IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoedu/v63y2018icp167-179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does greater primary school autonomy improve pupil attainment? Evidence from primary school converter academies in England✰

Author

Listed:
  • Regan-Stansfield, Joseph

Abstract

A recent English education policy has been to encourage state primary schools to become academies: state-funded, non-selective, and highly autonomous establishments. Primary schools have been able to opt-in to academy status since 2010 and academies now account for twenty-one percent of the primary sector. This paper investigates the causal effect of becoming a converter academy on primary school assessment outcomes, and on entry-year intake composition. Unlike existing evidence focused on earlier academies formed from failing secondary schools, no evidence is found of a converter academy effect on attainment for the average pupil. Although, there is evidence of a slight positive effect on age 11 attainment for pupils eligible for free school meals. There is no evidence that becoming a converter academy affects the composition of the entry-year intake.

Suggested Citation

  • Regan-Stansfield, Joseph, 2018. "Does greater primary school autonomy improve pupil attainment? Evidence from primary school converter academies in England✰," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 167-179.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:63:y:2018:i:c:p:167-179
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.02.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775716306562
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.02.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eyles, Andrew & Machin, Stephen & McNally, Sandra, 2017. "Unexpected school reform: Academisation of primary schools in England," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 108-121.
    2. Joshua D. Angrist & Parag A. Pathak & Christopher R. Walters, 2013. "Explaining Charter School Effectiveness," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 1-27, October.
    3. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Joshua D. Angrist & Yusuke Narita & Parag A. Pathak, 2017. "Research Design Meets Market Design: Using Centralized Assignment for Impact Evaluation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1373-1432, September.
    4. Joshua D. Angrist & Sarah R. Cohodes & Susan M. Dynarski & Parag A. Pathak & Christopher R. Walters, 2016. "Stand and Deliver: Effects of Boston's Charter High Schools on College Preparation, Entry, and Choice," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 275-318.
    5. Roland G. Fryer, Jr., 2014. "Injecting Charter School Best Practices into Traditional Public Schools: Evidence from Field Experiments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(3), pages 1355-1407.
    6. Philip Gleason & Melissa Clark & Christina Clark Tuttle & Emily Dwoyer, "undated". "The Evaluation of Charter School Impacts," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 3066da11915a4b04a77b38848, Mathematica Policy Research.
    7. Andrew Eyles & Stephen Machin & Olmo Silva, 2015. "Academies 2: The New Batch," CEP Discussion Papers dp1370, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    8. Will Dobbie & Roland G. Fryer Jr., 2013. "Getting beneath the Veil of Effective Schools: Evidence from New York City," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 28-60, October.
    9. Andrew Eyles & Claudia Hupkau & Stephen Machin, 2016. "Academies, charter and free schools: do new school types deliver better outcomes?," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 31(87), pages 453-501.
    10. Petra E. Todd & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2003. "On The Specification and Estimation of The Production Function for Cognitive Achievement," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(485), pages 3-33, February.
    11. Damon Clark, 2009. "The Performance and Competitive Effects of School Autonomy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(4), pages 745-783, August.
    12. Stephen Machin & James Vernoit, 2011. "Changing School Autonomy: Academy Schools and their Introduction to England's Education," CEE Discussion Papers 0123, Centre for the Economics of Education, LSE.
    13. David H. Autor, 2003. "Outsourcing at Will: The Contribution of Unjust Dismissal Doctrine to the Growth of Employment Outsourcing," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 1-42, January.
    14. Will Dobbie & Roland G. Fryer, 2011. "Are High-Quality Schools Enough to Increase Achievement among the Poor? Evidence from the Harlem Children's Zone," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 158-187, July.
    15. repec:mpr:mprres:6676 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Eyles, Andrew & Hupkau, Claudia & Machin, Stephen, 2016. "School reforms and pupil performance," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 9-19.
    17. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Joshua D. Angrist & Peter D. Hull & Parag A. Pathak, 2016. "Charters without Lotteries: Testing Takeovers in New Orleans and Boston," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1878-1920, July.
    18. repec:mpr:mprres:7293 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Joshua D. Angrist & Susan M. Dynarski & Thomas J. Kane & Parag A. Pathak, 2011. "Accountability and Flexibility in Public Schools: Evidence from Boston's Charters And Pilots," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(2), pages 699-748.
