-Angela
With Vouchers, States Shift Aid for Schools to Families
By FERNANDA SANTOS and MOTOKO RICH
PHOENIX — A growing number of lawmakers across the country are taking
steps to redefine public education, shifting the debate from the
classroom to the pocketbook. Instead of simply financing a traditional
system of neighborhood schools, legislators and some governors are
headed toward funneling public money directly to families, who would be
free to choose the kind of schooling they believe is best for their
children, be it public, charter, private, religious, online or at home.
On Tuesday, after a legal fight, the Indiana Supreme Court upheld the state’s voucher program as constitutional. This month, Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama signed tax-credit legislation
so that families can take their children out of failing public schools
and enroll them in private schools, or at least in better-performing
public schools.
In Arizona, which already has a tax-credit scholarship program, the
Legislature has broadened eligibility for education savings accounts.
And in New Jersey, Gov. Chris Christie, in an effort to circumvent a Legislature that has repeatedly defeated voucher bills, has inserted $2 million into his budget so low-income children can obtain private school vouchers.
Proponents say tax-credit and voucher programs offer families a way to
escape failing public schools. But critics warn that by drawing money
away from public schools, such programs weaken a system left vulnerable
after years of crippling state budget cuts — while showing little
evidence that students actually benefit.
“This movement is doing more than threaten the core of our traditional
public school system,” said Timothy Ogle, executive director of the
Arizona School Boards Association. “It’s pushing a national policy
agenda embraced by conservatives across states that are receptive to
conservative ideas.”
Currently, 17 states offer 33 programs that allow parents to use
taxpayer money to send their children to private schools, according to
the American Federation for Children,
a nonprofit advocate for school vouchers and tax-credit scholarship
programs that give individuals or corporations tax reductions if they
donate to state-run scholarship funds.
To qualify, students generally must fit into certain categories, based
on factors that include income and disability status. Georgia students
do not need to meet any specific criteria
to receive tax-credit scholarships. And under the income criteria set
for Indiana’s voucher program, nearly two-thirds of the state’s families
qualify.
The Arizona Legislature last May expanded the eligibility criteria for
education savings accounts, which are private bank accounts into which
the state deposits public money for certain students to use for private
school tuition, books, tutoring and other educational services.
Open only to special-needs students at first, the program has been
expanded to include children in failing schools, those whose parents are
in active military duty and those who are being adopted. One in five
public school students — roughly 220,000 children — will be eligible in
the coming school year.
Some parents of modest means are surprised to discover that the
education savings accounts put private school within reach. When Nydia
Salazar first dreamed of attending St. Mary’s Catholic High School in
Phoenix, for example, her mother, Maria Salazar, a medical receptionist,
figured there was no way she could afford it. The family had always
struggled financially, and Nydia, 14, had always attended public school.
But then Ms. Salazar, 37, a single mother who holds two side jobs to
make ends meet, heard of a scholarship fund that would allow her to use
public dollars to pay the tuition.
She is now trying to coax other parents into signing up for similar
scholarships. “When I tell them about private school, they say I’m
crazy,” she said. “They think that’s only for rich people.”
These state efforts come at a particularly challenging time for public
schools. Their budgets suffered severely during the recession, and they
are now facing pressure to conform to new curriculum standards and to
evaluate teacher performance.
“We’re not providing adequately now,” said Dennis Van Roekel, president
of the National Education Association. “Why would you take away”
financing from public schools?
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled
that school vouchers did not violate the Constitution’s separation of
church and state, even though many families use the public money to send
their children to religious schools. Many states, however, still have
constitutional clauses prohibiting the financing of religious
institutions with public money, which is why some of the programs face
legal challenges. Voucher opponents also have filed suits based on state
constitutional guarantees of public education.
Beyond Indiana, the Supreme Court in Louisiana heard an appeal this
month by a group of parents who are currently using vouchers and the Black Alliance for Educational Options,
an advocacy group, after a lower court upheld a challenge to the
state’s voucher program. They argued that children enrolled in failing
public schools had the right to a high-quality education.
“What we’re dealing with is what public monopolies always give us, which
is low quality at a very high price,” said Richard Komer, a lawyer with
the Institute for Justice,
a libertarian public-interest law firm that represents the pro-voucher
groups in Indiana and Louisiana. “The idea is to try and break that
cycle, because what we’ve been doing in public education since the
beginning of time is rewarding failure.”
Critics say schools that accept vouchers or tax credit scholarships
often filter out students with special needs, and that families already
sending their children to private school use the public programs to
subsidize their tuition. It is also not clear that students who attend
private schools using vouchers get better educations, as many do not
have to take the annual standardized tests that public school students
do. Research tracking students in voucher programs has also not shown
clear improvements in performance.
“At the same exact time as accountability and transparency seem to be
the total watchword for how are we spending these dollars in an
austerity-ridden environment,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the
American Federation of Teachers, “there’s absolutely no accountability
with vouchers.”
Mr. Komer at the Institute for Justice called for a shift of focus. “We
happen to take the view that parents know best,” he said, “and are the
best accountability measure to make sure that things are done properly
for their kids.”
In Arizona — which, over the past five years, cut more of its K-12
budget than any other state, according to the Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities, a policy research group based in Washington — charter schools are ubiquitous and school districts have open borders, so children are free to go to school wherever they want.
Dr. Ogle, of the Arizona School Boards Association, said, “The arguments
that you need to have more options is superfluous.”
But the savings accounts have many powerful supporters, including
Arizona’s governor, Jan Brewer. Unlike vouchers, these accounts allow
the money to follow the child from one school year to the next.
(Scholarships total roughly $3,500 a year, or the state’s portion of
school per-pupil funding.)
“It will be the end of schools that don’t perform, and that’s a
blessing,” said Darcy A. Olsen, president of the Goldwater Institute,
which designed the program and led a robust lobbying campaign to pass it
in the Legislature. “We’re not doing anyone any favors by keeping
schools afloat that don’t teach children how to read.”
The school boards association and the state’s teachers union, among
others, have challenged the savings accounts in court on the grounds
that they violate a constitutional amendment banning spending public
money on private schools. (Direct vouchers, begun in 2006, were deemed
unconstitutional in 2009 for that reason.)
In January 2012, a Superior Court judge in Maricopa County, which
includes Phoenix, upheld the savings accounts, though the plaintiffs
appealed the ruling. Oral arguments were heard last month. A decision is
pending.
No comments:
Post a Comment