To Voucher Researchers and Advocates,
“We can rebuild him, we have the technology. Better … Stronger …Faster.” - Opening for The Six Million Dollar Man.
This line from classic TV, the heyday of Lee Majors before The Fall Guy relegated him to guest star on VIP opposite Pamela Anderson, comes to mind when I think about the present set of circumstances for voucher advocates and researchers. We have come to a point where we now know that school voucher programs can be successful, and we know the recipe for that success.
I came to a realization prior for last month’s conference at Harvard on “What’s Next for School Vouchers.” In preparation for the conference, I notified several of my colleagues – university faculty, staff, and graduate students –that I would be out of town, and explained the nature of the conference. The seemingly universal response was “Oh, well I’m not a fan of school vouchers, they’ll ruin all the public schools,” a comment which, as a voucher advocate and sometime researcher, I quickly replied to with the lessons learned from the Cleveland, Milwaukee, and Florida voucher programs. The reaction of my colleagues, again virtually universal, was “Well … I may need to reconsider my position.”
This anecdotal example leads me to two conclusions for voucher proponents. While me may expect the general public to be uninformed about vouchers, as they are about most policy issues, we should hope that other academics would be better informed – they are not. This generally liberal group has been spoon fed rhetoric on vouchers from the NEA and Democratic Party elites, and the body of research supporting the effectiveness of vouchers has yet to connect with even the most well read population. However, I believe that given the proper set of information, this audience would be far more receptive to school vouchers as a public policy alternative.
While much research remains to be undertaken on current, and any future, voucher programs, we have already learned much from the programs that have taken form in Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Florida. A substantial body of research demonstrates that vouchers improve student test scores, that the creation of voucher programs results in public school reforms as a response to competition, that the private school market has grown and has established services to meet new demands, and that parents become more involved and more satisfied with their children’s education under vouchers. Furthermore, these programs demonstrate that we can create publicly financed voucher programs which include sectarian schools that are Constitutional; that reduce segregation in education; that admit the most disadvantaged students (that is, they don’t “skim” students from public schools); and that these programs not only don’t impoverish public schools, but that they will, by design, increase per-pupil expenditures in public schools.
These are the lessons learned from the school voucher experiments in Cleveland, Milwaukee, and Florida. We know vouchers are effective; we know they can and will, if designed right, improve public schools as well. However, we have as yet failed to translate our knowledge of school vouchers to both the general public and the broader academic community. Until we do so, advocates will consistently lose the public policy for vouchers – and when we do so, the lessons we have learned about voucher programs will persuade many academics, policy makers, and the general public to support vouchers.
Our situation, as I see it, is thus: We have learned the effectiveness of vouchers. While more research remains, our work demonstrates the success of present voucher programs. What lies before us is the difficult task of advancing this scholarship until it become recognized, and accepted by the broader intellectual community, and the general public.
7 comments:
I was reading your post on school vouchers and I just don't agree. Just graduating this year out of high school and serving on many school committees, vouchers only seem to hurt public schools and for the main part most public schools create successful students. I have a friend who goes to a very prominent private school in my area and she once said to attend a private school you either had to be rich and dumb or smart and poor. So I really don't think private schools make a whole lot of difference. Students go to school where they fit in and feel comfortable. As a student you either enjoy learning and getting ready for the real world or you dred it. The only way to make school work for every student is to place computer chips in their brains to make them love learning..but of course we can't do that, so we have to get parents more involved, punish truant and disrespectful students more, and put the best teachers and books in the classroom.
Josh
Josh,
I agree with your comment on several points. First, most public schools are relatively good and turn out successful students. Second, for the most part, a student gets what they want out of school, those who enjoy learning will be more successful. Finally, parental involvement is crucial to a good education, as are the quality of teachers.
However, you are wrong when you state that "vouchers only hurt public schools". This is what the original post was attempting to say. Research on voucher programs indicate that not only do students recieving vouchers do better, but public schools also show improvement, and have not lost out either in funding or by "creaming" of good students.
While most public schools are good, many are very bad, and not all students "go where the fit in", because that alternative is not open too them. In many cases, though not all, a private school would be a better alternative for a student than the public school to which they are assigned. However, lower-income students cannot take this option without the assistance of vouchers (or if you like, "scholarships").
In terms of your own prescription for the education system, research on school choice indicates that parents become more involved when they are allowed to choose schools. Additionally, private schools often do a much better job on punishing truancy and misbehaving students, particularly in large, urban settings. Thus, if you are right about what is need in schools, then a voucher program should be highly beneficial.
You have some very good points, but the notion that private schools make students smarter is just not fair nor is there proof of that. Most if not all private schools don't have any sort of monitoring or test to measure there achievement level. I have lots of friends in some pretty good private schools and I would take the smartest kids from a public school to match up against private school kids anyday. There are still no long term studies that can link school vouchers with higher success. I know that in my state, FL, most of the kids who use school vouchers return back to public schools, not to mention most school vouchers only cover around $3,000-5,000 of private school costs and for that little amount students won't get into top notch private schools. Although I'm against private school vouchers, I am for allowing students to change to different public schools that have higher achievement levels.
Hey Nate:
By the way I have a blog to, you can take a look if you like.
http://youthspeak.blogspot.com/
Josh,
I don't think we are necessarily in complete disagreement on school vouchers. The argument you are making is that vouchers won't solve everything, which I would agree with, though I think vouchers have a significant benefit. When you say you would put the best public school students up against private school students, you are missing the point. Most students go to public schools, and most good go to public schools; likewise most public schools are good. Not every private schools is good, and not every private school student is a good student. That doesn't make the case that students shouldn't be allowed (or constrained by limited income) to choose to go to private schools, especially in areas where: public schools are poor, public schools are overcrowded, and many good, affordable private school alternatives are available.
You are right when you imply (I think this is your argument) that private schools will not automatically produce good students. I agree with you, and most of the research in the field indicates, that school variables (i.e. class size, school size, teacher quality, public v. private, spending, etc) have a limited, albeit important, impact on student outcomes. Student achievement is much more related to the individual student, family, and parental variables (income, parent's education, time spent with a child, etc). So you are right when you say that there are many things a voucher cannot provide. I think that you are wrong to argue that vouchers have no benefit, hurt public schools, or hurt students, when all the evidence points to the opposite conclusion.
I think we both have good arguments. And I agree with most of what you said in your last reply. Except I just think "private" school vouchers is just a short term solution, if that, to a long term problem. There needs to be a lot more pressure to raise student achievement, parent involvement, and higher teacher accountability. Because if those 3 items aren't in place no school, private or public, can succeed.
Josh
Post a Comment