Is Choice Cap Too Tight?
The advocates of Wisconsin's Parental School Choice Program see no need for a limit ( or "cap") of 15% of MPS enrollment; Milwaukee Teachers Education Association (MTEA) sees no need for the program at all. As this is written, Governor Doyle and legislative leaders are working on a compromise that would lift the cap to about 22.5% and require choice schools to become accredited in the next few years. Doyle must have seen some of the ubiquitous "Lift the Cap" signs along 51st Blvd, and saw the need to take action before this year's election.
The dispute is really about two different goals: quality of education, and religious instruction. The voucher program was sold to the Wisconsin Legislature as a way for poor children in Milwaukee to get a better education in a private school than they could get in Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS). Religious schools were admitted to the program several years after its inception, and both the Wisconsin and US Supreme Court have ruled that their eligibility for funding is Constitutional.
Wisconsin spends about $95 million on the Program now, and would spend about 50% more with the new higher cap. But is this Progam a good use of tax dollars?
The trouble is that the Program never specified any criteria for the Choice schools to meet. As a result, no one knows if the Choice students are really getting a better education than MPS students. It is certain, however, that crooks and charlatans have opened Choice "schools" where little or no teaching was going on, unqualified "teachers" and administrators were hired, and loads of money were embezzled. About six such enterprises were forced to close, leaving students stranded in mid-semester. Although such travesties could have easily been anticipated, the State imposed only minimum standards for a school to qualify for the voucher.
The time has come to demand verifiable results from these schools. Accreditation should certainly be required, and soon. Even more important is the need for all Choice students to take standardized tests (at least in reading and math) used in public schools, and these tests should be administered by employees of the State Department of Public Instruction (DPI). Any school whose students are performing substantially below the levels of MPS pupils at the same grade should be dropped from the progam. Only then will it be clear that the schools that meet this challenge are at least providing a basic education in exchange for the vouchers. If enough substandard schools are cut from the program, the enrollment cap will be less of a problem.
But even if quality questions could be answered by accreditation and testing, is it right for tax dollars to subsidize religious education? My answer is that virtually any school, whether public or private, inclulcates some sort of general philosophy or "world-view". For example, public schools typically forbid boys from wearing head-coverings (i.e. yarmulkes) and girls from wearing head-scarves (in the Muslim tradition), celebrate Christmas with songs and pageants, and pressure students into reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. These activities embody a philosphical concensus that no longer exists in America.
American society in our time is becoming increasingly "Balkanized" along religious and ethnic lines, and the schools reflect this trend. The Choice Program merely allows parents to choose the ideological framework that governs their children's education, instead of simply accepting the "one size fits all" option of the public schools. Instead of the childrens game "Choose Your Own Adventure", we now have "Choose Your Own Ghetto."
The teachers unions (MTEA and WEAC) object to the Program because the funds to pay for it come from the budget of MPS; MTEA estimates that MPS funding has been cut by about 10% as a result. While the diversion of about 15,000 students from MPS has reduced overcrowding at some schools, it has done little to reduce costs. That is because MPS must still operate the same number of schools with about the same number of staff, despite enrollment reduction. Moreover, the most expensive students (special education, disabled, and disruptive) are not accepted by most Choice Schools, and so are left in MPS. The funding formula has created a conflict between Choice advocates and MPS staff that is tangential to the main issues. This formula should be changed so that the cost is borne primarily by the taxpayers of the entire state.
The dispute is really about two different goals: quality of education, and religious instruction. The voucher program was sold to the Wisconsin Legislature as a way for poor children in Milwaukee to get a better education in a private school than they could get in Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS). Religious schools were admitted to the program several years after its inception, and both the Wisconsin and US Supreme Court have ruled that their eligibility for funding is Constitutional.
Wisconsin spends about $95 million on the Program now, and would spend about 50% more with the new higher cap. But is this Progam a good use of tax dollars?
The trouble is that the Program never specified any criteria for the Choice schools to meet. As a result, no one knows if the Choice students are really getting a better education than MPS students. It is certain, however, that crooks and charlatans have opened Choice "schools" where little or no teaching was going on, unqualified "teachers" and administrators were hired, and loads of money were embezzled. About six such enterprises were forced to close, leaving students stranded in mid-semester. Although such travesties could have easily been anticipated, the State imposed only minimum standards for a school to qualify for the voucher.
The time has come to demand verifiable results from these schools. Accreditation should certainly be required, and soon. Even more important is the need for all Choice students to take standardized tests (at least in reading and math) used in public schools, and these tests should be administered by employees of the State Department of Public Instruction (DPI). Any school whose students are performing substantially below the levels of MPS pupils at the same grade should be dropped from the progam. Only then will it be clear that the schools that meet this challenge are at least providing a basic education in exchange for the vouchers. If enough substandard schools are cut from the program, the enrollment cap will be less of a problem.
But even if quality questions could be answered by accreditation and testing, is it right for tax dollars to subsidize religious education? My answer is that virtually any school, whether public or private, inclulcates some sort of general philosophy or "world-view". For example, public schools typically forbid boys from wearing head-coverings (i.e. yarmulkes) and girls from wearing head-scarves (in the Muslim tradition), celebrate Christmas with songs and pageants, and pressure students into reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. These activities embody a philosphical concensus that no longer exists in America.
American society in our time is becoming increasingly "Balkanized" along religious and ethnic lines, and the schools reflect this trend. The Choice Program merely allows parents to choose the ideological framework that governs their children's education, instead of simply accepting the "one size fits all" option of the public schools. Instead of the childrens game "Choose Your Own Adventure", we now have "Choose Your Own Ghetto."
The teachers unions (MTEA and WEAC) object to the Program because the funds to pay for it come from the budget of MPS; MTEA estimates that MPS funding has been cut by about 10% as a result. While the diversion of about 15,000 students from MPS has reduced overcrowding at some schools, it has done little to reduce costs. That is because MPS must still operate the same number of schools with about the same number of staff, despite enrollment reduction. Moreover, the most expensive students (special education, disabled, and disruptive) are not accepted by most Choice Schools, and so are left in MPS. The funding formula has created a conflict between Choice advocates and MPS staff that is tangential to the main issues. This formula should be changed so that the cost is borne primarily by the taxpayers of the entire state.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 10:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home