Progress on school choice in the
statehouse and courtroom during 2002 set the stage for an ambitious
2003 legislative agenda in many states and the U.S. Congress. Most
significantly, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris that voucher programs do not violate the
U.S. Constitution, even when participating schools are
overwhelmingly religious. Before the one-year
anniversary of the Court's decision, Colorado Governor Bill Owens
signed into law the Colorado Opportunity Contract Pilot Program,
which will provide vouchers to low-income students in
low-performing school districts. The Maryland legislature enacted a
charter school law.
Meanwhile, the body of research supporting
choice has grown considerably. This research, the Supreme Court's
landmark legal opinion, and increased legislative activity on
choice provide a foundation for new programs that will empower
parents to choose the schools that best meet their children's
needs.
Nationwide, the school choice movement has
made significant gains. As of May 26, 2003:
- In six states--Colorado, Florida, Maine,
Ohio, Vermont, and Wisconsin--students may use state or
district-funded scholarships to attend a private school of
choice.
- Six states offer tax credits or deductions
for education expenses or contributions to scholarship
programs.
- Forty states and the District of Columbia
have enacted charter school laws.
- Fifteen states guarantee public school
choice within or between districts. (Other states have choice
programs that are optional for districts, target only specific
populations, and/or require that parents pay tuition.)
- Thirty-nine states and the District of
Columbia have privately funded scholarship organizations that
provide tuition assistance to more than 60,000 students.
- In all 50 states, home schooling is legal.
As many as 2 million students are homeschooled nationwide.
- Twenty-one states have comprehensive dual
enrollment programs that enable high school students to attend
college classes for high school and postsecondary credit at minimal
or no expense to the student.
Progress at the Federal Level
Since President George W. Bush announced a
voucher plan for the District of Columbia and other communities in
his fiscal year (FY) 2004 budget, several prominent D.C. leaders
have voiced their support for vouchers, including D.C. Mayor
Anthony A. Williams (D) and D.C. School Board President Peggy
Cooper Cafritz. In an interview with The Washington Post, Mayor
Williams explained, "We've got a model we've been using for 140
years. I think it's time to try something else." Kevin P. Chavous
(D), member of the D.C. Council and chairman of its Committee on
Education, Libraries, and Recreation, backs vouchers as part of a
proposal to increase support for charter schools and traditional
schools. According to Chavous, "No school bureaucracy will reform
itself internally. It only comes through pressure. And the most
effective form of pressure is choice."
In
January 2002, President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act,
which requires states to compile a list of all schools that have
failed to make adequate yearly progress toward meeting state
standards for two consecutive years. In 2002, children attending
8,652 schools nationwide that were deemed "failing" under the
provisions of this legislation were eligible to transfer to
better-performing schools. Students enrolled in schools that had
failed for three years were eligible to obtain supplemental
services such as tutoring.
Some
states and districts, however, are not providing public school
choice or supplemental services for all eligible students as
mandated by the Act. They cite insufficient capacity within their
public school systems as the obstacle to compliance. In New York
City and Albany, New York, parents of students in failing schools
filed a lawsuit when the school districts did not make the
educational opportunities required by the Act available to their
children.
In
July 2002, a presidential commission recommended expanding
educational options for students served under the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), stating that "The Commission
views parental empowerment as essential to excellence in special
education. Increasing parental empowerment, coupled with public
accountability for results, will create better results for children
and schools." The commission reasoned that
"Parental and student choice is an important accountability
mechanism and IDEA should include options for parents to choose
their child's educational setting."
Although thousands of children with
disabilities throughout the country are being educated in private
schools at public expense under the IDEA, many children do not have
this option. For a student to be placed in a private school, the
members of his or her Individualized Education Plan (IEP)
team--which includes the child's teachers, administrators,
specialists, and parents--must agree that the child would be served
more appropriately in a private program. The options are limited by
the team's decisions, which may seem arbitrary to frustrated
parents.
On
April 30, 2003, U.S. Representative Jim DeMint (R-SC) introduced an
amendment to the IDEA reauthorization legislation (H.R. 1350) to
give states the flexibility to establish innovative parental choice
programs for students with disabilities. While the amendment failed
to pass, there are still opportunities for similar legislation in
the Senate.
Existing School Choice Programs
Arizona
An
Arizona law enacted in 1997 allows individuals to receive a tax
credit of up to $500 and married couples to receive a credit of up
to $625 for donations to a private tuition scholarship program.
Individuals may also receive a credit of up to $200 for donations
to public school extracurricular activities.
On
January 26, 1999, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the tax credit
plan, finding the program to be neutral with regard to religion and
beneficial to low-income families who have been "coerced into
accepting public education."
