The Adam Smith Institute writes:

Those who make that claim should look at the experience of the US Charter schools. They are independently run, state funded schools often set up by groups of parents in deprived areas and they do not charge fees. The evidence shows that it is the poor and those from ethnic minorities who benefit most from school choice.

Caroline Hoxby, Professor of Economics at Harvard University, and Jonah Rockoff, of Columbia Business School, looked at charter schools in Chicago, where school places are allocated by lottery when a school is over-subscribed. The study compared the achievements of pupils selected by lottery with those who were not (and who, consequently, attended local state schools). All the pupils had motivated parents who wanted their children to attend charter schools - some were lucky enough to attend and others were not.

Maths results are reported as ‘percentile scores’, that is all test results are ranked from 1 to 100. Maths scores were over 6 percentile points higher and reading 5 points higher. When adjusted for gender, ethnicity, participation in the federal free or subsidized lunch programme, and the need for special education, maths results were 6.18 percentile points higher and reading 5.11 points higher.

A second study compared 4th grade (age 9-10) children in charter schools throughout the USA, some 50,000 pupils. Charter schools were compared with schools in the same neighbourhoods. Charter school pupils were found to be 5.2% more proficient in reading and 3.2% more in maths. Charter schools were especially likely to raise the achievement of pupils who were poor or Hispanic. In highly Hispanic areas the advantage was 7.6% in reading and 4.1% in maths, whereas in a typical charter school the advantage was 4.2% in reading and 2.1% in maths. In high poverty areas the advantage was 6.5% in reading, compared with 2.6% for other charter schools.

According to Dr David Green, Director of Civitas, “Egalitarians define middle class success as a public policy problem. But middle-class parents whose children are successful should be seen as ‘good parents’. We should glad that their children do well and focus public policy on the children who come from a disadvantaged background who are badly served by the existing state system. A pluralistic system that drives up standards by permitting energetic new entrants to shake up the existing schools will benefit them the most. Labour’s backbench rebels are acting against the interests of the poor.”