![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
The continued presence of educational management organizations (EMO) is explained as an inevitable and continued component of the public school landscape. This article discusses both why EMOs are here to stay and the benefits of EMOs in public education. Statistics are shared showing a 420% increase in the number of EMOs over the past 11 years as well as the Obama administration’s commitment to choice and entrepreneurship in education. EMOs’ role of providing a quality education option for students living in low-income urban neighborhoods and students of color was discussed using evidence and research showing that EMOs serve students of color in the urban centers of districts. In addition, the benefit of being free from the bureaucratic control of traditional public school districts is examined. Last, research findings that suggest significant academic gains for students attending EMO-run schools are presented. Together, these findings suggest that EMO-run schools are a beneficial component to the educational landscape.
References
|
Borja, R. (2006). Analysts debate long-term viability of EMO model. Education Week, 25(44), 10. Google Scholar | |
|
Bulkley, K., Hicks, J. (2005). Managing community: Professional community in charter schools operated by educational management organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 306-347. Retrieved from http://eaq.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/41/2/306 Google Scholar | |
|
Coleman, J. (1968). The concept of equality of educational opportunity. Harvard Educational Review, 38(1), 7-22. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Garcia, D., Barber, R., Molnar, A. (2009). Profiting from public education: Education management organizations and student achievement. Teachers College Record, 111, 1352-1379. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=15234 Google Scholar | |
|
Hannaway, J., Sharkey, N. (2004). Does profit status make a difference: Resource allocation in EMO-run and traditional public schools. Journal of Education Finance, 30(1), 27-49. Google Scholar | |
|
Kozol, J. (1990, Winter/Spring). The new untouchable. Newsweek Special Issue, 114(27), 48-53. Google Scholar | |
|
Kruse, S. D., Louis, K. S., Bryk, A. S. (1995). An emerging framework for analyzing school based professional community. In Louis, K., Kruse, S. (Eds.), Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Google Scholar | |
|
Lacireno-Paquet, N. (2004). Do EMO-operated charter schools serve disadvantaged students? The influence of state policies. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(26). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n26/v12n26.pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Lacireno-Paquet, N. (2006). Charter school enrollments in context: An exploration of organization and policy influences. Peabody Journal of Education, 81(1), 79-102. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327930pje8101_5 Google Scholar | |
|
Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. Washington D.C.: Education School Project. Retrieved from: http://www.edschools.org/pdf/Final313.pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Levine, D. (1971). Concepts of bureaucracy in urban school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 52, 329-333. Google Scholar | |
|
Loveless, T. (2003). Charter schools, achievement, accountability and the role of expertise. In 2003 Brown Center report on American education: How well are American students learning? (pp. 27-36). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Google Scholar | |
|
Mead, S. (2006). Education Sector Report: Maintenance required- Charter schooling in Michigan. Retrieved from Education Sector website: http://www.educationsector.org/publications/maintenance-required-charter-schooling-michigan Google Scholar | |
|
Molnar, A., Miron, G., Urschel, J. (2009). Profiles of for-profit educational management organizations. Eleventh annual report. September 2009. Tempe: Arizona State University, Commercialism in Education Research Unit. Retrieved from http://epicpolicy.org/publication/profiles-profit-emos-2008-09 Google Scholar | |
|
Molnar, A., Garcia, D. R. (2007). The expanding role of privatization in education: Implications for teacher education and development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(2), 11-24. Google Scholar | |
|
Oakes, J. (1986). Tracking, inequity, and the rhetoric of reform: Why schools don’t change. Journal of Education, 168, 60-79. Google Scholar | Abstract | |
|
United States Department of Education . (2010). Elementary and secondary education: A blueprint for reform, the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/publication.html Google Scholar | |
|
Wilson, S. F. (2005). Realizing the promise of brand-name schools. Retrieved from The Brookings Institute: The Brown Center on Education Policy website: http://www.brookings.edu/brown/brown-center-reports.aspx Google Scholar |