From
1998 to 2002, the tax credit program generated $56 million that
financed nearly 36,000 scholarships. More than 80 percent of the
scholarship recipients were from lower-income families. A Cato
Institute report found the credit to be revenue-neutral. Because
the scholarships cost less than the per-pupil expenditure at the
public schools, the system saves money when students who had been
educated at public expense transfer to less costly private schools,
offsetting the revenue loss of the tax credit.
Colorado
Starting in 2004, the Colorado Opportunity
Contract Pilot Program will provide vouchers to low-income students
in districts that are designated by the state as "poor-performing."
The vouchers will be worth 37.5 percent of the district's per-pupil
costs for kindergarteners, 75 percent for elementary and junior
high school students, and 85 percent for high school students. Only
students who participate in the federal free and reduced-price
lunch program and who were enrolled in a Colorado public school the
previous year will be eligible to participate.
Additionally, in grades 4-12, only
students who failed the state assessment or college entrance exam
will be eligible. Participation is capped at 1 percent of a
district's enrollment in 2004-2005, and the cap will rise yearly to
a maximum of 6 percent in 2007-2008 and thereafter.
Florida
Florida has three school choice programs:
Opportunity Scholarships, McKay Scholarships for students with
disabilities, and a tax credit for donations to scholarship funds
for poor students.
The
A+ Plan provides Opportunity Scholarships to students in schools
that have failed to achieve state assessment benchmarks twice
within a four-year period. The plan allows these students to carry
their state per-pupil dollars to another public school or a private
school. Of the 1,611 students using the Opportunity Scholarships
during the 2002-2003 school year, 702 used their vouchers to attend
a private school, and the rest are attending other public
schools.
During the 2002-2003 school year,
approximately 8,200 disabled students used McKay Scholarships to
attend another public or private school. The McKay Scholarship
program, enacted as a pilot program by the Florida legislature in
1999 and expanded statewide in 2001, provides vouchers to
special-needs students if their parents are dissatisfied with their
academic progress.
In
addition, 15,000 students statewide are using scholarships under
Florida's corporate income tax credit program during the 2002-2003
school year. Under this program, which was approved by the state
legislature in 2001, corporations can receive tax credits for
scholarship-fund donations of up to 75 percent of the amount of
their corporate income tax bill. The tuition scholarship
organizations give low-income students scholarships worth $3,500 or
the full cost of tuition, whichever is less, to attend a private
school or a $500 voucher to attend a public school in another
school district. Income thresholds apply.
Illinois
In
1999, the Illinois legislature approved a tax credit plan for
education expenditures (S.B. 1075). The law provides an annual tax
credit of up to 25 percent of education-related expenses--including
tuition, book fees, and lab fees--that exceed $250, up to a maximum
of $500 per family.
After the law's enactment, opponents
brought two lawsuits against the credit. The plaintiffs lost in
both circuit and appeals courts, however, and in 2001, the Illinois
Supreme Court refused to reconsider the two district appeals court
rulings that upheld the tax credit.
Iowa
In
1987, the Iowa legislature enacted a law providing tax credits and
deductions for education expenses. Under the original law, families
earning less than $45,000 could deduct up to $1,000 per child from
their state income tax liability for education expenses. Taxpayers
using the standard deduction could take a tax credit of up to $50
for education expenses for each child. The law was amended in 1996
and again in 1998, and all families may now take a tax credit of 25
percent of the first $1,000 spent on their children's education.
Maine
Maine has been paying for students to
attend private schools since colonial times. A century ago, the
state enacted the town "tuitioning" law that serves students today.
Under the law, school districts without public schools allow
students to attend public schools in other districts or
nonsectarian private schools. In 1981, the legislature
enacted a law preventing students from selecting religious
schools.
Minnesota
Since 1955, Minnesota families have been
able to deduct education expenses from their state taxes. In 1997,
the legislature enacted legislation giving Minnesota families who
earn $33,500 or less a refundable tax credit of up to $1,000 per
student (up to $2,000 per family) for education expenses, excluding
tuition. The law increased the maximum deduction to $1,625 for
expenses associated with elementary school education, including
tuition, and up to $2,500 for junior high school and senior high
school expenses.
Ohio
Enacted in 1995, the Cleveland Scholarship
and Tutoring Program provides elementary school students with
vouchers worth up to $2,250 for tuition at a private school of
choice.
Although the number of vouchers was increased from 4,523 in the
2001-2002 school year to 5,523 for the 2002-2003 school year,
officials say they had to turn away more than 1,100 Cleveland
parents who applied for vouchers because there were not enough to
meet the demand.
Pennsylvania
In
2001, the Pennsylvania legislature approved an education tax credit
program that permits corporations to receive credits of up to
$100,000 for contributions to organizations that provide
scholarships to private schools or grants to public schools for
innovative programs. The state may award a maximum of $30 million
in tax credits per year. Scholarship recipients must meet income
eligibility guidelines.
