As soon as someone uses the phrase “school choice” a debate ensues.  Most often, the words are spoken when the controversy concerns charter schools and vouchers.

Colorado public elementary school

The National Education Association (NEA) as well as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) have written passionate criticism of vouchers.  A group called School Choices founded by Andrew J. Coulson defends them.  A number of educators defend them, including Charles Murray from the American Enterprise Institute in a New York Times article on May 5, 2010, “Why Charter Schools Fail the Test.”  It’s a play on words as studies have shown that the majority of charter schools do no better on state tests than traditional public schools, but in his thesis there are many other reasons why charter schools and vouchers are the best “school choice.”

Vouchers have been legislated in a number of Midwest school districts and famously in Washington, D.C.  However, the legislation permitting a 5 year field test of vouchers for D.C. school children was not reauthorized by Congress in 2009.  Only students already in school receive vouchers until they graduate and no new vouchers will be paid for with federal monies.

Why is it such a ‘hot’ issue?

Most people in the education world define the ’school voucher,’ (AKA ‘education voucher,’ or ’scholarship’) as “a certificate from the government that a parent can apply to tuition at a private school.” (see Wikipedia)  At first the vouchers were not valid for a parochial school because of the Constitution’s separation of church and state.  Of course, the “school choice” advocates did not like that exception.  Now the rules for use of vouchers vary.  In states like Wisconsin the courts allowed vouchers to be used for parochial school fees.

The theory is that families paying for a private school also pay taxes to support public school systems.  Those families look at vouchers as a way to offset their costs.  On the other hand, opponents, especially teacher’s unions, say vouchers undermine the public school system because taxes for vouchers are like paying subsidies to private schools.

What else has happened?

In the 1960’s, vouchers were valued in the South as a way to continue segregation.  Only white children obtained them to use at one of the many private schools that popped up at the time.  One voucher claim is that these certificates help low-performing students move to a school that isn’t failing.  A number of studies don’t confirm that proposition.

All of these policies were based on economist Milton Friedman’s free market theories that built a following especially in the 60’s.  He thought competition between private or charter schools (since 1992) and public schools would improve every school’s academics and cost efficiency.  Friedman’s line “the freedom of private enterprises to experiment” is music to the ears of those who love the business model for schools.  In fact, many school choice proponents emphasize the competitive market ideal that vouchers would foster in every feature of schools in the United States, although most private and parochial schools aren’t set up as businesses.

NEA and other groups make a case that privatizing schools allows for even further inconsistency in what is taught and learned.  They advocate consistent standards for students.  Also, the unions see further economic, racial, ethnic, and religious divides in the country if some students get vouchers and others don’t.  NEA and ADL both discuss the elitist strategy of subsidizing private school tuition rather than using every penny available to improve education for low-income students.

It is alarming how the issue of providing ways to get into a school other than public school is gaining traction.  In California, recent legislation altered the education code so that it fits with federal guidelines designed to provide help to improve schools.  The bills authorized a raise on the cap for school charters.  In addition, SBX5 4 allows students to move into another school if the school they attend is persistently poor-performing.  Next, someone in the legislature will introduce a bill to provide actual vouchers, defeated once before, but one never knows.