Welcome! Although the participation of private companies in education is expansive, this Wiki site has been designed to focus specifically on the presence of Education Management Organizations (EMOs) in American K-12 education. EMOs are for-profit management companies that manage schools receiving public funds (Molnar, Miron, and Urschel, 2009). For-profit EMOs differ from non-profit management organizations in that they operate in an effort to return a profit to their company and investors through providing services.

Table of Contents.

History

Policy Research

Contemporary Politics

Policy Analysis

Private Companies in Action: A Glimpse into Philadelphia

References

Appendix

Multimedia

External Links

Additional Resources

History 

EMOs began to form during the early 1990's as wide spread interest in market-based reform proposals gained popularity. The basic premise is to bring an entrepreneurial and innovative spirit and competitive edge to education by forcing public schools to compete with privately managed schools to either improve student achievement or cease operating (Molnar, et. al., 2009). The emergence of EMOs was primarily in response to efforts to repair academically troubled schools in districts and occurred as the charter movement began. 

Continue reading...

Policy Research

Click here for more information

.

Contemporary Politics

Click here for more information

.

Policy Analysis

Click here for more information

.

Private Companies in Action: A Glimpse into Philadelphia

Click here for the full story. 

References

Byrnes, V. (2009). Getting a feel for the market: the use of privatized school management in Philadelphia. American Journal of Education, 115(2) pp. 437-455.

Chingos, M & Peterson, P. (2009). “For-Profit and Nonprofit Management in Philadelphia Schools.Education Next, Spring 2009 (p. 64-70)

Peterson, P. & Chingos, M. (2009). Impact of for-profit and non-profit management on student achievement: The Philadelphia intervention, 2002-2008. Program on Education Policy and Governance Working Paper Series. PEPG 09-02.

Miron, G. & Applegate, B. (2000). An Evaluation of Student Achievement in Edison Schools Opened in 1995 and 1996. The Evaluation Center. Western Michigan University

Fitz, J. & Beers, B. (2001). Occasional Paper No. 22: Education Management Organizations and the Privatization of  Public Education: A Cross-National Comparison of the USA and UK. National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education. Teachers College, Columbia University. June 2001.

Hoxby, C. (2000). “Does Competition Among Public Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers?”American Economic Review

Iver, M. & Iver, D. (2006) Privatizing education in Philadelphia: Are educational management organizations improving student achievement? DRAFT

Lubienski, C. (2006). School choice and privatization in education: An alternative analytical framework. Journal of Critical Education Policy Studies. 4(1).

Molnar, A., Miron, G, & Urschel, J. (2009). Profiles of For-Profit Educational Management Organizations. 11^th Annual Report. Commercialism in Education Research Unit. Education Public Interest Center

Murnane, R. (2005). The role of markets in American K-12 Education. The Limits of Market Organization.

The Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center (2006). CSRQ Center Report on Education Providers. American Institutes for Research

Whittle, C. (2005). Crash Course: Imagining a Better Future for Public Education. Riverhead Books. New York, NY 

Appendix

Murnane, R. (2009, November 17). Juliana W. and William Foss Thompson Professor of Education and Society. Harvard Graduate School of Education. Personal Interview.

Stedmann, J.K. (1989, September 9). Professor of Economics, Washington State University. Interview. 

Johnson, M. <mjohnson@wsu.edu > (1998, April 9). Bunker Hill Site Remediation Plans [personal email]. (1998, April 12).

Miller, G. F. (1996, November 7). Telephone interview. 

External Links

Additional Resources  

Chubb, J. (2001). The private can be public. Education Next. Spring 2001. Vol. 1, No. 1. 

Greenberger, S (2001). For-Profit School Firm Falls Short on Reforms. Boston Globe, Sunday, May 13, 2001

  Media Material