Public school students would receive
a higher quality education if they all had the option of taking the government
money (local, state, federal) currently being spent on their own
education and turning that money into vouchers that they
could use towards covering the costs of any private school or public school of
their choice (e.g. charter schools).
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Comment | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Daron Acemoglu
|
MIT | Uncertain | 5 |
Vouchers likely to improve things in short run given the awful state of US public schools. But we know little about their long run effects. |
Bio/Vote History |
Alberto Alesina
|
Harvard | Agree | 8 | Bio/Vote History | |
Joseph Altonji
|
Yale | Uncertain | 5 |
The evidence is mixed on the benefits of school choice. |
Bio/Vote History |
Alan Auerbach
|
Berkeley | Uncertain | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
David Autor
|
MIT | Disagree | 6 |
Maddeningly sweeping! Some students would benefit and the average effect might indeed be positive. But some students would surely be harmed. |
Bio/Vote History |
Katherine Baicker
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 6 |
Those using vouchers would likely be better off, but others might be worse - need to consider system-level and distributional effects. |
Bio/Vote History |
Marianne Bertrand
|
Chicago | Uncertain | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
Raj Chetty
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
Judith Chevalier
|
Yale | Agree | 5 |
The kids whose parents don't pay attention or are poorly informed can be worse off. Otherwise agree. |
Bio/Vote History |
Janet Currie
|
Princeton | Disagree | 8 |
More motivated and able students would take advantage of the vouchers, but the students left behind would likely be worse off. |
Bio/Vote History |
David Cutler
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 7 |
The existing alternatives to public schools are not all of uniformly higher quality; adverse selection is a big deal too. |
Bio/Vote History |
Angus Deaton
|
Princeton | Strongly Disagree | 7 |
And what about the kids that don't take up the vouchers? |
Bio/Vote History |
Darrell Duffie
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 2 |
Maybe yes. And maybe those left behind would do worse. The equilibrium could be tough. |
Bio/Vote History |
Aaron Edlin
|
Berkeley | Agree | 6 |
On the plus side, incentives are better under vouchers. On the negative side, decision making might be in the hands of those with less info |
Bio/Vote History |
Barry Eichengreen
|
Berkeley | Disagree | 8 | Bio/Vote History | |
Ray Fair
|
Yale | Uncertain | 10 |
I think the majority of public school students would be better off, but certainly not all. The question is ambiguous about the percent. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Yale | Disagree | 6 |
Treating students as clients does not improve education. Evidence on voucher programs very mixed - no robust evidence of positive effects. |
Bio/Vote History |
Claudia Goldin
|
Harvard | Agree | 9 |
Many public school students would benefit but some with little choice might not. On net it would be beneficial and increase competition. |
Bio/Vote History |
Austan Goolsbee
|
Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
Michael Greenstone
|
Chicago | Agree | 7 |
Competition is likely beneficial on average. Less clear that all students would benefit leading to tough ?s about social welfare functions |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Stanford | Agree | 5 |
The problem with cashing out public support of education is that parents are the agents of children and some parents are poor agents. |
Bio/Vote History |
Bengt Holmström
|
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
Caroline Hoxby
|
Stanford | Strongly Agree | 10 |
There is enough in avg student's per-pupil budget for a solid supply-side response-i.e. what's needed for widespread benefits of competition |
Bio/Vote History |
Kenneth Judd
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 6 |
I do not believe that all students would be better off. |
Bio/Vote History |
Anil Kashyap
|
Chicago | Agree | 3 |
Hard to know what the equilibrium will be, but so many kids are trapped now eventually most of them would have better choices. |
Bio/Vote History |
Pete Klenow
|
Stanford | Agree | 3 | Bio/Vote History | |
Edward Lazear
|
Stanford | Agree | 7 |
The main disadvantage to vouchers is potential weakening of public schools. But those that would lose students are terrible already. |
Bio/Vote History |
Jonathan Levin
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 5 |
Hard to give a blanket answer to this question |
Bio/Vote History |
Eric Maskin
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 5 |
This is a complicated question with arguments on both sides. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Yale | Disagree | 3 |
Hard to predict what a privatized school system would look like. |
Bio/Vote History |
Maurice Obstfeld
|
Berkeley | Uncertain | 3 |
The issues and caveats strike me as far too complex for 140 characters. |
Bio/Vote History |
Cecilia Rouse
|
Princeton | Disagree | 10 | Bio/Vote History | |
Emmanuel Saez
|
Berkeley | Agree | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
José Scheinkman
|
Princeton | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
MIT | Disagree | 6 |
Many would of course benefit, but those in rural areas or with irresponsible parents wouldn't. Charters aren't magic. |
Bio/Vote History |
Hyun Song Shin
|
Princeton | Uncertain | 6 | Bio/Vote History | |
James Stock
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 4 |
School choice has merits but the system is complex and long-term effects on both private and public education is unclear. |
Bio/Vote History |
Nancy Stokey
|
Chicago | Strongly Agree | 9 |
It's the only way to break the unions. Why do that? Fran Tarkenton said it all in his recent WSJ op ed piece. -see background information here |
Bio/Vote History |
Richard Thaler
|
Chicago | Agree | 6 |
Hurray for charter schools but to go to full vouchers it is necessary to deal with possible unraveling if no schools want the bottom kids. |
Bio/Vote History |
Christopher Udry
|
Yale | Agree | 8 | Bio/Vote History | |
Luigi Zingales
|
Chicago | Strongly Agree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |