Private School Vouchers

My son started Pre-K at a private Catholic school last month. My husband and I made the decision early on that our children would be attending private school rather than public due to many factors, not the least of which is the poor quality of the public schools that we are zoned for. There were a myriad of other personal reasons as well. We made this decision knowing that for the next 14 years (Pre-K, K, 1-12), we will be shelling out a substantial amount of money for our child's education (15 years if you count his sister who starts Pre-K next year) - and tuition expenses are compounded by the uniform cost. We are lucky that we have this option - that we have the funds to send our children to the best school available to them - even though it's going to "hurt" financially, we can still dig deep, and do it. However, each time that tuition bill is drafted from our bank account, I start thinking (dreaming?) of school vouchers. Certainly, vouchers would help out our budget tremendously. But is it the right thing for our society to have them available? Let's examine what vouchers are, and some of their pros and cons.

"The debate, at its core, is about the extent to which knowledge or access to knowledge is privileged...Who in a democracy has the right to know what?"

What are school vouchers?

From Wikipedia: "A school voucher, also called an education voucher, is a certificate by which parents are given the ability to pay for the education of their children at a school of their choice, rather than the public school to which they were assigned."

From School Choices: "School vouchers, also known as scholarships, redirect the flow of education funding, channeling it directly to individual families rather than to school districts. This allows families to select the public or private schools of their choice and have all or part of the tuition paid. Scholarships are advocated on the grounds that parental choice and competition between public and private schools will improve education for all children. Vouchers can be funded and administered by the government, by private organizations, or by some combination of both."

A History of Vouchers (from the National School Boards Association which opposes vouchers):

Cleveland, OH – enacted in 1995; about 6,300 students enrolled; approximately $19 million annual cost Milwaukee, WI – enacted in 1990, about 17,410 students enrolled; estimated 2006-07 cost of $110 million Washington, D.C. – enacted in 2004; about 1,800 students enrolled, $14 million annual cost for federally funded program Arizona – 2 small programs enacted in 2006, each with a cap of $2.5 million annually Florida – McKay voucher program for children with disabilities enacted in 1999; about 17,300 students enrolled; $107 million spent in 2005-06 Georgia - special education voucher program patterned after Florida's McKay program; narrowly enacted in 2007 Ohio – statewide program enacted in 2005; about 2,200 students enrolled Utah – small program for children with disabilities enacted in 2004; universal voucher program enacted in 2007; challenged by voters and will be put to public referendum in November 2007

PRO School Vouchers:

In the 1950s, economist Milton Friedman voiced his opinion that school vouchers would promote competition and improve schools. Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani supports taxpayer-funded vouchers for private elementary and secondary schools: "People come from all over the world to attend college in the United States," Giuliani said. "How is it that we have the best higher education in the world and a weaker K-through-12 system?" Giuliani said. "What's the difference? Why does one operate so well and the other not nearly as well? American higher education is based on a quintessential American principle -- choice. I'd give parents control over their children's education. We've got to have competition operating. If we don't do that, our education system is going to deteriorate." (source)

Another view is that vouchers help deliver equal education for all children. Presidential candidate John McCain said "School choice stimulates improvement and creates expanded opportunities for our children to get a quality education." The Honorable Kurt L. Schmoke (mayor of Baltimore) had this to say, "My support of school choice is founded in the common sense premise that no parent should be forced to send a child to a poorly performing school...We need to give poor children the same right that children from more affluent households have long enjoyed. The right to an education that will prepare them to make a meaningful contribution to society." Per School Choices: "At present, educational choice is concentrated among wealthier families, who can opt for private schooling, and who can more easily relocate to areas with better quality schools. Poor inner city children, by contrast, are frequently stuck in dilapidated government school buildings and offered an abysmally poor education compared with their suburban counterparts.

" Double taxation" It has also been said that the current system is unfair as parents who choose private school as they are paying twice for education - once for tuition at their private school of choice and once again when they pay taxes for the public schools ("Why Conservatives and Libertarians Should Support School Vouchers").

The same article brought up Religious Liberty: "Nearly nine out of ten parents who choose private schools do so out of religious conviction. They oppose the secular humanism taught in government schools and want their children to learn their own values and beliefs. It is a well-established legal principle that no one should be required to pay a tax penalty to exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right."

CON School Vouchers:

Vouchers drain money from public schools and they are "tantamount to providing taxpayer-subsidized 'white flight' from urban public schools (source). The Americans United for Separation of Church and State put it this way "Public schools will improve only if our government officials and the public decide to make a serious commitment to educational quality. Diverting money from public schools to private will not achieve this goal, but will hurt the nation's public education system."

