Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Educational vouchers: A viable option for urban settings?

  • Published:
The Urban Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Educational vouchers have been proposed as a way to give parents more choice in their child's education. The economic and social consequences that vouchers will have for education is discussed. From a historical perspective, vouchers have never been fully implemented. Educational vouchers have the potential to drain public education of valuable resources. Educators have suggested that vouchers will not increase choice among parents or improve the quality of education in general. It is likely that vouchers will lead to larger inequalities between children of the middle and poor classes. Alternative approaches are provided that will give parents more choices within the public school system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bridge, G. (1978). Information imperfections: The Achilles' hell of entitlement plans.School Review 86: 504–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Research (1987).Louisiana School Directory. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butts, R. F. (1979). Educational vouchers: The private pursuit of the public purse.Phi Delta Kappan 61: 7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassel, A. (1988). Minnesota's free market in education.The Philadelphia Inquirer. Vol. 318, no. 179, p. 1ff.

  • Cohen, D. K., and Farrar, E. (1977). Power to the parents? — The story of educational vouchers.Public Interest 48: 72–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coons, J. E., and Sugarman, S. D. (1978).Education by Choice. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. F. (1986).Choice in Public Education. Center for Policy Research in Education. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, Rutgers University, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Everhart, R. B. (ed.) (1982).The Public School Monopoly. San Francisco: Pacific Institute for Public Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1955). The role of government in education. in R. A. Solo (ed.),Economics and the Public Interest. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garibaldi, A. (1985).Pros and Cons of Educational Vouchers. New Orleans, LA: Total Community Action Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Governors' 1991 Report on Education (1986).Time for Results. National Governors' Association Center for Policy Research and Analysis.

  • Jencks, C. (1966). Is the public school obsolete?The Public Interest 2: 18–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kadrmas v. Dickinson Public Schools (1988). 86–7113.

  • Kapel, D. E., and Pink, W. T. (1978). The schoolboard: Participatory democracy revisited.The Urban Review 10: 20–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, H. M. (1969). The failure of the public schools and the free market remedy.The Urban Review 1: 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, H. M. (1979).Educational vouchers and social policy. (Program Report No. 79-B12). Stanford, CA: Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, C. B. (1982). The public interest in education. Social and political considerations. Stanford CA: Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance. Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murnane, R. J. (1984). Comments on Arthur E. Wise and Linda Darling-Hammond's “Education by voucher.”Educational Theory 34: 49–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacheco, A. (1980). Educational vouchers and their implications for equity. (Program Report No. 80-A2). Stanford, CA: Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salganik, L. H. (1981). The fall and rise and educational vouchers.The Education Digest 6–10, December.

  • Sizer, T., and Whitten, P. (1968). A proposal for a poor children's bill of rights.Psychology Today 58.

  • Sullivan, D. (1982). Comparing public and nonpublic schools. The difficulty of measuring efficiency. Stanford, CA: Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance. Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Geel, T. V. (1978). Parental preferences and the politics of spending public educational funds.Teachers College Record 29: 339–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willms, D. (1982). Is there a private school advantage? Measuring differences in student achievement. Stanford, CA: Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance. Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, A. E., and Darling-Hammond, L. (1984). Education by voucher: Private choice and the public interest.Educational Theory 34: 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Special Education, College of Education, University of New Orleans, 70148, New Orleans, LA

    Andrew B. Sandler

  2. Glassboro State College, Glassboro, N. J.

    David E. Kapel

Authors
  1. Andrew B. Sandler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David E. Kapel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sandler, A.B., Kapel, D.E. Educational vouchers: A viable option for urban settings?. Urban Rev 20, 267–282 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01120138

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01120138

Keywords

Search

Navigation