolchoice “study,” while the top #edpolicy journal in the country had a real study showing #schoolvouchers don’t help edu-attainment.

There is no better example of the state of voucher evidence than right here 👇👇👇

9/

Journalists: Anyone telling you most studies show #schoolvouchers “work” is an advocate spinning you.

Anyone saying studies are “mixed” is well-meaning but under-read in this field. @DianeRavitch @Network4pubEd @NEPCtweet @FutureEdGU @BrookingsEd

/end