The best way to stop Trump’s plan to privatize public schools is to say no to vouchers, writes Frank Adamson of Stanford University.
“Vouchers violate the American ideal of democracy because they transfer educational decisions from the public domain (through school boards and elections) to private management companies and organizations. This has already occurred in charter schools run by private charter management organizations that refuse public input into teaching and curriculum decisions. Furthermore, these organizations often prioritize profits over learning, using public tax dollars to hire inexperienced, cheaper teachers and pocketing the difference. By permitting entirely private schools, vouchers would further decrease public accountability and create a wall between the public and the education sector, thereby diminishing democracy and the role of education as a public good.
“Finally, it is critical to understand that the debate about education vouchers is nested within a larger battle over labor. Vouchers can disenfranchise teacher unions because they disperse teachers across many types of institutions and constrain their capacity to collectively bargain. In Chile, teacher unions were dissolved, teacher salaries decreased by over half, and teaching became deprofessionalized based on non-competitive salaries and working conditions. In the U.S., the push for education privatization comes from foundations of wealthy companies and families, such as the heirs of Walmart, a company notorious for its anti-labor policies and practices.
“Trump and DeVos’s proposed voucher system promises to concurrently segregate students by class, ethnicity, and ability level while socially ostracizing individual students based on their ethnicities and identities. This system—driven by underlying agendas of marginalizing labor and generating private profit—will violate three core American principles: the separation of church and state, meritocracy, and democratic participation. In Chile, hundreds of thousands of people have marched in the streets to recapture public education after the vouchers decimated their system; U.S. citizens would do well to protest a national voucher policy before losing public education as a foundation of and for democracy.”
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
I think we need to do more than say “no.” What about offering choice among the public schools. For instance, many California districts have individual schools with a dual immersion school focus, an arts focus, a STEM or STEAM focus, a humanities focus, etc. The parent and child can choose a school within the district public system, rather than having to attend the neighborhood school.
Many large school districts already offer magnet programs for students with exceptional abilities or interests. Many suburban district pool their resources to serve students the need a different type of program. For example, vocational options or special needs students may require teachers to have specialized training, but no one district has enough students for a district to hire a teacher so districts share the cost of the professional teacher. These types of cooperative services generally provide more “choice” than a one size fits all charter from a staff with minimal training.
I think the aims of vouchers in the US are not different from the aims/outcomes in Chile.
Vouchers are designed to overturn the separation of church and state well beyond the faith-based initiatives of George Bush.
The concept of meritocracy has been undermined by economists and others who refuse to acknowledge any form of “merit” unless measurable, preferably by scores on standardized tests, growth measures appropriated from stock analyses, and variants of league tables in competitive sports.
Democratic participation in making decisions about education and other vital public institutions has been eviscerated. This vital form of civic engagement is undermined by reducing everything to a customer service operation with vouchers the functional equivalent to a credit card. Let the buyer beware.
Forgive my ignorance. I thought that the separation of church and state meant not using taxpayer moneys for religious entities.
Why has there not been an attempt to bring about an injunction or some such thing against these vouchers or charters where taxes go to these religious affiliated schools. There must be some reason but I honestly do not know why.
The Supreme Court held that voucher plans are constitutional in a case out of Cleveland in the early 2000s. The reasoning was essentially that the parent’s choice of where to use the voucher provides a buffer between the state’s action in disbursing funds and the parochial school’s receipt of them.
Many states prohibit public funding or religious schools. The Supreme Court has not declared unconstitutional those state bans. DeVos sponsored a referendum in 2000 to eliminate the prohibition of vouchers in Michigan and it failed, 69-31%. Jeb Bush tried it in Florida in 2012 and it lost too.
I believe there is a Blaine Amendment case that the Supreme Court will decide this term.
A case is coming before the Supreme Court soon. Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Pauley is the case.
see
http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/01/constitution-check-are-the-states-blaine-amendments-on-shaky-ground/
Yes, that’s the case I was referring to.
The issue has already been solved, in the case of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002). Please see:
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2001/00-1751
Parents in Ohio, Indiana, and other states, are receiving school vouchers from the public purse, and redeeming them at religiously-affiliated schools (and private schools).