Vermont
Since 1869, Vermont has operated a
tuitioning program for students in school districts without a
public school. Students may attend a
public school in another district or an approved nonsectarian
private school. As was the case in Maine, students in Vermont could
attend religious schools during the first 100 years that the
program was in existence. An estimated 7,147 students participated
in the program during the 2001-2002 school year.
Wisconsin
More
than 10,000 students participate in the Milwaukee Parental Choice
Program. Established in 1990 and expanded in 1995, the program
provides vouchers to Milwaukee families with incomes that are at or
below 175 percent of the poverty level to enable their children to
attend private or religious schools of choice. The Wisconsin
Supreme Court upheld the program in 1998, and the U.S. Supreme
Court declined to review the decision.
Privately Funded School Choice
Thanks to such private foundations as
Children First America (CFA) and the Children's Scholarship Fund
(CSF), the number of privately funded scholarships enabling
low-income public school students to attend a private school of
choice continues to grow. These scholarship organizations have been
active for over 10 years and have served more than 100,000
children. During that period, approximately 100 privately funded
organizations have invested $500 million in the future of America's
children, providing vouchers that range from $1,500 to $5,000 per
year. Because vouchers typically do not cover the entire tuition,
some financial commitment from the parents is usually required.
Children First America has played a
central role in developing many of the scholarship programs and
continues to provide support for new and existing scholarship
organizations. CFA also provides information on parental choice to
parents; local, state, and federal elected leaders; and the general
public.
The
Children's Scholarship Fund, founded in 1998, is a
multimillion-dollar foundation that matches funds raised in
communities throughout the country. The CSF provides scholarships
to nearly 34,000 students at 7,000 schools. In 2001, Worth magazine
named it one of "America's 100 Best Charities."
Charter School Developments
Maryland recently joined 39 other states
and the District of Columbia in enacting a law to establish charter
schools. The first charter school opened its doors in 1992 in St.
Paul, Minnesota. In 2002, Wyoming and Indiana opened their first
charter schools, and the number of charter schools increased by 14
percent, bringing the total to approximately 2,700 schools. The
states with the most charter schools in 2002 included Arizona, with
465; California, with 427; Florida, with 227; Texas, with 221; and
Michigan, with 196.
The
number of "virtual charter schools" that implement educational
programs via the Internet is also on the rise. There are
approximately 50 virtual charter schools throughout the nation.
A
U.S. Department of Education report released in June 2001 confirmed
existing research indicating that public schools and school
districts respond positively to the formation of charter schools.
Challenge and Opportunity: The Impact of Charter Schools on
Districts reported that districts improved their services and
operations in response to competition from charter schools. Heralding
this new report, U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige stated:
Charter schools offer meaningful options
for parents and their children--particularly for those children who
would otherwise be left behind in low-performing schools. The good
news is that charter schools do not just help the students they
serve directly, they also prod the entire system to improve.
Research over the past two years has found
that charter schools are typically smaller than traditional
schools, serve predominantly at-risk populations, and show
achievement gains after two years. Specifically:
- The 2000-2001 evaluations of the Public
Charter Schools Program, commissioned by the U.S. Department of
Education, found that charter schools are smaller than traditional
public schools, enjoy strong parental involvement, and serve
diverse populations of students.
- Results from the Center for Education
Reform's 2002 Survey of American Charter Schools show that charter
schools, in addition to educating children who are poorly served by
traditional public schools, are both cost-effective and
innovative.
- In a recent study, Harvard professor
Caroline Hoxby found that increased school choice raises school
productivity and student achievement within the public school
system. Hoxby's report found that competition from charter schools
in Michigan and Arizona, and from Milwaukee's voucher program, has
compelled public schools to raise their productivity, as measured
by students' achievement gains.
- According to a 2002 California State
University study, California Charter Schools Serving Low SES
Students: An Analysis of the Academic Performance Index, the
state's charter schools were more effective than traditional public
schools in improving the academic achievement of low-income and
at-risk students. Charter schools in which at least half of the
students participated in the federal free and reduced-price lunch
program improved at a rate of 22 percent, while academic
achievement in traditional public schools improved at a rate of 19
percent. Moreover, charter schools in which 75 percent of the
students participated in the lunch programs improved at a rate of
28 percent, compared with 24 percent in the other public schools.
- A report released by the Georgia
Department of Education in 2002 shows that the state's charter
schools are outpacing their traditional counterparts. Compared with
their counterparts in traditional public schools, more charter
school students passed the state's proficiency tests in all five
subjects. Furthermore, fewer charter school students repeat grades
or drop out of school.
Home Schooling
The
home-school movement has grown steadily over the past two
decades.
