Vexed about Vouchers

U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings and Republican members of Congress recently proposed a $100 million national plan to offer low-income students private education vouchers to escape low-performing public schools. Critics charged the move was an election year ploy (Washington Post, New York Times).

Bill wrote in the Teacher Leaders Network daily discussion group:

It looks like the federal government has decided that the public school system isn't "cutting the mustard," and is about to jump feet first into providing vouchers for children to have additional schooling options—including private schools.

I think one of my biggest complaints about the private v. public debate is that private schools (and tutoring services provided for under NCLB) aren't held to the same accountability standards as public schools. In fact, there are no accountability standards for private schools and tutors (other than market based demands/pressures).

My favorite section of the article was this one:

Spellings was later pressed by reporters on whether private schools would be held to the same accountability standards under the plan, since they would be taking public money.

"Well, as we have gotten very sophisticated about data and measurements in public schools, I think parents have come to expect that, they have come to expect report cards not only about their child but about the quality of their schools," she said, sidestepping the question. "I certainly am a strong believer of accountability in education."

Do you think Spellings is accurately portraying the assessment of public schools when she describes it as "very sophisticated?"

Nancy replied:

I think average parents care most about whether someone is paying careful attention to their kids in school. They want to know that teachers know their kids, and care about their well-being, academic and otherwise. They expect to see their children making steady academic progress, they assume (or hope) the teacher will know how to make that happen. Some parents care about how their kid stacks up against other kids in the class, but not all. As for parents' sophisticated knowledge about interpreting school measurement data—as Jon Stewart says, not so much.

I do believe that Spellings WISHES that parents were hawking school data and talking about it at Little League games, but most parents who choose private schools don't do so because of test data. They choose a private school so they have more control over who their child's classmates are, or for curricular or class size reasons (and I say this as a parent who's had one child in public, and one in a private school). Parents look for all kinds of things in choosing schools (or neighborhoods) for their kids. I have never witnessed a parent asking about building philosophy, faculty strengths, special programs for kids—things that I would think a truly knowledgeable, sophisticated parent would want to know.

While it is true that "data-driven decisions" are the hot new thing, most of the people chasing the right measurement numbers are beleagured administrators under the NCLB gun, psychometricians looking for the killer equation, and policy wonks, like Spellings. Interpretation of academic measurement is very complex. States like Florida try to simplify it by giving schools an easily understandable "grade". But we have heard stories from one of our Florida members about how her school's grade went down when the test scores went up!

Ironic that this little story has emerged only a few days after a U.S. Dept of Ed report came to light, showing that "public schools are performing as well as or better than private schools, with the exception of eighth-grade reading, in which private schools excelled. The results prompted questions from foes of vouchers about why taxpayer money should go toward private schools instead of toward improving public schools" (Washington Post)

Liz replied:

I adamantly believe that when public tax money—and I do believe it is WHEN not IF—is used for vouchers for private schools or for tutoring, then the same testing standards must be applied to those students funded in the private school setting as in the public one. Tutoring services should be required to provide evidence of improvement.

Every teacher organization and every teacher in this country should support such a move. We are experimenting with the lives and the education of our greatest resource—our children—if we do not.

I cannot understand those that wish to dismantle the public school system. It is the cornerstone of true democracy!

Renee wrote:

The fact that our non-educator Secretary of Education thinks measurement of the work of schools has become more sophisticated would be humorous if it weren't so serious.

Here in the Deep South where statewide networks of private schools were established for the specific purpose of maintaining racial separation, the myth of higher quality of education at those schools lives on despite the years of evidence that proves exactly what (the Dept of Ed researchers found): there is varying quality among all schools.

There are, however, serious disparities in other areas. Just yesterday at our local school board meeting, the director of Special Education pointed out that under new provisions in the federal law, the PUBLIC school districts must agree to test and service any disabled students at the private schools in their area. Through a (large) loophole in our state law, private schools were already able to get free public textbooks. Teachers at private schools do not have to be certified or highly qualified; students are not required to take any of the state tests; and the schools each set their own curricula.

Does anybody see anything wrong with this picture?