Defining the Problem
Since the monumental Brown v. Board of Education case of the 1950’s overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, allowing for the integration of public spaces, the topic of how this integration will and has had an effect on the education system has been at the forefront of many political issues and policies. Almost immediately after segregation was abolished, there was a massive exodus out of the public school sector. Although the majority of individuals seeking alternative forms of education were white middle and working class families, other minority groups also took advantage of other educational opportunities, often leaving those of lower economic status at underfunded and de-funded schools. Today, this antiquated midcentury idea continues to plague our political and educational system in the 21st century as parents and various interest groups fight for or against school choice policies.
School choice and waiver policies were set in place to give families the opportunity to offer their children an education based on their personal values and belief systems. Waivers made alternative education more attainable and accessible to families regardless of their income status. However, the controversy with school choice and waivers is that opposers of these policies believe that these programs often have a negative effect on the public school sector. These negative effects may be monetarily and/or academically. Opposers also feel that funding from the government should be allocated to support the communities and schools most in need, while supporters of school choice and waivers feel that as taxpayers, they should have the right to choose how and where their tax dollars should be used.
Policies surrounding school choice are often in line with whatever political group is in control at the time. This is often true at the federal, state, and local levels. Currently, at the federal level, President Trump and the Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos have been pushing to fund alternative education policies and programs heavily in favor of School choice. This is an interesting time in history as these decisions are reflective of the current political and racial climate resonating throughout our country. It is very similar to that which we experienced during the 1950’s. However, the level of sophistication of many supporters of the push for school choice is masked in ideas of national civil rights rather than the blatant white supremacy ideology of yesterday.
According to Valerie Strauss (2017), author of Three big problems with school ‘choice’ supporters don’t like to talk about, there are fundamental issues that surround the policies and legislative decision making of school choice and waivers. The first issue she notes is that privatized schools decrease funding for the local neighborhood schools. The second point she makes is that vouchers for private and charter schools place a burden on taxpayers the more privatization of alternative education programs expands. The last point she focuses on is the legal and fraudulent issues due to the lack of transparency and additional administrative costs result in abuse for personal gain and a waste of tax dollars (Strauss, 2017).
Evidence
Valerie Strauss (2017) provides several examples to support her argument that school choice and voucher policies are not the complete remedy to the educational issues our country faces. The idea that “backpack funding” will not hurt local public schools when taken to alternative education programs such as private, home, or charter schools of the parents’ choice is not factual. There are many accounts of school costs not being reduced to the money in the “backpack” when a student leaves the public school. This problem is known as “stranded costs”. These mounting costs of funding that is left versus what’s being saved often leaves local public schools in great financial strain (Strauss, 2017).
Strauss (2017) describes the impact that vouchers for alternative programs have on taxpayers. She determined that if taxpayers took on all the costs for privatized education, it would cost $59 billion a year. However, the cost will only increase as more programs become available over time, especially as it covers tuition for families who could afford to pay out of pocket. One example of this is Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts, where donors promised to remove all caps, giving parents 90 percent of public education costs on a debit card as an incentive to not send their children to a public school (Strauss, 2017).
Privatization of education often lacks accountability on how tax dollars are used. It was found that nearly all charter schools spend double the cost or more to educate students compared to their public school counterparts. The lack of transparency in fund allocation allows fraud to run rampant, and the abuse of power undetectable. Credit card fraud, waste, questionable spending practices, and conflicts of interests are the types of scandals privatized schools with voucher and waiver programs exhibit. Strauss (2017) ends her article by comparing this new push towards the privatization of education to consumerism while emphasizing that we, as a nation, are getting away from our formal conservative value as it relates to education (Strauss, 2017).
