Marketing, Information, and Parental Choice: A Comparative Case Study of Third-Party, Federally Funded Out-of-School-Time Services

REFERENCES

• Acosta, R., Burch, P., Good, A.G., & Stewart, M.S. (2013). Devil is in the details: Examining equity mechanisms in Supplemental Educational Services. In G.L. Sunderman (Ed.), Charting reform, achieving equity in a diverse nation. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• André-Bechely, L. (2005). Could it be otherwise? Parents and the inequities of public school choice. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Angrist, J.D., & Guryan, J. (2008). Does teacher testing raise teacher quality? Evidence from state certification requirements. Economics of Education Review, 27, 483–503.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S.J. (2003). Class strategies and the education market: The middle classes and social advantage. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Berliant, M., & Yu, C.M. (2013). Rational expectations in urban economics. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 43, 197–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulkley, K.E., & Burch, P. (2011). The changing nature of private engagement in public education: For-profit and nonprofit organizations and education reform. Peabody Journal of Education, 86(3), 236–251.
   Google Scholar
• Burch, P. (2009). Hidden markets: The new education privatization. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cucchiara, M., Gold, E., & Simon, E. (2011). Contracts, choice, and customer service: Marketization and public engagement in education. Teachers College Record, 113(11), 2460–2502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Dougherty, J., Harrelson, J., Maloney, L., Murphy, D., Smith, R., Snow, M., & Zannoni, D. (2009). School choice in suburbia: Test scores, race, and housing markets. American Journal of Education, 115(4), 523–548.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumas, M.J., & Anderson, G. (2014). Qualitative research as policy knowledge: Framing policy problems and transforming education from the ground up. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(11). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1483
   Google Scholar
• Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1232(g) (1974).
   Google Scholar
• Garn, G. (2001). Moving from bureaucratic to market accountability: The problem of imperfect information. Educational Administrator Quarterly, 37(4), 571–599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldhaber, D.D., Goldschmidt, P., & Tseng, F. (2013). Teacher value-added models at the high-school level: Different models, different answers? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(2), 220–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanushek, E.A. (1979). Conceptual and empirical issues in the estimation of educational production functions. Journal of Human Resources, 14(3), 351–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanushek, E.A. (1986). The economics of schooling: Production and efficiency in public schools. Journal of Economic Literature, 24(3), 1141–1177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hara, M. (2007). “Everything has a price tag”: Supplemental Educational Services in an urban middle school setting. (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Wisconsin, Madison.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, D.N., & Larsen, M.F. (2014). What schools do families want (and why)? School demand and information before and after the New Orleans post-Katrina school reforms. New Orleans, LA: Alliance for Education Reform, Tulane University.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, D.N., & Sass, T.R. (2011). Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 95, 798–812.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastings, J.S., Van Weelden, R., & Weinstein, J. (2007). Preferences, information, and parental choice behavior in public school choice (NBER Working Paper 12995). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
   Google Scholar
• Haynes, E.A., & Licata, J.W. (1995). Creative insubordination of school principals and the legitimacy of the justifiable. Journal of Educational Administration, 33(4), 21–35.
   Google Scholar
• Heinrich, C.J. (2009). Third-party governance under No Child Left Behind: Accountability and performance management challenges. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, i59–i80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinrich, C.J., & Burch, P. (2011). The implementation and effectiveness of Supplemental Educational Services: A review and recommendations for program improvement. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress and the American Enterprise Institute. Retrieved from http://sesiq2.wceruw.org/documents/CAP-AEI%20ses_paper_Heinrich&Burch.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Henig, J.R. (2007). The political economy of Supplemental Educational Services. In F.M. Hess & C.E. Finn, Jr. (Eds.), No remedy left behind: Lessons from a half-decade of NCLB (pp. 66–95). Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, P.T., Pierce, L.C., & Guthrie, J.W. (1997). Reinventing public education: How contracting can transform America's schools. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kanstoroom, M., & Palmaffy, T. (2002). Using market forces to make Title I more effective. In K.K. Wong & M.C. Wang (Eds.), Efficiency, accountability, and equity issues in Title I schoolwide program implementation (pp. 3–27). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Kotler, P., & Fox, K.F. A. (1995). Strategic marketing for educational institutions (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Koyama, J.P. (2010). Making failure pay: For-profit tutoring, high-stakes testing, and public schools. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kreps, D.M. (1990). Game theory and economic modeling. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, B.A. U., Sutton, M., & Winstead, T. (2009). Education policy as a practice of power: Theoretical tools, ethnographic methods, democratic options. Educational Policy, 23(6), 767–795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubienski, C. (2005). Public schools in marketized environments: Shifting incentives and unintended consequences of competition-based educational reforms. American Journal of Education, 111(4), 464–486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubienski, C. (2007). Marketing schools: Consumer goods and competitive incentives for consumer information. Education and Urban Society, 40(1), 118–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marschall, M. (2000). The role of information and institutional arrangements in stemming the stratifying effects of school choice. Journal of Urban Affairs, 22(3), 333–350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Milanowski, A.T., Kimball, S.M., & Odden, A. (2005). Teacher accountability measures and links to learning. In L. Stiefel, A.E. Schwartz, R. Rubenstein, & J. Zabel (Eds.), Measuring school performance and efficiency: Implications for practice and research (pp. 137–161). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
   Google Scholar
• Mizala, A., & Urquiola, M. (2013). School markets: The impact of information approximating schools’ effectiveness. Journal of Development Economics, 103, 313–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monk, D.H. (1997). Challenges surrounding the collection and use of data for the study of finance and productivity. Journal of Education Finance, 22(3), 303–316.
   Google Scholar
• Oplatka, I. (2002). The emergence of educational marketing: Lessons from the experiences of Israeli principals. Comparative Education Review, 46(2), 211–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M.Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rivkin, S.G., Hanushek, E.A., & Kain, J.F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross, S.M., Potter, A., Paek, J., McKay, D., Sanders, W., & Ashton, J. (2008). Implementation and outcomes of Supplemental Educational Services: The Tennessee state-wide evaluation study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 13(1), 26–58.
   Google Scholar
• Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• School Choice Ohio. (2013). Finding a great school. Retrieved from http://www.scohio.org/school-options/evaluate-school-options/great-school.html
   Google Scholar
• .
   Google Scholar
• Sensiper, S. (1999). Generating family-school partnerships through social marketing. Social Marketing Quarterly, 5(1), 16–21.
   Google Scholar
• Stake, R.E. (2000). Case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 435–454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Steinberg, M.P. (2011). Educational choice and student participation: The case of the Supplemental Educational Services provision in Chicago Public Schools. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 33(2), 159–182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, M.S. (2013). Design and implementation of an out-of-school choice program: Evidence, opportunities, and limitations in Supplemental Educational Services. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (3594980)
   Google Scholar
• U. S. Department of Education. (2007). Giving parents options: Strategies for informing parents and implementing public school choice and Supplemental Educational Services under No Child Left Behind. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Office of Innovation and Improvement.
   Google Scholar
• U. S. Department of Education. (2009). Supplemental Educational Services: Non-regulatory guidance. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Weatherly, R., & Lipsky, M. (1977). Street-level bureaucrats and institutional innovation: Implementing special education reform. Harvard Educational Review, 47(2), 171–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar