This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2007, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Poor, urban students with similar family and economic backgrounds generally don't do any better in private high schools than in public ones, according to a Center on Education Policy study released today.
It's a finding Jack Jennings, president of the center, which is pro-public schools, said has implications for debates about voucher programs nationwide.
Utahns will vote in November whether to implement a program that would give voucher money to students who want to transfer from public to private schools, start kindergarten in private schools or low-income students who are already in private schools.
"We may be arguing about the wrong thing," Jennings said. "We should be looking at whether parents are helping kids do well in school."
According to the study, three main factors influence how well a student will do in high school: how well a student does before high school, the income and resources parents provide and parental involvement in school-related activities.
The study looked at achievement data, such as SAT scores and assessment results, for 1,003 low-income, urban students from 1988 to 2000 to reach its conclusions.
Representatives from different sides of Utah's voucher debate said they agree the argument shouldn't be about public versus private schools.
"The campaign has never been focused on one being better than the other," said Parents for Choice spokeswoman Leah Barker. "Our campaign has always been about offering parents the opportunity to choose a good education for their children."
Kim Campbell, president of the Utah Education Association, which is against vouchers, said the findings of the study are no surprise.
"I think this points out what we've been saying all along," Campbell said. "This isn't about public versus private. It's not about school choice. This is about who pays for the choice and who pays for private school enrollment."
According to the study, the only type of private schools that generally show greater achievement than public ones are Catholic holy order schools, meaning schools run by orders such as the Jesuits, but not by a diocese. Only 34 of the 1,003 students studied attended such a school. Also, students who attend independent, private high schools also tended to have higher SAT scores than those in public schools.
That finding suggests that private schools aren't any better at teaching subjects but might give students better test-taking skills or enroll students with higher IQs, according to the study.
Derek Keenan, vice president for academic affairs at the Association of Christian Schools International, said about 400 largely minority schools in his association do perform better on some national tests than students in public schools. Students at those schools are generally 12 to 14 months ahead of their peers on average nationwide, he said.
"The private school advantage is nimbleness," Keenan said. "We can move on things."
The study also found that students who went to private high schools had no more job satisfaction at age 26 than their peers who went to public high schools.
Study author Harold Wenglinsky said his findings show schools and families should focus on getting parents more involved and creating more activities and programs to support students.
"We're arguing about adult issues," Jennings said. "Let's look at kids and see what helps them do well."