This is Matthew Ladner's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Matthew Ladner's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Matthew Ladner
Recent Activity
David- You make an interesting use of the word "apparently." I'm not aware of anyone requesting these receipts, other than myself from SV. I'm the only one that has the right to request them of course, but once I have them, I will be happy to send you a copy. Likewise, I am not aware of anyone requesting the data- either from SV or from me. The data doesn't belong to the pollster, but rather to the client. If you would like a copy, you can email me.
Toggle Commented Nov 23, 2009 on Matthew Ladner responds at Blog For Arizona
1 reply
David- I believed you linked to a post last week where I explained that I am awaiting further evidence from Strategic Vision. I'll make a few additional comments here. If this survey were a fraud, it was an elaborate fraud indeed as from the start SV provided me with not only cross-tabs but also with raw data. It wouldn't be impossible for someone to sit around and type in the thousands of records it would take to produce such a file, but it would be very strange to do so. Second, SV also surveyed private school students in Arizona, and as you will recall the results of that survey on the civics exam were still terrible. If SV were sitting around in Georgia manufacturing data to please their clients, this would be an odd way to do so. Third, I have been in contact with other firms which have used SV, one of which went to the expense of replicating surveys with another firm. The results held up. Fourth, the students in the SV surveys did about half as well as freshmen students from Harvard did on a similar civics survey that was given in a multiple choice format. The SV survey replicated the U.S. citizenship exam and used an open answer format, which is inherently more difficult than a multiple choice format. You can examine these results here: http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/2006/summary.html Finally, I have requested receipts of purchase from SV from the marketing firms. The surveys involved buying phone lists of students. If SV were simply making up data, it stands to reason that they would have simply pocketed the money for the lists. If SV does not provide these receipts, I will be inclined to purchase a new survey from a different firm. I wouldn't get too excited, the results are likely to do be very similar. If freshman students at Harvard score a D on a civics exam, what is almost certain to be found is yet more evidence that American schools do a terrible job of teaching civics.
1 reply
It was a single survey. Email me a fax number.
1 reply
What is the question?
1 reply
The Republic has already backed off their estimate and increased the size of their savings estimate: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/10/20/20091020taxcredits1020.html A private school association is preparing to document a number of private school students above 60,000, which will increase the cost savings substantially by the Republic's methodology. The RAND Corp's finding that private schools lose one student for every three in charter schools is Michigan is merely strongly suggestive for Arizona, but it makes an important point: there is nothing in the way of a control for "history" as Campbell and Stanley describe it in the Republic's estimate. The world was not static outside of the creation of the tax credit-lots of other things happened-500 new and free school options being the most obvious among many others. Feel free to switch back to your actual objections to tax credits now that a faux one has failed. Do try to be consistent in your standards however- I support an improvement in STO practices and have said so many times. If however allegations of corruption were grounds for eliminating an education delivery method, public schooling would have been shut down long ago.
1 reply
David- You are really going to have to stop being so reckless, or else I will, with the deepest regret, have little alternative but to interview for a new cyber-stalker. I was not implying that children in private schools read better than those in public schools, although they do and I will provide you with proof in a moment. Instead, I was implying that if public schools faced meaningful competition for students that they would do better in teaching the basic skills hoped for with our $9+ billion. There is plenty of evidence to support that as well. On the private vs. public question- you can read the study linked to in this column. It comes from the IES in the U.S. Department of Education "What Works" Clearinghouse, and is a random assignment control group study comparing DC voucher children to DC voucher lottery losers. The IES has subjected 11 different education interventions to this level of scrutiny, only 3 of them show statistically significant gains, and that this one has the biggest impact of any studied thus far: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjA4NjNhNDMyMWE0MGZiMjY1MjBjYjU3NTRlODNjNjY As to Mr. Hansen's estimate, essentially what I told him was that he was trying to know something which currently cannot be known with any certainty. No one knows what the price elasticity of demand for private schools, nor how many students would be attending private schools in the absence of the program, or for that matter, even how many students actually are attending private schools. He made a good-faith attempt, but this is really far more complicated than his method captures, as I pointed out here: http://jaypgreene.com/2009/10/15/bean-counting-arizona-tax-credits/ Finally, at the core, I believe that this is an entirely a phony issue for those who share your views as you wouldn't care in the least if we had metaphysical proof that the credit did save money. As I have written here before, the $9.2 billion elephant will shriek at the $55m mouse regardless. If you really are concerned with saving the state money, feel free to join me in calling for a personal use tax credit explicitly designed to save the state money, as I suggest in the blog post above. No STOs, no admin fee, big savings to the state- nothing much of any of the things you've been complaining about.