As many as 2 million children in grades K-12 were homeschooled
during the 2001-2002 school year. The home-school population is
growing at a rate of 7 percent to 15 percent a year. From 1999
to 2002, the number of African-American home-schooling families
increased nearly tenfold. African-American families now comprise
nearly 5 percent of the total number of home-schooling families.
On
average, home-school students have higher academic achievement than
students in public or private schools. Home-schooled elementary
school students tend to perform one grade level higher than their
peers in traditional schools. By high school, they are achieving
four grade levels above the national average. Nearly all home-schooled
students participate in at least two extracurricular activities
such as dance, sports, music, and volunteerism. In fact, the
average home-school student participates in five such activities.
Barred from the National Honor Society,
home schoolers have started their own honor society, Eta Sigma
Alpha. Founded in 1999 by Joanne Juren, a former public school
teacher and administrator, the society has 20 chapters
nationwide.
Winning in the Courts
In
June 2002, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the
Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program, ruling that the use of
public money to underwrite tuition at private and religious schools
does not violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution
as long as parents make the decision regarding where the voucher is
used.
The Cleveland program provides vouchers for tuition or tutoring
fees at public, private, secular, and religious schools.
Given the range of options and the freedom
parents have to choose among them, the Court concluded that the
Cleveland program is neutral with regard to religion, even though
most parents used vouchers to send their children to religious
schools. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice William Rehnquist
stated, "We believe that the program challenged here is a program
of true private choice, consistent with Mueller, Witters, and
Zobrest, and thus constitutional. As was true in those cases, the
Ohio program is neutral in all respects toward religion."
This
momentous decision removes the constitutional cloud from policy
consideration, enabling state legislators and Congress to consider,
on their merits, new programs to give parents greater choice in the
schooling of their children.
Other important state-level constitutional
battles remain in play as the courts interpret state constitutional
provisions, including discriminatory "Blaine amendments" that
prohibit tax money from flowing to religious institutions. Vestiges
of a 19th century anti-Catholic movement, state-level Blaine
amendments have been used by some courts to strike down voucher
programs, while other courts have upheld choice programs despite
the clause. Thirty-seven states have Blaine-type language, and 29
have prohibitive "compelled support" provisions. This type of
constitutional language dates back to colonial times and was
intended to prevent governments from compelling individuals to
contribute to or attend a state-designated church.
The
following are among the significant developments in the courts
during 2002.
- Undeterred by the U.S. Supreme Court's
ruling on the Cleveland voucher program, a Florida circuit court
struck down the state's voucher program in August 2002. Supporters
of vouchers, including Governor Jeb Bush, have challenged the
decision. The state has appealed the circuit court's decision, and
the judge has allowed the program to continue while the case makes
its way through the courts.
- On July 18, 2002, the Ninth U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals declared unconstitutional a Washington State
policy that prohibits students who use state higher education
scholarships to earn a degree in theology. The court declared in
Davey v. Locke that "a state law may not offer a benefit to
all...but exclude some on the basis of religion." The case
has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
- In June 2002, the Washington Supreme Court
overturned a previous trial court decision and ruled that the
state's Educational Opportunity Grant (EOG) Program does not
violate the state constitution when college students use grants for
tuition at religiously affiliated colleges. Washington's Blaine
amendment prohibits public-sector funding of sectarian
institutions. The state interpreted this provision to prohibit
students from using state aid to attend religious K-12 schools or
colleges. The court ruled that the Blaine amendment did not apply
to higher education. However, it did not consider whether the
Blaine amendment itself violates the U.S. Constitution, which
requires that government programs must be non-discriminatory toward
religion.
- The Institute for Justice is representing
six families in Maine who have filed suit against a 1981 statute
that removed religious schools from the state's century-old voucher
program. Under Maine's tuitioning law, students who live in rural
towns without a public school may attend a public school in another
town or a private school. Until 1981, students had been allowed to
attend sectarian schools under the program. Maine's constitution does
not have a Blaine amendment.
- On March 2003, a number of Vermont
residents filed suit against the state regarding its tuitioning
policy, which enables students in rural towns without public
schools to attend private schools. Since 1961, Vermont law has
prohibited parents from using the tuitioning policy to send their
children to religious schools. Plaintiff Dr. Blane Nasveschuk had
to pay tuition for his sons to attend Mount St. Joseph's Academy,
although students in nonsectarian schools could take advantage of
the tuitioning policy. Dr. Nasveschuk was joined in this suit by
two other families who also live in tuitioning towns but must pay
for their children's education in schools with a religious
affiliation. The Institute for Justice is representing these
families.
