differences autonomy included “efficiency” outcomes better generate

Endnotes
1. New legislation has expanded this authority to the UW System and certain Technical Colleges.
2. For some examples, see Grosskopf, Shawna, Kathy Hayes and Lori Taylor. 2009. “The Relative
Efficiency of Charter Schools.” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 80: 67-87, and Wolf,
Patrick J., Albert Cheng, Meagan Batdorff, Larry Maloney, Jay May and Sheree Speakman. 2014
“The Productivity of Public Charter Schools.” School Choice Demonstration Project.
3. The 2014-15 WKCE in 4th, 8th, and 10th grade Science and 2015 Badger Exam in 4th and 8th
grade Math (See page 12 for limitations on these tests).
4. Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary School Districts: School Year
2011-12. National Center for Education Statistics.
5. Previous research by WILL indicates that charter schools perform better than traditional public
schools when appropriate controls are included: Leuken, Marty and CJ Szafir. 2015. “Apples to
Oranges? When comparisons are made between MPCP and MPS Schools.” Wisconsin Institute
for Law and Liberty Policy Brief Vol. 2.
6. Grosskopf, Shawna, Kathy Hayes and Lori Taylor. 2009. “The Relative Efficiency of Charter
Schools.” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 80: 67-87
7. Gronberg, Timothy, Dennis Jansen and Lori Taylor. 2012. “The Relative Efficiency of Charter
Schools: A cost frontier approach.” Economics of Education Review 31: 302-317
8. These efficiency differences dissipate when comparisons are made to the average non-charter
campus.
9. Wolf, Patrick J., Albert Cheng, Meagan Batdorff, Larry Maloney, Jay May and Sheree Speakman.
2014 “The Productivity of Public Charter Schools.” School Choice Demonstration Project.
10. Much of the information here comes from publicharters.org
11. When federal, state, local and other sources are taken into account, MPS receives more than
$14,000 per member. Because we cannot completely account for these sources for charter
schools, we use a more conservative estimate of MPS funding. This decreases the likelihood of
finding significant differences between MPS and charter schools.
12. https://apps4.dpi.wi.gov/sfsdw/Agency_Financial_profile.aspx
13. The details of this calculation can be found in the “methodology” section of this manuscript.
14. Budde, Ray. 1974. “Education by Charter: Restructuring School Districts.” Unpublished manuscript.
15. Budde, Ray. 1996. “The Evolution of the Charter School Concept.” Phi Delta Kappan.
16. Badger Exam results are not available for 10th grade, meaning High Schools are not included in
our Badger analyses.
17. Note that data from a small number of schools was not available online and is thus missing from
this analysis. A full list of the included schools and their efficiency scores is found in appendix B
and C of this manuscript.
18. It would be possible to average scores at the grade level. This analysis produces very similar
results.
19. The 80% cutoff was chosen because it approximately represents schools at or above the mean
free-and-reduced lunch in our sample, 81.3%.
20. Leuken, Marty and CJ Szafir. 2015. “Apples to Oranges? When comparisons are made between
MPCP and MPS Schools.” Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty Policy Brief Vol. 2.
Bang for the Buck
17