Examining the Public's Confidence in (Misinformed) Understanding of Charter School Policy

• In Event: 63.069 - What Shapes Public Perceptions of Educational Systems?

Abstract

While the present-day political era has come to be associated with the discounting of evidence and facts, an informed public is a fundamental building block of democratic society. Yet, little empirical evidence exists, particularly around education issues, about the public’s confidence in its understanding of policy and the types of individuals who make up the informed public.

In the 2014 and 2017 PACE/USC Rossier Polls, a representative sample of California voters were asked whether charter schools could charge for tuition and how a charter school decides which students to enroll when there are more applicants than spaces available. This study draws upon response data from these two questions to explore (a) how voters’ perceptions of charter policies change over time and (b) if voters become more confident in their understanding of charter policies. I first descriptively analyze poll results. Subsequently, I use demographic data of individual respondents to match each 2014 respondent with a 2017 survey respondent of the same gender, race, age range, parental status, income level, education level, political affiliation, and locale. I then examine the types of voters who became more confident in their understanding of California’s charter policies and those who became more confident in a misinformed understanding.

I find that Californians have become more confident in their understanding of charter policies, as is evidenced by the reduction in “Don’t know” and “Unsure” responses, which were about 20% lower in 2017 than 2014. Furthermore, the percent of voters that were misinformed about some aspects of charter policies increased. For example, the percent of voters that believed that California charter schools can charge tuition was 10 percentage points higher in 2017 (31%) than 2014 (21%). Under California Education Code §47605.6(e)(1), charters are prohibited from charging tuition. Similarly, the percent of voters that believed that, when applications outpace available seats, California charters can select students was five percentage points higher in 2017 (25%) than 2014 (20%). Under California Education Code §47605.6(e), when the number of applicants is greater than the available seats, a charter school must hold a public random drawing. These patterns of increased confidence but greater misinformation were consistent across gender, race, party affiliation, ideology, age, and education level.

When exploring responses of subgroups, I find the pattern of increased confidence but greater misinformation was most pronounced among parents. While the percentage of parents who were unsure about how charters operate was cut nearly in half across both charter questions, parents have become more confident in misinformation. Between 2014 and 2017, the percent of parents who believed that charters could select the students they prefer when applications exceed available seats nearly doubled (17% in 2014, 32% in 2017), as did the percent of parents who believed that charters can charge for tuition (20% in 2014, 40% in 2017).

Analyses using the matched data are currently underway. Initial findings suggest that low-income individuals and individuals with less than a college degree were more likely to become more confident in a misinformed understanding of California’s charter school policies.

Author

• Rachel Sue White, Old Dominion University