EPRUEducation Policy Research Unit
On March 21, 2008 this became an archive site. All documents published before this date are still available here. All documents published after this date are available at our new combined site (http://www.epicpolicy.org/), a joint effort of CERU, EPIC, and EPRU.
2000 - Peer Review Articles of Related Work
These articles and/or reports are copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of educational issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Review of "The Costs and Benefits of Smaller Classes in Wisconsin" by Thomas Hruz (Wisconsin Policy Research Institute)
The WPRI's critique of
Wisconsin's SAGE class-size reduction program ignores data that clearly
demonstrates the benefits of small class size. The document also improperly
uses studies that show no benefit from lower pupil-teacher ratios to impugn
the benefits of class-size reduction, when the two measures are not equivalent.
HTML
Presented as a roadmap
for urban school reform, "No Excuses" lacks the academic rigor that would
make it a practical source of guidance, and fails in its attempt to rebut
an argument central to the debate over educational quality, namely that
economically distressed schools need more resources.
This report asserts that
adding religious schools to the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program has
increased integration in private schools, particularly religious schools.
It presents no trend data necessary to support its claim, however, and
ignores data that implies the opposite.
The Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation's rating of states based on their implementation of rigorous
educational standards fails to disclose the basis of how evaluations were
actually conducted, and its criteria and findings are divorced from real-world
performance.