Research Revealing the Benefits of
Choice
Lawmakers can now make decisions informed
by a growing body of evidence that choice often improves the
academic performance of at-risk students, promotes parental
involvement and satisfaction, and fosters accountability within
public school systems. Significant research over the past two years
confirms earlier findings that choice improves the educational
experience of students.
A
May 2003 survey by the U.S. Department of Education shows that more
families, particularly those with lower incomes, are participating
in "public-school choice," sending their children to schools other
than their assigned schools. The number of students attending a
public school of choice rose from 11 percent in 1993 to 14 percent
in 1996 and 1999. Further, the National Center for Education
Statistics found that parents of students in private schools or
public schools of choice were "more likely to say they were 'very
satisfied' with their children's schools, teachers, academic
standards, and order and discipline" than were parents of students
attending a public school to which they had been assigned.
According to research conducted by Harvard
University professor Paul Peterson, the academic achievement of
low-income African-American students who received scholarships
offered by the School Choice Scholarships Foundation (SCSF) rose
significantly. African-American students
who participated in the program for three years had scores on the
Iowa Test of Basic Skills that were 9.2 percentile points higher
than the scores of students who remained in the public schools.
Students who participated in the program for fewer than three years
also experienced gains.
In
September 2002, the U.S. General Accounting Office released a
report that examined research findings regarding 78 privately
funded voucher programs. Several studies showed that families using
vouchers were more satisfied with their children's new schools with
regard to such factors as academics and safety. Parents using
privately funded vouchers reported that their children's schools
communicated with them more frequently and had a more positive
environment than did the public schools. Other studies documented
the academic gains of African-American students who had received
vouchers.
In
2001, Harvard and Georgetown University researchers released a
study comparing the academic experience of students using privately
funded vouchers through the Washington Scholarship Fund with that
of similar students in a control group who remained in public
schools. Their findings on academic and social indicators were
significant: Parental satisfaction was higher for parents of
scholarship students. The report also found that students in
private schools did more homework, were safer, and had greater
respect for teachers. Significantly, African-American students
using the vouchers scored 9 percentile points higher on national
math and reading achievement tests than their peers in public
schools.
A
2001 RAND Corporation review of existing literature on voucher and
charter programs found that the voucher programs produced positive
or neutral achievement benefits, resulted in higher parental
satisfaction, and hold the potential for increases in school
integration. Because choice programs have been small and limited,
RAND researchers caution against using them to make predictions
about the impact of large programs. Rather, they suggest, "A
program of vigorous research and experimentation is called for, but
not one confined to choice programs. Better information on the
performance of conventional public schools and alternative reform
models is needed as well."
In
October 2002, Manhattan Institute scholars Jay P. Greene, Ph.D.,
and Greg Forster, Ph.D., released a new study that focuses on the
impact of school choice on the academic achievement of public
school students in Milwaukee and San Antonio. After controlling for
demographic characteristics such as race and income level and
differences in expenditures, the authors found increased academic
achievement in public schools that had been exposed to competition
from private school scholarship programs and charter schools.
A
2002 analysis of the voucher programs in Maine and Vermont (the
oldest in the nation) found that choice increases productivity. In
these states, students in towns without public schools may attend
private schools at public expense. Schools located in areas where
there was high competition in attracting students (and their
per-pupil funding) had a strong incentive to improve performance.
Such schools exhibited higher levels of achievement than did those
in areas with less competition.
Research conducted in 2002 by Duke
University professor Thomas Nechyba suggests that a citywide
voucher program could alleviate neighborhood income segregation by
attracting higher-income families to poorer areas. Their relocation
to low-income neighborhoods would increase property values and
improve the tax base, thereby generating greater revenues for the
public schools. Thus, benefits flow not only to students using
vouchers, but also to students who remain in the public school
system. In this way, vouchers can contribute to neighborhood
revitalization and public school improvement while increasing the
freedom of parents to choose the school that best meets their
children's needs.
A
2001 analysis of the Florida A+ program, conducted by Jay P. Greene
of the Manhattan Institute, found that vouchers provided a strong
incentive for schools to improve. In Florida, schools receive
grades ranging from "A" to "F," based on the proportion of students
who pass the state's proficiency tests. Students who attend schools
that receive a failing grade twice within a four-year period can
receive a voucher to attend another public or private school of
choice. Greene found that schools receiving an "F" improved when
they were faced with the prospect of vouchers.
Winning in the Court of Public
Opinion
A
poll conducted in July 2002 by Zogby International Polling on
behalf of the Center for Education Reform found that 76 percent of
respondents "strongly" or "somewhat" supported "providing parents
with the option of sending their children to the school of their
choice--either public, private or parochial--rather than only to
the school to which they are assigned." When asked specifically
whether they were "in favor of or against allowing poor parents to
be given the tax dollars allotted for their child's education and
permitting them to use those dollars in the form of a scholarship
to attend a private, public, or parochial school of their
choosing," 63 percent of respondents favored the proposal. Rates of
approval were higher among minority respondents.
