Does Charter School Competition Impact Principal Behavior?

• In Event: School Choice and School Improvement

Abstract

Objective

This paper addresses the following questions: What are principals’ perceptions of the competition produced by charter schools? What affects principals’ perceptions of charter competition? And what is the relationship between charter competition and principal leadership behavior?

Framework

Charter schools are expected to have both direct and indirect effects on public educational outcomes. Direct effects come from the autonomy given to charter schools that enable them to be more effective. The indirect effects are hypothesized to come from the increased productivity of non-charter public schools due to increased charter competition (Betts, 2009; Eberts & Hollenbeck, 2001). Non-charter schools do not want to lose students and their funding; thus they should improve their own practices to retain students or attract back those who left.
The mechanisms of charter school competitive effects depend on the perceptions and actions of non-charter school personnel. To be spurred to act, school personnel must perceive as detrimental the threat of losing students to charter schools and then change their behavior in response to that threat (Hoxby, 2003).

Data & Methods

Data are from a survey of principals in schools participating in the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) assessment program in spring 2008. All charter, magnet, and private schools participating NWEA, and a matched sample of TPS, were included. As this paper focuses on competitive effects of charter schools, only magnet, private, and traditional public school data from states with charter school policies are used. The final sample size is 138 schools (34 magnet, 17 private, and 118 traditional public), with a response rate of 76%. Data on the presence of charter schools surrounding the 138 sample schools come from the CCD.

Results

About 23% of principals indicated that charter school competition affected their ability to attract and retain teachers and students in a negative way. Slightly fewer principals (19%) thought charter school competition negatively affected their ability to acquire financial resources.
Schools with larger distances to their closest charter school had smaller odds of saying charter competition had a negative effect. The number of charter schools and the percentage of students attending charter schools within 2.5 miles were also associated with the odds of perceiving a negative effect of charter competition, indicating that when a school has more charter schools in close proximity, the principal perceives a more negative effect of charter schools.
There is no evidence in these data that either actual or perceived charter competition were related to principal behavior and use of time.

Significance

This study highlights limitations to the potential indirect effects of charter schools through competitive pressure to succeed. The most consistent evidence for a charter competition effect came when charter schools were within 2.5 miles of the non-charter school. The importance of a very close geographic proximity and school density has implications for how charter school policies may operate in communities where schools are more spread out. Policymakers who are considering increasing the supply of charter schools should consider the potential differential impact in both high and low density areas.

Author

• Marisa A. Cannata, Vanderbilt University