The Alternatives
Redirecting federal dollars towards public schools doing well and schools with the most needs is a viable alternative to using public dollars to fund charter and private schooling. This can be done by further incentivizing public schools that are doing well academically. This could be based on their ability to score high on standardized testing as a school, being innovative in areas of need such as STEM, STEAM, Performance Arts, Pre-Law, Per-Med, Computer Science, Information Technology, and other trades. Providing the funds to historically low performing public schools can also be a great alternative. This may allow the public schools to better compete with other non-traditional educational programs. With increased budgets, lower performing schools may be able to offer similar content, curriculums, and higher standards with supportive tools and resources, more informed educators, and more creativity for their students.
Encouraging co-op schools and homeschooling as alternatives is also an option. This would decrease the burden on taxpayers and give, as the parents assume all fees associated with educating their students. It will also give the parents the ultimate decision on what curriculum their students learn based on their personal belief systems, visions, and values. Co-ops allow for like-minded families to take turns educating the members of their group. Their special interests in educating their children outside of the traditional schooling may be due to their political, religious, and/or cultural beliefs.
Increasing federal oversight for alternative education programs for accountability is also an alternative reaction to the current way legislation deals with alternative education programs. There have been so many accounts of mismanagement and fraud as it relates to the use of federal dollars for school choice. If school choice is going to continue to be a viable option for families desiring an alternative to public education, the state has to step in and regulate how funds are allocated and used by schools receiving waivers and vouchers to supplement or fully cover education costs. Every aspect of educating children through school choice programs should be determined based on a specific criterion. The schools that violate rules, regulations, policies, and/or procedures should be punished at the highest level.
The Criteria
Public schools that want to take advantage of school choice “redirection” incentive programs should be required to show that they have the ability to do the following:
- Produce a curriculum comparable to private and charter schools with similar demographic.
- Determine what type of programs, trades, and certifications the school will provide as tracks to increase graduation rates and post-secondary school and career readiness.
- Provide financial allocation projections.
- Clearly state how the funds will be used
- Project the academic outcome and benefits of having access to the additional funds.
For families who desire alternative education programs at religious schools should not have access to federal dollars for educational purposes. This is mainly due to the need to uphold the separation of church and state. Co-ops typically are independent schools with the freedom to teach whatever they desire. They are 100% funded by the members of the group. Although these two forms of alternative education programs are often funded independently, as taxpayers, they should still have access to public curriculums and resources to help support educational efforts towards creating productive citizens.
Alternative education programs that want to receive federal dollars should be required to do the following:
- Have a cap on how much additional tuition can be charged to the family based on family size and income.
- The more autonomy the school desires, the more accountability they should be subjected to
- Relationships with authorizers, and partnerships with educational management organizations and community-based organizations, special interest groups, or other persons of influence should be revealed to limit conflicts of interest.
The Projected Outcomes and Trade-offs
When provided with a funding redirection option, public schools can entice families that may want to transfer to alternative programs because of the specialized programs they offer. One example of this move towards pulling families back to public education programs is through the creation of Magnet schools. Magnet schools often offer students a wide variety of extra-curricular courses. Some of these courses are academic based, while others focus on the creative interests of their students. Studies show that students that are involved with specialized programs often score higher on standardized tests than students who do not. The trade-off is that the public school sector will see an uptick in growth, and ultimately this will save tax dollars. Students will be able to receive a similar education that they would have through the alternative programs due to the public school’s increased budget, opening up their ability to offer specialty programs.
If families see a decrease in funding for alternative education programs such as private schools, they will have the option of choosing from the public school of their choice, homeschooling, or joining a co-op. Families can continue to have a choice in how their children are being educated. Unfortunately, defunding alternative education programs will cause a political issue as many people who take advantage of such programs feel that they have the right to the education of their choice as taxpayers. It would be the duty of the legislation to educate the public on what constitutes freedom and rights as it relates to education within our nation. The constitution does not guarantee public education. That is a state right. The extent to how individual states handle such issues should be based on the will of the people. However, separation of church and state should always be upheld. Therefore, religious institutions should not benefit from federal funds towards educational efforts.