    20. repec:mpr:mprres:6720 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Philip Gleason & Melissa Clark & Christina Clark Tuttle & Emily Dwoyer, 2010. "The Evaluation of Charter School Impacts (Presentation)," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 770e250b2ef343a3b1ec8c932, Mathematica Policy Research.
    22. Joshua D. Angrist & Susan M. Dynarski & Thomas J. Kane & Parag A. Pathak & Christopher R. Walters, 2010. "Inputs and Impacts in Charter Schools: KIPP Lynn," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 239-243, May.
    23. Caroline M. Hoxby & Sonali Murarka, 2009. "Charter Schools in New York City: Who Enrolls and How They Affect Their Students' Achievement," NBER Working Papers 14852, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joe Regan-Stansfield, 2016. "Do good primary schools perform even better as academies?," Working Papers 141167564, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    2. Eyles, Andrew & Machin, Stephen & McNally, Sandra, 2017. "Unexpected school reform: Academisation of primary schools in England," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 108-121.
    3. Andrew Eyles & Stephen Machin, 2019. "The Introduction of Academy Schools to England's Education," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1107-1146.
    4. Lorenzo Neri & Elisabetta Pasini, 2020. "Heterogeneous Effects of School Autonomy in England," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 202010, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews.
    5. Eyles, Andrew & Hupkau, Claudia & Machin, Stephen, 2016. "School reforms and pupil performance," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 9-19.
    6. Roland G. Fryer, Jr, 2016. "The Production of Human Capital in Developed Countries: Evidence from 196 Randomized Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 22130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Lorenzo Neri & Elisabetta Pasini, 2018. "Heterogeneous Effects of Mass Academisation in England," Working Papers 847, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    8. Nicholas Bloom & Renata Lemos & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2015. "Does Management Matter in schools?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(584), pages 647-674, May.
    9. Stephen Machin & Matteo Sandi, 2020. "Autonomous Schools and Strategic Pupil Exclusion," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(625), pages 125-159.
    10. Matthew Davis & Blake Heller, 2019. "No Excuses Charter Schools and College Enrollment: New Evidence from a High School Network in Chicago," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 14(3), pages 414-440, Summer.
    11. Sarah R. Cohodes, 2016. "Teaching to the Student: Charter School Effectiveness in Spite of Perverse Incentives," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 11(1), pages 1-42, Winter.
    12. Susan Dynarski & Daniel Hubbard & Brian Jacob & Silvia Robles, 2018. "Estimating the Effects of a Large For-Profit Charter School Operator," NBER Working Papers 24428, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Léonard Moulin, 2023. "Do private schools increase academic achievement? Evidence from France," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 247-274, March.
    14. Andrew Eyles & Stephen Machin & Olmo Silva, 2018. "Academies 2 – The New Batch: The Changing Nature of Academy Schools in England," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(1), pages 121-158, March.
    15. Barrios-Fernández, Andrés & Bovini, Giulia, 2021. "It’s time to learn: School institutions and returns to instruction time," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    16. Figlio, D. & Karbownik, K. & Salvanes, K.G., 2016. "Education Research and Administrative Data," Handbook of the Economics of Education,, Elsevier.
    17. Lisa Dragoset & Susanne James-Burdumy & Kristin Hallgren & Irma Perez-Johnson & Mariesa Herrmann & Christina Tuttle & Megan Hague Angus & Rebecca Herman & Matthew Murray & Courtney Tanenbaum & Cheryl , 2015. "Usage of Practices Promoted by School Improvement Grants," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 8e99f01663504ef5b9f8357f6, Mathematica Policy Research.
    18. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Joshua D. Angrist & Yusuke Narita & Parag A. Pathak, 2017. "Research Design Meets Market Design: Using Centralized Assignment for Impact Evaluation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1373-1432, September.
    19. Jere R. Behrman & C. Simon Fan & Xiangdong Wei & Hongliang Zhang & Junsen Zhang, 2020. "After-School Tutoring, Household Substitution and Student Achievement: Experimental Evidence from Rural China," PIER Working Paper Archive 20-004, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    20. Marco Bertoni & Stephen Gibbons & Olmo Silva, 2017. "What’s in a name? Expectations, heuristics and choice during a period of radical school reform," CEP Discussion Papers dp1477, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    School type; School autonomy; Primary education;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoedu:v:63:y:2018:i:c:p:167-179. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/econedurev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.