Additionally, The voucher system is a violation of the United States Constitution ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion") because it provides government funding for church-run schools (interestingly enough, I found an argument against this that compares school vouchers to the GI Bill: "A properly structured voucher system is no more a violation of the principle of the separation of church and state than is the GI Bill. This program allows military veterans to use government dollars to attend any university of their choice, public or private, religious or secular.")

"Cream skimming" - Private schools are already selective on whom they choose to admit. With school vouchers, the pool of applicants would be larger, allowing them even greater selectivity. They may choose to exclude more students with disabilities, autism, and discipline problems - students public school are required by law to admit. This one concerns me personally quite a bit as my own son has learning delays and allergies - and it was touch and go there for a while as to if the private school of our choice was even going to accept him.

So what do you think? Are vouchers a good idea or not? Why or why not?

Comments

[Rachel]

I think that they can be both a good idea and a bad idea.

Vouchers could be good because they may give children the opportunity to go to a wonderful school instead of a possibly under performing drug and gang infested school. These kids deserve a chance. They should not be punished because their parents do not make much money.

On the other hand, let's face it, most of the kids whose parents do send them to private schools (maybe not most, but alot) can very much afford it without so much as a blink of their eyes. Those children that may get into that same school with a voucher may be outcast because they are from a "poor" neighborhood. Maybe they don't wear the most expensive clothes and such. What would that do to a child's self-esteem?

But, in my opinion, the good outweighs the bad in this.

[Sonia]

I've never heard any of the information you've presented. You've obviously done your homework (no pun intended)!
We have both a parochial and public school in my town and people choose private school primarily for the Catholic education because our public school is one of the best in the state.
There are compelling arguments on both sides, as you have clearly presented. I had an easy choice to send my kids to a "free" public school with excellent credentials, but I may be thinking about the burden of private school, like you, if my kids were in a district where they would not be getting a good education.
Excellent post, I'll be reading further on all your links.

[SingForHim @ Real Life]

My husband is a teacher at two schools, and we are zoned in a third. We had the privilege of true school choice (except private schools) It was the most empowering feeling as a parent to be able to weigh the pros and cons of each school before sending our children there. I think at the very least, we should allow public school choice, and I am all for vouchers. It's time the government had to actually work for the money we give them.

Another, possibly more controversial point: History has proven that socialism breeds mediocrity. Although we have many great teachers, the US education system is decidedly socialist, with very few rewards for excellence or incentives not to waste the money they are given. A little injection of market forces would add a little more accountability for our government education program.

Thanks for your very informative and balanced presentation of this issue.

[Steff (http://okierivermama.livejournal.com/)]

I am against vouchers. I think the money would be better spent to invest in the teachers and curricula at public schools. I think private schools foster an elitist system. Not that its something that actually affects my kids one way or the other. We live in such a rural area that the nearest private school is more than an hours drive. The school my children attend is a very rural country school and you can tell the difference. My boys are only 3 and 4 and in the pre k class, but their school is so small that even the 8th grade teacher knows them on sight and gets both of their names correct. My boys are in a minority at their school anyway as we are in the 8% of their school district that doesnt live at or below the poverty level, and in addition do not have native american status.
steff

[SingForHim @ Real Life]

Would private schools be elitist if anyone could attend them? Not just those who could afford it?

[Mike]

The best of both worlds is when school districts offer complete choice within the district. In Cincinnati, we had the choice of sending our son to many grade schools and have been very happy with the choice.

http://www.citykin.com/2007/09/magnet-schools-work.html

[Mike]

Another Con for me is the low pay some of the parochial schools offer their teachers.

[Sonia]

I have to add in here, we have "open enrollment" here, you are not required to go to the school district you live in. My younger brother did this when my parents moved before his junior year of high school to a neighboring school district which of course, he did not want to attend so he could graduate with kids he'd known his whole life instead of starting over.
So, that adds a lot of flexibility for parents and of course, schools stay competitive or risk losing students to other schools.

[Emma]

This is a great post. Where I live my children can go to any school of their choice, they are not limited to the area in which we live. They can go to either a public or separate (Catholic) school, as both are funded by the government. (However, due to my son's learning disabilities, he is limited in choice and is bussed to an academic support program...although I hate that he is not at school a block away I do realize I am lucky that he was offered this program...I know that there are places where he would be left to drown on his own.)

[Lisse]

I'm all for charters and choice, but I do not support vouchers. I would love it if we had wonderful local schools in every neighborhood, but I also recognize that no school can be all things to all people.

Private schools work for two main reasons; size and selectivity. Draining top kids and money from the public schools leaves them nothing to compete with. And if we were really serious about leaving no child behind, we wouldn't be subjecting them and their future prospects to a life stakes competition where someone always loses.

[Private Schools]

Private schools are certainly nice than public schools. But the high fee structure at these schools is a cause of trouble for middle class parents.