Even
a 2001 survey conducted for the National Education Association
(NEA), a union that has actively opposed vouchers, found that 63
percent of those surveyed supported President Bush's plan to give
parents of children in failing schools a voucher to send their
children to another public, charter, or private school. According
to Representative John Boehner (R-OH), chairman of the U.S. House
Committee on Education and the Workforce:
Americans support giving parents the power
to do what they think is best for their children's education. The
President's plan gives this power as a last resort to the parents
of children trapped in chronically failing schools after those
schools have been given every opportunity to change. A solid
majority of Americans support this approach.
Support for choice also is strong among
Members of Congress--at least as far as their own children are
concerned. According to a Heritage Foundation survey, among members
of the 107th Congress, 47 percent of Representatives and 50 percent
of Senators who have school-age children were sending their
children to private schools. The percentage of Members practicing
private school choice in 2001 was higher than in Heritage's
previous surveys, particularly in the House of Representatives. It
was also much higher than the percentage of the general population
(approximately 10 percent) that sends their children to private
schools.
Despite the rising popularity of private
schools among Members of Congress, however, many of the same
policymakers who exercise choice in their own children's education
voted to block legislation that would have given lower-income
families the range of options that they enjoy. Had these Members
voted on choice legislation in a way that was consistent with their
own practices, such legislation would have passed.
Minority Support for School Choice
Potentially powerful and growing support
for school choice is found among minority parents. A 2002 National
Opinion Poll conducted by the Joint Center for Political and
Economic Studies found that 57.4 percent of African-American
respondents favored a voucher system when asked, "Would you support
a voucher system where parents would get money from the government
to send their children to the public, private, or parochial school
of their choice?" An earlier poll by the
Joint Center found that, while 69 percent of black elected
officials oppose vouchers, 60 percent of the black populace
supports them and that 70 percent of blacks under the age of 50
support vouchers.
A
July 2001 poll by the Latino Coalition and Hispanic Business
Roundtable found that 73 percent of Hispanic adults surveyed
supported the following statement: "The government should provide
taxpayer-funded vouchers to help low-income families send their
children to a better public, private, or church-run school." An
even larger percentage of respondents supported giving all parents
a $1,000 tax credit for educational expenses, including tuition.
A
June 2002 poll conducted by Black America's Political Action
Committee (BAMPAC) found that 63 percent of African-American
parents would like to transfer their children from their current
public schools to a public charter school or private school. More
than half of the respondents gave their children's public school a
grade of "C" or lower. BAMPAC President Alvin Williams declared
that "African-Americans are becoming increasingly frustrated with
the public school system and its failure, in many cases, to provide
a quality education for their children. This just shows us that the
idea of choice is widely supported by the African-American
community."
In
September 2000, the Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO)
began a public information campaign to highlight the importance of
choice for children in inner-city communities. The campaign
featured a compelling slogan: "School choice is widespread unless
you're poor." BAEO Chairman Howard Fuller supports the view that
giving minority parents vouchers to take their children out of
failing schools is the best way to close the racial achievement
gap.
In
2001, the Hispanic Council for Reform and Educational Options
(CREO) was formed to address the education crisis among Hispanic
youth. Faced with high dropout rates, illiteracy, and teen
pregnancy among Hispanic youth, CREO advocates increased education
options to improve the academic achievement of all Hispanic
children.
Parental Support for School Choice
The
following parental testimonies are reprinted with permission from
the American Education Reform Council. The testimonies are
abridged for reasons of space.
In third grade, my son Jonathan was making
A's and B's on his report card, yet when he was tested, he could
not read. My son was on the honor roll, and he could not read. My
husband and I wanted to enroll Jonathan in another school, but we
had no real options. Our income is limited.... But, beginning in
the fourth grade, Florida's new A+ Opportunity Scholarship Program
let us enroll Jonathan at Sacred Heart Catholic School in
Pensacola. Everybody at Sacred Heart knows Jonathan. He feels like
he's somebody.... Since he started attending Sacred Heart, Jonathan
gets up in the morning ready to go to school. Most importantly,
Jonathan can now read.
By Cassandra, whose son Jonathan uses a
publicly funded Opportunity Scholarship to attend a school of
choice.
The Milwaukee program has let me choose
schools that I think are best for my girls.... My daughters are
excelling. I believe both of them will have a choice to go on to
college because of the voucher program. Before, I thought that
wouldn't happen. I have seen how options like choice, charter
schools, and privately funded scholarships through Milwaukee's PAVE
organization have made a difference for many other low-income
families like ours. People who once felt they had little or no
voice in their children's education now have a voice. Because of
these opportunities, I see young African Americans doing better.