1 reply
Nice pop culture reference. George C. Scott doesn't nearly enough recognition for that movie. Now as it happens, Hoxby disposed of the other Stanford study, which was not a random assignment study in any case: http://www.nber.org/~schools/charterschoolseval/memo_on_the_credo_study.pdf
Toggle Commented Oct 12, 2009 on G.I. earns one gold earring at Blog For Arizona
1 reply
Lighten up Francis, the stalking comment was just a joke. On the survey, if what I was trying to do is to prove that private school attendance causes higher levels of tolerance, I would be obligated to control for this that and the other. It would be better still to perform a random assignment study with a control and an experimental group. Even if I had such results, they would have to be placed in the context of a meta-analysis and weighed against the results of other such studies. Fortunately, that was not what I was trying to do. I was simply testing whether private schools serve as intolerance boot camps. They don't here in Arizona. Just in case you are curious, someone has already performed the meta-analysis of control group studies: http://educationnext.org/civics-exam/ Predictably, opponents of private choice have routinely been making claims which are exactly contrary to the best available evidence.
1 reply
David- It is good to see that you still have such an active fantasy life. If you will read the entirety of my comments, you will see that what you selected as your best supported case was nothing more than a misapplied standard of evidence. If you want to unlock the secrets of quantum physics, you will need an atom smasher. If you want to know whether it is raining outside, walking out into the front yard will suffice. Testing the absurd and evidence free assertions of your fellow travellers fell into the latter category in this case. You picked this as your best supported argument, and it falls flat. I do however agree that it was the strongest of your weak arguments, so we'll always have that in common. As for tracking my movements around Phoenix, it seems a little creepy. Ever thought about taking up a hobby?
1 reply
David- These results were merely a straightforward poll of public and private students. When you see polls comparing the attitudes of men and women, or Democrats and Republicans, how often do you see statistical controls to account for other differences in the populations? I'm going to go with "never." Never is a strong word though, so let's go with almost never just in case. Don't get me wrong, in some circumstances I'd like to see that done. If I were trying to make the absolute claim that attending a private school makes a person more politically tolerant, it would be appropriate. That is not, however, what I have done here. A straight poll of private and public school students is more than adequate to test the cartoonish theory of some of your fellow private school choice opponents that private schools serve as intolerance boot camps. The poll was sufficient to test that theory. The poll shows that many public school students take a dim view of their schools on a variety of important factors. This is important regardless of the private results. The polls show a limited level of political tolerance among public school students. This is also important regardless of what the private poll demonstrates.
Toggle Commented Sep 26, 2009 on Star suckered by G.I. once again at Blog For Arizona
1 reply
David- Sorry to be so tardy to respond. I made the mistake to attend back to back conferences without a laptop. I'll beg your indulgence to only hold me responsible for what I actually write, not for what you feel when you read what I write. If I recall your point about the surveys correctly, you essentially argued that uncontrolled differences in the population will have influenced the results. This is of course true. This was a survey of high school students. I know that I didn't have a clue about my family income when I was in high school, so I wouldn't trust the results of such an item if it were asked (and it would result in a large number of 'I don't knows' that would minimize the effectiveness of the item as a control in any case). The theory I was testing however was not "does attending a private school make you more poltically tolerant?" Rather, the theory I was testing was that espoused by education reactionaries "attending private school will serve to indoctrinate students into dangereous intolerant ideologies." As it turns out, private school students are substantially more tolerant than public school students in Arizona. That may or may not be because they attend private schools, but it certainly calls the evidence-free theory of choice opponents into grave doubt. Most of the results have nothing to do with family income. You either think your school gives you challenging work, or you don't. You either think that your school treats students equally regardless of race or ethnicity, or you don't. The results also beg the questions- why do we see higher levels of intolerance in the public schools? Why do so few Arizona public school students report that their school treats people equally regardless of race or ethnicity? Why do only 39% of Arizona public school students report that their fellow students are focused on academics?
Toggle Commented Sep 24, 2009 on Star suckered by G.I. once again at Blog For Arizona
1 reply
Todd- Wow- I want my promise ring back! I checked in to BfA today and find it full of GI bashing. Where to start? First, David needs to take off his unhinged glasses and reread the daily email that he completely mischaracterized. I never said that public universities were bad, merely that they had self-evidently done little to slow down out of control costs at private universities. If you doubt it, look up the figures or call Harvard and ask them what their tuition runs these days. Second, Schlomach was making reference to the state portion of the total K-12 funding, not the total funding. Second, David's critique of the survey results is replete with errors. Glaring among these was a fanciful summary of the empirical research on voucher programs. The federal government has sponsored 11 ultra-high quality random assignment studies of education interventions, and only 3 of them show statistically significant results. Guess which intervention has the largest positive impact by a wide margin? Read for yourself here from the PI of the evaluation: http://educationnext.org/lost-opportunities/ David- On your critique, you've thrown a great deal of spagetti on the wall. To demonstrate that I am a good sport, however, pick whatever main point that you believe is best supported, and I'll post a response on JPGB.
Toggle Commented Sep 17, 2009 on Star suckered by G.I. once again at Blog For Arizona
1 reply