NYT:For Parents Seeking Choice, Charter Schools More Popular Than Vouchers

[DeepModem Mom]

For Parents Seeking a Choice, Charter Schools Prove More Popular Than Vouchers
By SAM DILLON
Published: July 13, 2005


CLEVELAND - When Ohio enacted a pilot program of school vouchers here a decade ago, David Brennan, an Ohio businessman, quickly founded two schools for voucher students.

Three years later, with voucher programs under attack, Mr. Brennan closed the schools and reopened them as charter schools, another educational experiment gaining momentum at the time.

That decision reflected the fortunes of the two parallel school choice movements that once shared the cutting edge of the nation's school reform efforts. Charter schools, which are publicly financed but privately administered, have proliferated across the nation, with 3,300 such schools now educating nearly one million students in 40 states. In contrast, voucher programs, which use taxpayer funds to pay tuition at private schools, serve only about 36,000 students in Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin and Washington, D.C.

"Vouchers are moving slowly," said Paul T. Hill, a professor who studies school choice as director of the University of Washington's Center on Reinventing Public Education. "The American people don't want a complete free market in education. They want some government oversight of taxpayer-funded schools."

Last month voucher advocates achieved a rare victory when the Republican-dominated Ohio legislature created 14,000 new publicly financed "scholarships" or vouchers to allow students in failing public schools to attend private schools. That will make Ohio's voucher program, which began in 1996 with the Cleveland pilot program, the largest in the country. Earlier this spring the Utah Legislature also created a small voucher program....But those twin victories were the meager results from the most ambitious legislative campaign yet by voucher advocates. Republicans introduced proposals in more than 30 legislatures for voucher or tuition tax credits, an arrangement under which parents receive a subsidy for children's private schooling through the tax code rather than as a direct grant. Vouchers were defeated in Florida, South Carolina, Texas, Indiana and Missouri....


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/13/education/13voucher.html

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. While this seems to be touting for profit charter schools

I think many non-profit charter schools have been great for kids in urban areas where the public schools would rather push them out than see their testing scores lowered.

[progressivebydesign]

2. And.. they underperform REGULAR public schools.

That is the latest research out. Charter schools are yet another way for parents who believe their children are much more special than the rest of the kids, to separate them from kids whose parents don't have the resources or energy to make special transportation arrangments and other accommodations that allow them to attend Charter schools.. also, many charter schools do not require the same stringent teacher requirements. I have never been impressed with charter schools.. it's like a social club for parents who are not quite wealthy enough to pay for exclusive private schools.

[MichiganVote]

3. Charter, schmarter, kids go there and then return to the public schools

I see it all the time. Parents think they are going to get the equivalent of a upper crust private school and end up disappointed. Kids with problems will have them no matter wher they go to school.

[K-W]

4. School choice is not an answer and neither is privitization.

They will simply accelerate the death of unversal education and the establishment of a neo-liberal model where only those who can afford an education get one.

We need a completely reworked, well funded, and modernized national education system

[fberknm]

5. There is always the collegiate example

As a Professor of Economics in SoCal, perhaps I need a better union, but then I have to ask why. We have a longstanding example of a competitive educational environment at the college level. While our primary and secondary schools are falling behind international standards, our colleges and universities continue to attract the best and brightest of the international students.

When a private, religious university receives federal or state funding, either direct grants, or federal or state funded financial aid, this is a de facto voucher. However for some reason we do not see the hostility toward government funding of private schools. I went to Notre Dame for my undergraduate studies, received federally funded financial aid, and was required to study Catholic theology. As a Catholic, it was not a problem. However the controversy over the establishment clause did not seem to be relevant for this purpose.

This is one area where I believe that my party has gotten it dead wrong as a matter of policy. I understand the politics of the issue, the various teachers' organizations do not support vouchers and they do support us, but I strongly believe, as was stated above, that we are hurting those kids who are in the greatest need.

The wealthy do not need vouchers, they can afford to send their kids to any school they wish. However, I think we have failed to serve the needs of the truly poor who cannot afford to live in an area with good public schools. The poor kid who is stuck in a failing school district, with parents who do not know how to participate in their child's education is at the mercy of the local school. These are the people who need the choice. Some of the more successful voucher systems in the nation have indeed been needs based.

To me, this is the right approach. I applauded my senator, Diane Feinstein, for supporting the voucher program in Washington D.C. It is shameful how badly run is the local government in our nation's capitol, and this extends to the local school district. Feinstein broke ranks with the party to support a focused, needs based program to help those kids who needed it the most.

As for charter schools, well the jury is still out. We have a number of them in SoCal and they are quite popular. As for the long term success, we need to wait and see. However, why should we look at them in an adversarial manner? If our goal is to expose all kids, regardless of income, race, gender to an opportunity for education, then I suggest we consider all potential options. As a teacher, I understand that the same approach does not work for all students, even at the collegiate level.

[DeepModem Mom]

6. Thanks for a thoughtful and informed post, fberknm -- welcome to DU!