Education - Vouchers
- Aug 1, 2005
Are Americans in favor of school choice vouchers or not? It depends on how the question is asked. A Wirthlin Worldwide study, commissioned by the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation, asked, “Do you favor or oppose allowing students and parents to choose a private school to attend at public expense?” They found that only 41 percent answered in the affirmative. But when the question was asked, “Do you favor or oppose allowing students and parents to choose any school, public or private, to attend using public funds?” the results were just the opposite with 63 percent in favor.
“A Voucher By Any Other Name,” (Wall Street Journal) August 27, 2004 [Subscription required]
In a study funded by School Choice Wisconsin, researcher Jay P. Greene of the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research found that 64 percent of Milwaukee students who used vouchers to enter ninth grade at ten private schools in 1999 graduated from high school four years later. That compared to only 36 percent of students in public schools.
Two other researchers were asked by the Washington Post to review the study. One of those, Terry M. Moe of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, said that more random sampling was needed since about 100 schools in Milwaukee accept vouchers. Moe is a proponent of vouchers.
The other researcher, Richard D. Kahlenberg of the Century Foundation in Washington, D.C., said that the study left the question “What is the effect of the voucher program on the large number of students left behind in the regular public schools?” unanswered.
Greene, however, pointed out that two studies completed in the 1990s found that voucher recipients in Milwaukee were more likely to be poor and to come from single-parent families than their peers in the public schools. His study also found that the graduation rate in his study was higher than the graduation rate of 41 percent among students at six Milwaukee public high schools with selective admission requirements.
The Greene study was applauded by the Washington Scholarship Fund, the group that runs the new D.C. voucher program.
Sewell Chan, “Study Bolsters Case For Tuition Vouchers,” (Washington Post), September 29, 2004
In March 2005, the Arizona Senate passed a bill to provide for vouchers to be used by parents who desired to send their children to private school instead of public schools (see Vouchers Rally to Kill Bill, March 16, 2005). The measure then was to be considered by the House. However, due to pressure from public education interest groups, the measure was never brought to a vote. Some of those opposed to the voucher system believe it violates the state constitution while others say it will take money from public schools which are already inadequately funded. Those who favor vouchers are presently looking to make them a matter of a voter referendum in 2006 (see Vouchers Lack Votes in House, April 4, 2005).
However, a poll conducted in late March revealed that Arizonans are in favor of some kind of school choice. Sixty percent indicated that they would be in favor of tuition tax credits. About 70 percent of those polled were in favor of eliminating the “marriage penalty tax,” which would allow married couples to increase their education tax credit from $625 to $1,000. The governor, Janet Napolitano, has already vetoed the legislative budget that included changing the “marriage penalty tax” and corporate tuition tax scholarships.
“Chip Scutari, Survey Finds Support for Some School Choice, (Arizona Central), April 8, 2005
In August 2004, a district appeals court ruled that Florida’s Opportunity Scholarship Program violated the state’s constitution. That program provides vouchers to students in failing schools so that they may attend a school that provides a better education. The focus of media coverage of the ruling has been on approximately 600 students who are attending private schools. The ruling has been appealed to the Florida Supreme Court which may consider the case in early June. One of the arguments against a voucher system is that it has a negative effect on the school system through loss of education funding.
There are those who believe that vouchers are actually beneficial to public schools. Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters of Manhattan Institute’s Education Research Office say, “Voucher programs provide failing public schools with the incentives they need to improve. Under the current system, urban public schools don’t have to worry too much about providing students with a quality education because their students have no real opportunity to leave. Vouchers force public schools to compete with private schools for their students, as well as the state funding those students generate, by providing a better education.
“We recently evaluated Opportunity Scholarships’ effect on Florida’s failing public schools. We found that public schools faced with voucher competition made extraordinary gains on the state’s standardized tests. For example, public schools whose students were offered vouchers improved by nearly six-percentile points more than other Florida public schools in one year’s time on the Stanford-9 math test, a nationally respected measure of academic proficiency. Schools that were not yet competing with vouchers but were in danger of facing such competition if they didn’t improve also made significant gains.
“Because of the way Opportunity Scholarships work, failing schools can remove themselves from the threat of voucher competition if they turn themselves around. Interestingly, our research suggests that once this happens and they are no longer threatened by vouchers, schools actually regress relative to other public schools. Thus, when schools compete they rise to the challenge and improve, but when they are allowed to relax they slip back towards failing their students just like before.”
Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters, Killing Opportunity, (National Review), August 19, 2004
Many are coming to realize that the crisis in education has nothing to do with money. “The federal government spends more on education—and gets less for it—than ever before. Per-student spending in the United States has doubled in constant dollars since 1971, from $3,931 then to $7,524 now. The federal contribution to education spending has doubled in just the last eight years. In fact, the federal government has doled out so much money for education that last year a congressional committee found more than $6 billion of it sitting in state coffers. Federal aid flows in such abundance that some states haven’t even been able to spend it in the two years they’ve had it.
“Yet, despite all this spending, student achievement since the 1970s has remained flat or fallen in every category. Today, 68 percent of America’s fourth-graders score at basic or below-basic levels on national assessments in mathematics (which means they have partial or no mastery over grade-level material), and 71 percent of eighth-graders score at these levels.”
Among those recognizing the need for change is Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina. The legislature in that state has proposed the “Put Parents in Charge Act” that allows for tuition tax credits and tax credits for donations to scholarship funds. Those tax credits would allow parents to choose where to send their children based on what they believe will be best for them. In a state with a dismal record on education, parents and some legislators seem to be ready for a change. Interestingly, many in the media continue to defend the status quo.
“Such programs are wiser investments than much current educational spending because they result in increased achievement by both the students who transfer to other schools and by those who remain in their public schools. That’s right. According to research from universities such as Harvard and Stanford and a bevy of think tanks, including The Heritage Foundation and the Manhattan Institute, not only do students in choice programs improve at a faster pace than their peers after transferring, but students at nearby public schools show improvement as well.
“Experts attribute improvement in public schools to reforms those schools adopt to make their programs more attractive to families empowered by choice programs. Competition, to use the language of business, causes improvement. This is why one Harvard researcher suggests that school-choice programs could be a ‘tide that lifts all boats.’”
Jonathan Butcher, Don’t Change the Subject on School Choice, (Heritage Foundation), April 8, 2005