By Tony, whose daughters Chronda and Tanya attend schools of choice
through the Milwaukee voucher program.
When Dylan was at the public school, the
teacher was writing full-page letters every day telling me what
Dylan could not do. He would come home with a full day's
schoolwork, plus homework because he couldn't read the
instructions. Homework became a four-hour ordeal of fighting and
tears.... After he failed so many times, and he has no self-esteem
and no desire to try, then he's labeled as something else and no
one wants to deal with him. [At his new school] he does very well.
He has learned a lot of coping mechanisms that he wasn't taught at
the public school.... After just eight weeks in the private school
he earned his very first, ever, perfect score on a spelling test.
The skills and abilities he has attained just amaze me. I always
knew he could do it, he just needed the right way to unlock that
busy brain of his.
By Susan, whose son Dylan attends a school
specializing in dyslexia, using a McKay
Scholarship.
Kenya is a very happy child. She likes to
smile. But, she is very demanding. She's mentally and physically
profoundly handicapped and she can't walk, she can't talk. The
public school system has been some help, but not enough. I felt
Kenya was not making enough progress in public schools.... When I
learned about the McKay Scholarships, I chose one of the schools
that fit her needs. The McKay Scholarship gives parents a choice--a
choice in their child's future. You have an opportunity to make
some decisions about the services your child will receive.... She
will receive much more in the private school system: psychological
services, speech therapy, and more aggressive physical and
occupational therapy.
By Selma, whose daughter Kenya has used a McKay Scholarship to
attend a school that specializes in serving children with
disabilities.
I care about my child's education. I would
do anything, whatever it takes, to get her the best education
possible. Ebony is a very bright child. I'm not saying that just
because she's my child. I know she will grow up to be somebody very
special. So when I found out she wasn't doing well in her social
studies and math, I knew I had to do something. I was going to find
a school that would help her do her best. I wanted to send her to a
private school but I could never afford it. If you try to send your
children to private school, you will have to work two or three jobs
to do it, and then you won't have any time for your kids. That's
why the Cleveland Scholarship Program is very important to me. When
I got the letter saying she got a voucher, I was so happy I didn't
know what to do. It was like someone was coming to my rescue.
By Eulanda, whose daughter Ebony receives a voucher through the
Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program.
Legislative Outlook in Congress
Some
of the lowest levels of achievement among public school students
exist in the nation's capital. Despite per-pupil expenditures of
more than $11,000, 94 percent of 4th grade students in Washington,
D.C., are not proficient in math and 90 percent lack proficiency in
reading, according to the National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP). The results are similar for
8th graders. Many will never catch up. As few as 59 percent of
students graduate from high school.
Research strongly suggests that vouchers
would improve the academic achievement of D.C. students.
Researchers at Harvard and Georgetown University found improved
academic achievement and higher parental satisfaction for
African-American students who used privately funded scholarships
through the Washington Scholarship Fund.
According to the NAEP test results,
parochial school students consistently achieve at a higher rate
than their peers in public schools. Research by Heritage
Foundation Analyst Kirk Johnson, Ph.D., using NAEP data confirms
this trend for African-American students in the District and shows
that, on average, a black 8th grader in a Catholic school
outperforms 72 percent of his or her public school peers.
Given the failure of other reforms to
improve achievement and the growing recognition that additional
funding alone will not improve the system, a far better approach
would be to grant families in the District of Columbia publicly
funded scholarships to send their children to a public or private
school of choice. In 1997, such legislation was passed by both
houses of Congress but was vetoed by then-President Bill
Clinton.
On
June 23, 2003, Representative Tom Davis (R-VA), chairman of the
House Government Reform Committee, introduced H.R. 2556, the D.C.
Parental Choice Incentive Act. The bill would enable low-income
parents in the District of Columbia to enroll their children in
private schools through a scholarship program administered by the
Department of Education. The maximum scholarship is $7,500, and the
total authorized for the program is $15 million. The Secretary of
the Department of Education must conduct an annual evaluation of
the program to present to Congress.
President Bush's FY 2004 budget includes a
D.C. voucher proposal as part of a $75 million Choice Incentive
Fund. The fund would provide competitive grants to states, school
districts, and community-based nonprofit organizations to give
scholarships to students to attend a school of choice. The District
of Columbia would receive a choice grant. In all, the budget provides
for several school choice initiatives, including a refundable tax
credit for parents who transfer their child out of a "failing"
school as defined under the No Child Left Behind Act. The credit
would be worth 50 percent of the first $5,000 in tuition, fees, and
transportation costs. The No Child Left Behind Act currently allows
students in failing schools the option of transferring to another
public school within the District, but many students have been
denied this opportunity because of insufficient capacity within the
public school system.
