Educational quasi-markets, school effectiveness and social inequalities

References

• Agasisti, T., and S. Murtinu. 2012. “Competition and Performance in Italian Schools.” British Educational Research Journal 38 (5): 841–858.10.1080/01411926.2011.588314
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen, S. C., and S. Serritzlew. 2007. “The Unintended Effects of Private School Competition.” Journal of Public Administration Research Theory 17 (2): 335–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belfield, C. R., and H. M. Levin. 2002. “The Effects of Competition between Schools on Educational Outcomes: A Review for the Unites States.” Review of Educational Research 72 (2): 279–341.10.3102/00346543072002279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, S., and J. Taylor. 2002. “The Effect of the Quasi-market on the Efficiency-equity Trade-off in the Secondary School Sector.” Bulletin of Economic Research 54 (3): 259–309.
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, S., and J. Taylor. 2010. “Diversity, Choice and the Quasi-market: An Empirical Analysis of Secondary Education Policy in England.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 72 (1): 1–26.10.1111/obes.2009.72.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, T., and A. van Zanten. 2007. “School Choice: A European Perspective.” Journal of Education Policy 22 (1): 1–5.10.1080/02680930601065692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carbonaro, W., and E. Covay. 2010. “School Sector and Student Achievement in the Era of Standards Based Reforms.” Sociology of Education 83 (2): 160–182.10.1177/0038040710367934
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chubb, J. E., and T. M. Moe. 1990. Politics, Markets and America’s Schools. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Cullen, J. B., B. A. Jacob, and S. Levitt. 2005. “The Impact of School Choice on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Chicago Public Schools.” Journal of Public Economics 89: 729–760.10.1016/j.jpubeco.2004.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delvaux, B., and A. van Zanten. 2006. “Les etablissements scolaires et leur espace local d’interdependance [Schools’ Interdependencies].” Revue française de pedagogie 156: 5–8.10.4000/rfp
   Google Scholar
• Devos, G., H. Hulpia, M. Tuytens, and I. Sinnaeve. 2013. “Self-other Agreement as an Alternative Perspective of School Leadership Analysis: An Exploratory Study.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement 24 (3): 296–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumay, X., V. Dupriez, and C. Maroy. 2010. “Marché scolaire segregation et inégalités” [Educational markets, segregration and inequalities]. Revue française de Sociologie 51(3): 461–480.
   Google Scholar
• Dupriez, V., and C. Maroy. 2003. “Regulation in School Systems: A Theoretical Analysis of the Structural Framework of the School System in French-speaking Belgium.” Journal of Education Policy 18 (4): 375–392.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evetts, J. 2006. “Organizational and Occupational Professionalism: The Challenge of NPM.” Paper presented at XV1 ISA World Congress of Sociology, Durban, South Africa, July 23–29.
   Google Scholar
• Fiske, E. B., and H. F. Ladd. 2000. When Schools Compete: A Cautionary Tale. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Freidson, E. 2001. Professionalism: The Third Logic. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, T., and L. Wößmann. 2004. What Accounts for International Differences in Student Performance? A Re-examination using PISA Data. CESifo Working Paper 1235.
   Google Scholar
• Hammons, C. W. 2001. The Effects of Town Tuitioning in Vermont and Maine Mimeo. Indianapolis, IN: Milton & Rose D. Friedman Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Howell, W. G., and P. E. Peterson. 2002. The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban Public Schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Lauder, H., and D. Hugues. 1999. Trading in Futures – Why Markets in Education Don’t Work. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Le Grand, J., and W. Bartlett, eds. 1993. Quasi-markets and Social Policy. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leithwood, K., and T. Menzies. 1998. “A Review of Research concerning the Implementation of Site-based Management.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement 33: 233–285.10.1080/0924345980090301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levacic, R. 2004. “Competition and the Performance of English Secondary Schools: Further Evidence.” Education Economics 12 (2): 177–193.10.1080/0964529042000239186
   Google Scholar
• Lubienski, C. 2003. “Innovation in Education Markets.” American Educational Research Journal 40 (2): 395–443.10.3102/00028312040002395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luyten, J. W., J. Scheerens, A. J. Visscher, R. Maslowski, B. Witziers, and R. Steen. 2005. School Factors Related to Quality and Equity: Results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Mons, N. 2007. Les Nouvelles Politiques éducatives [The New Educational Policies]. Paris: PUF.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, R. 2003. “Is the School Composition Effect Real? A Discussion with Evidence from the UK PISA Data.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement 14 (4): 441–457.10.1076/sesi.14.4.441.17153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Opdenakker, M.-C., and J. Van Damme. 2006. “Differences between Secondary Schools: A Study about School Context, Group Composition, School Practice and School Effects with Special Attention to Public and Catholic Schools and Types of Schools.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement 17 (1): 87–117.10.1080/09243450500264457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plank, D. N., and G. Sykes. 2003. Choosing Choice: School Choice in International Perspective. New York: Teachers’ College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prenzel, M., M. Kobarg, K. Schöps, and S. Rönnebeck, eds. 2013. Research on PISA: Research Outcomes of the PISA Research Conference 2009. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Raudenbush, S. W., A. S. Bryk, A. S. Cheong, Y. F. Fai, R. T. Congdon, and M. du Toit. 2011. HLM 7: Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
   Google Scholar
• Scheerens, J., and R. Maslowski. 2008. “Autonomie des etablissements scolaires: des moyens a la recherche d’un objectif? [School Autonomy: Which Objectives and Results?]” Revue Française de Pédagogie 164: 27–36.10.4000/rfp
   Google Scholar
• Vandenberghe, V. 1998. “L’enseignement en Communauté française de Belgique: un quasi-marche [The Educational System in French-Speaking Belgium: A Quasi-Market].” Reflets et Perspectives de la vie economique XXXVI (1): 65–75.
   Google Scholar
• Wößmann, L. 2003. “Schooling Resources, Educational Institutions, and Student Performance: The International Evidence.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 65 (2): 117–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wößmann, L., and T. Fuchs. 2007. “What Accounts for International Differences in Student Performance? A Re-examination Using PISA Data.” Empirical Economics 32 (2–3): 433–464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wößmann, L., E. Lüdemann, G. Schütz, and M. R. West 2007. School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice and the Level of Student Achievement: International Evidence Form PISA 2003. Documents de travail de la Direction de l’éducation de l’OCDE, n° 14.10.1787/19939019
   Google Scholar
• van Zanten, A. 2009. Choisir son école [School choice]. Paris: PUF.
   Google Scholar