Alternative education programs that follow new guidelines may not be open to decreasing their levels of autonomy. There may be much backlash and a cry for increased support if legislation is in favor of defunding school choice and redirecting funds towards public education. However, this may continue to heightened competition among the various forms of schooling. We may also see a decrease in mismanagement and fraud if there is more accountability, and less autonomy.
Decide
Based on my personal experience with alternative educational schools as both a parent and an educator, I personally feel that it would be best to do away with alternative education programs. Especially due to the burden it has on taxpayers that may not benefit from it. The government provides public education based on the overall vision and values of the nation we live in. In Many other countries, families that want alternative education programs have to pay the cost in full. Although, having choice is a beautiful part of living in our nation, the line has to be drawn at some point. Parents should have choice. They should have more say in how public education is disseminated to their children. The answer, however shouldn’t be to leave. It should be to change from within. Parents have to become more involved in their local schools and districts. However, if the parent is still not pleased, they should find like-minded individuals to create an alternative such as private schools, home school, or co-ops.
My Experience
A few years ago, I worked at a charter school. This school received public funding to subsidize cost for their students. However, it was obvious that the leadership’s financial practices were fraudulent, but questionable at best. They had a history of not paying their employees for extended periods of time. They also pushed academic programs and promised incentives for students and staff that never came to fruition. They also purchased technology and other resources the school often wasted. The leadership was often overpaid and under-qualified for the administrative positions they received through nepotism. Because of the unusual practices, there was a running joke that the school was controlled by the “Mafia”, and was just a cover to wash illegal money.
This school’s brand consisted of four sites throughout the state of Florida and there were plans to expand even further. I had the “pleasure” of working at two of those sites. Both were in financial strain while I was working there. However, one of the schools had significantly more pressing problems. This particular school was on a probationary period for having two consecutive years at a “F” school grade. Charter school rules state that low performing schools have to intervene and make academic gains in order to keep the public dollars (Martin, 2016). The leadership team decided it was best to hire an education consultant firm to help provide professional development trainings to staff, provide feedback, and overall overhaul the entire way academics, the school climate, and school culture was handled.
As the school approached testing season, they thought it would be best to hire a “turn-around” principal. After having two principals leave (one within a week of being hired, and the other within 24 hours), and an incompetent acting principal, this seemed to be their greatest move yet. This principle did an awesome job. She came in, provided professional development to staff, challenged her academic, behavioral teams, and student to produce better results. At the end of the year, the school was able to earn a “B” as the school grade. She then took her new position in the district and the school grade dropped down to a “D” the following year.
The year after the school grade dropped back down, the school district began really diving into the leadership’s unusual practices. James Tutten (2019) describes the outcomes of the districts inquiries in the article titled 2 Osceola County Charter Schools May Close After Superintendent Finds ‘Blatant Mismanagement’, stating that the school’s charter agreement may not be renewed. He describes the organization as having a financial emergency. The school board stated this financial emergency was due to “blatant mismanagement and gross neglect” due to the school being thousands of dollars in debt, and behind on their rent for the buildings they provide educational services in. Eventually the schools closed. The most unfortunate part about the school’s closure was that it occurred during the Thanksgiving break, displacing students and staff, leaving families to find new schools and staff to find new jobs.
Reference
Martin, Annie. (2016). “12 Central Florida Schools Face Changes after Getting Fs.” Orlandosentinel.com, Orlando Sentinel. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/education/os-failing-schools-orange-seminole- 20160715-story.html.
Strauss, Valerie. “Analysis | Three Big Problems with School ‘Choice’ That Supporters Don’t like to Talk About.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 18 Apr. 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/05/03/three-big-problems- with-school-choice-that-supporters-dont-like-to-talk-about/.
Tutten, James. (2019). “2 Osceola County Charter Schools May Close after Superintendent Finds ‘Blatant Mismanagement’.” WFTV. https://www.wftv.com/news/local/2-osceola-county- charter-schools-may-close-after-superintendent-finds-blatant-mismanagement- /934740343.