Thread by @joshcowenMSU

Another glaring gap between the actual Fordham #ohioed #schoolvouchers results and the spin from its Forward is on student achievement.
@NPEaction @Network4pubEd @PV4PS @OhioPEP @StephenODyer @CLub_edu @SchlFinance101
1/

The actual researchers clearly say their results are due to changes in student composition—with #schoolvouchers by design drawing more lower income students (ie also lower ave test scores) away from districts.

So districts didn’t actually improve #education due to vouchers
2/

They just lost lower scoring kids.

“But wait!” #schoolvouchers activists may say, “that shows vouchers are admitting poorer kids!”

True enough but there’s no evidence voucher programs know how to *serve* those kids.

Quite the opposite:
3/

As I and others have shown, exit rates for #schoolvouchers are huge and are primarily driven by Black, lower scoring, lower income kids. I discuss that just this week @DianeRavitch

dianeravitch.net/2022/12/12/jos…
4/

And you can see sample work here, where we showed in Milwaukee that the kids most at-risk were the ones to flee #SchoolVouchers. Will Howell showed this in the old Peterson voucher data too, btw, in a solo 2004 JPAM article.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.31…
5/

In other words, the Fordham report is consistent with a story where disadvantaged district performance levels go up because of a constant yearly churn of #economicallydisadvantaged kids in and out of #schoolvouchers

You guys, that’s not a good thing.
6/6