Funding for a public school choice
program, charter schools, and magnet schools is also included in
the FY 2004 budget, along with billions of dollars of new funding
for other education programs, bringing the total to the largest
amount ever spent at the federal level for education. Although only
a very small percentage of this funding is designated to help
families find better schools for their children, such programs are
an important step in the right direction. They rest squarely on the
foundation of previous legislative activity, current law, legal
opinion, and research.
Remaining Challenges
Despite the growth of choice programs over
the past few years, the vast majority of poor children remain
trapped in low-performing schools. The nation spends more than $422
billion each year on elementary and secondary education, yet the
results of the most recent NAEP tests in math, science, reading,
history, and geography are deeply disappointing. Nearly 60 percent
of high school seniors lack even a basic knowledge of American
history, and more than half of the nation's low-income 4th graders
cannot read at a basic level.
Moreover, America's children have fallen
behind many of their international peers on tests of core academic
knowledge, particularly in math and science. Despite higher than
average per-pupil expenditures, American 8th graders ranked 19th
among counterparts in 38 countries in math and 18th in science in
the most recent international comparison of proficiency, the Third
International Mathematics and Science Study-Repeat (TIMSS-R) of
1999.
While parental choice has made significant
headway in the past few years, opponents have done their best to
limit its success. As the eminent scholars of the Koret Task Force
on K-12 Education recently stated:
Choice-based reforms have not had a fair
test. Most evidence to date suggests that they can boost student
learning and parental satisfaction, but constraints have kept them
from being tried in full. Opponents have hamstrung schoolchoice
programs at every turn: fighting voucher programs in legislative
chambers and courtrooms; limiting per-pupil funding so tightly that
it's impractical for new schools to come into being; capping the
number of charter schools; and regulating and harassing them into
near conformity with conventional schools.
These barriers have kept choice-based
reforms from receiving the proper trials they deserve, which is
significant on two counts: first, by ensuring that only half-baked
versions have been adopted, opponents have made it easier to claim
that the reforms were tried but they failed; second, profound
changes in a system--the kind of changes that choice would bring to
bear--cannot arise overnight.
Recommendations
This
presents Congress with an excellent opportunity to expand school
choice, especially for the children who need it most. Specifically,
Congress should:
- Provide vouchers
to students in Washington, D.C. Congress should give
children in the District of Columbia access to schools of
excellence. Despite high per-pupil expenditures, children in D.C.
schools continue to suffer from high dropout rates and low academic
achievement. The demand for choice is evident in the city's
higher-than-average charter school attendance and participation in
private scholarship programs. There are hundreds of private schools
in the D.C. metro area, most with tuitions that are less than the
per-pupil expenditure in public schools.
- Expand choice
for students with special needs.
The Administration should insist that Congress follow the
recommendations of the bipartisan Commission on Excellence in
Special Education and provide the parents of special-needs children
with a variety of educational options. Though many parents are
satisfied with the services their children currently receive, those
who are frustrated with the quality of service in their schools or
dissatisfied with their children's academic progress should be able
to access alternative services, including private schools. All
parents--not just those who have been able to procure a private
placement through the Individualized Education Plan (IEP)
process--should have access to private providers. Florida's McKay
Scholarship program, which provides vouchers to special education
students to attend a private or public school of choice, provides a
model of such a program.
- Hold oversight
hearings on choice.
Congress should hold hearings on how well the states and
districts are implementing the choice and supplemental services
provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act. If it becomes clear
that there is insufficient will or capacity to give students
meaningful public school choice, the Administration should insist
that Congress enable students to receive Title I vouchers under the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act to use for tuition at a
private school of choice.
Conclusion
2002
was a momentous year for the school choice movement. The Supreme
Court of the United States upheld the Cleveland Scholarship and
Tutoring Program, opening the door for new voucher programs.
Progress was made in the state courts against Blaine amendments
that have prohibited students from using publicly funded vouchers
in schools with a religious affiliation.
New
studies have added to the growing body of evidence showing that
when parents are empowered to choose their children's
schools--whether they choose public, public charter, private, or
home schools--all students can benefit. This research has added to
the growing recognition that competition produced by school choice
improves the public school system.
Eleven states currently have publicly
funded voucher or tax credit programs, and 40 states and the
District of Columbia have charter school laws. This year, Colorado
and Maryland adopted voucher or charter school laws. Other states
and Congress may yet adopt parental choice legislation before the
end of the year. There will be numerous opportunities in the coming
years to enact authentic education reform that empowers parents to
provide their children with the best education that is available.
The principles of parental empowerment and educational opportunity
are shaping the education policy debate as more policymakers
realize the benefits that choice holds for the nation's
children.
Krista
Kafer is Senior Policy Analyst for Education at The
Heritage Foundation.