School choice: the education issue of the the 1990s

Children Today, Jan-Feb, 1991 by William Bainbridge, Steven Sundre

During the past decade much attention has been devoted to "the problems in the public schools." Declining test scores, increased disciplinary problems, the advent of the drug culture, the demands of an increasingly technological and litigious society, and the perception of employers that many graduates do ot possess basic skills all contribute to these "problems."

The defenders of the public schools argue with some justification that the "Great American Experiment" of universal education is unparalleled in human history. Never before, they point out, has a society attempted to educate the handicapted, [sup.1] the disadvantaged, and the disinterested--and consequently, comparisons with countries that educate only the talented or privileged are unfair. Nevertheless, the debate continues, and alarming reports on the state of public education keep appearing.

Yet one major reform proposal could, its proponents claim, offer real hope for improvement. This proposal, which gained increasing support during the 1980s and is likely to dominate educational debate in the 1990s, calls for permitting parents to choose which public school they want their children to attend--in effect, forcing schools to compete for pupils. This idea, which seems so natural in a country based on economic free enterprise, has both supporters and detractors and remains highly controversial.

Over a decade ago, Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman and his wife Rose, in their book Free to Choose, devoted a chapter to the subject "What's Wrong with Our Schools?" Their solution, "a voucher plan for elementary and secondary schooling," stirred controversy among school professionals. The basic concept was relatively simple. The Friedmans and others argued that parents shold have the right to select the public school system for their children. Furthermore, they claimed, the states should develop plans by which tax dollars would "follow the student"--i.e., be allocated to schools based on enrollment. According to this argument, introducing market forces into public education would begin curing some major problems that everyone agrees handicap the system. Forced to compete for students, schools would likely:

* Adopt more efficient management techniques, including trimming bloated school bureauracies.

* Often better pay and promotions to teachers who do a good job, thus providing a performance incentive that is simply not now in existence.

* Respond more quickly to technological changes and other forces that affect the currculum.

Overall, schools would allocate resources more efficiently and devote more effort to improving instruction. The higher pay and other incentives offered to teachers would draw more talented people into the profession. Better management would lead to more effective teacher supervision and evaluation. Parents' ability to "comparison shop" among schools would bring demands for better and more frequent evaluation of school quality--and more pressure on schools to measure up. Furthermore, the level of parental involvement with schools would most likely increase: Having deliberately chosen a particular school, parents would be more likely to participate in that school's programs and perhaps even its management--and as all educators know, parental involvement is a key factor in school success. Finally, just as in the economic sphere competition and the free play of market forces tend (over time) to even out inequalities, so in education these same forces might be expected eventually to correct the vast disparities in financial resources that now exist from one school district to another and from one state education system to another.

Over the years, the idea of school choice has grown in popularity. Many progressive school administrators have embraced it in response to their own observations and the desire of parents, business leaders, and school board members for school improvements. State legislators have enacted measures permitting cross-district open enrollment. Many of the idea's proponents view it as a solution to school financial losses, racial imbalance, low test scores, community apathy, teacher renewal, and other school problems.

The national press has also focused on the issue of choice. Newsweek, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, USA Today, the national broadcast media, and scores of local and regional newspapers have featured the choice issue.

Polls have confirmed that the idea of school choice is supported by many parents, who believe it will improve educational standards. In a recent Gallup poll, for example, the parents surveyed favored school choice by a lopsided margin. Sixty-four percent of public school parents and 68 percent of non-public school parents felt they should have the choice "... to pick schools without regard to boundaries." Forty-two percent of the public school parents surveyed thought the "choice" would improve students achievement; 51 percent said it would hurt some schools while helping others; 53 percent felt it would increase "student satisfaction."