I suggest that you and the opponents of school choice, find some other avenue of approach, besides the establishment clause.
As we say in Texas: “That dog won’t hunt”!!
Charles,
Vouchers in Milwaukee and Cleveland and Louisiana have FAILED. Why do you want to deceive parents and children and pay for them to go to inferior schools?
A loaded question. Like any experiment, there will be failures and successes. Participation in the voucher program in Indiana, is experiencing exponential growth.
see
http://indianapublicmedia.org/stateimpact/tag/school-vouchers/
I am not interested in deceiving anyone. I just want for there to be more choices for parents, than to be locked into one school, run by the government, based on their zip code.
Turn the question around: Why do you want children to be going to terrible schools (Like Washington DC public schools)? Why do you want parents and taxpayers to keep paying for the inferior schools there?
There are no voucher successes.
25 years of failure.
First, even if a voucher program “is experiencing exponential growth” (dubious claim), or more likely, experiencing exponential funding from right wing, segregationist politicians to make it look like growth, public schools are tasked with a mission to successfully support democracy with universal literacy, not to win popularity contests.
Second, as for the 21st century SCOTUS disregarding previous reverence for separation of church and state, it’s true, they’ve abandoned American values carried forth by Thomas Jefferson. The same SCOTUS also ruled for Citizens United and Dubya Bush. The Court is quickly losing credibility as a nonpartisan institution.
The mods are back.
Participation and results are two different things. I hate how public schools are held to high standards via tests, standardized teaching methods, etc., but the worthiness of private schools is solely based on the opinions of its attendees’ parents.
Just saying “no”, is not going to stop school choice. What needs to be done, is to offer alternatives, between being stuck in a school, based on your zip code, and selecting a private/parochial school as an alternative.
Why not have the public schools, offer alternatives? School districts could come up with alternate educational plans, which would incorporate giving parents/students more choice within the public school systems. School districts could reach out to home-schoolers, and have them participate in extra-curricular activities. School districts could offer more instruction in religious history, and comparative religions (See Abingdon v. Schempp).
Instead of just OPPOSING, Try some PROPOSING!
Charles, there are many choices in public schools. You are not well informed.
I agree, that SOME public school districts offer SOME choices. There are magnet schools, and other alternatives in SOME public school programs. Can we not agree, that to defuse the demand for vouchers, and having parents/students walk away from public schools entirely, that school districts could offer MORE choices, including religious instruction (I mean religious history, and studying the Bible as literature, which is permitted under Abingdon v. Schempp?
Trump could do what Reagan did when the Air Traffic Controllers went on strike. FIRE PEOPLE. Maybe not directly, but it can be done with strong support from parents that are fed up with the direction educators are leading the kids. Instead of obstructing, work WITH the system and parents.
YEP, Let’s fire all them union thug teachers. Makes complete sense. . .
. . . to a very much less than knowledgeable partisan.
As a parent of three children who went through the public schools (and I didn’t but definitely wanted my children in the public schools) I can unequivocally say that the parental support for the schools in which my kids attended was superb and probably close to 100%. And I saw that support in both districts in which I taught.
So the assumption that is made by the privateers, that parents just can’t wait and are clamoring for that vaunted “school choice” is a false assumption, certainly not supported that historically parental support for their local public school is around 85% who would give their school an A or B. But boy that fact just doesn’t sell choice and opportunity to rip off taxpayers with private schools of choice, meaning the school is the one to do the choosing of students, not the parent.
Diane,
Thanks for this mention.
In addition to Frank’s posts, there are resources summarizing the work – tradeoffs between privatization approaches and investment in education as a public good. Infographics, videos, and research briefs in addition to longer research reports and links for the book, “Global Education Reform”.
https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/GlobalEdReform
We created a variety of resources to provide information about the research to a wide variety of interested people.
Thanks again
Ralph Rogers
Director of Communications
Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education
dianeravitch posted: “The best way to stop Trump’s plan to privatize public schools is to say no to vouchers, writes Frank Adamson of Stanford University. “Vouchers violate the American ideal of democracy because they transfer educational decisions from the public”