Real choice - public school choice programs

National Review, Sept 1, 1989

THE ROLE think-tanks," it has been wryly noted, is typically to "study reality in order to determine whether it will work in theory." Fortunately, New York's Manhattan Institute for Policy Research has a shrewder view of its mission and generates a disproportionate quantity of good and useful work. Newly established within the Institute is a Center for Educational Innovation, which has already produced a splendid paper entitled "Model for Choice," a careful description of perhaps the most remarkable of all the public-school choice programs in the land, the one carried out over the past decade in Community District 4 in Harlem. In this densely populated, lowincome neighborhood, public education serves 15,000 children in 44 schools. All the junior-highs (and five of the elementary schools) are "open-zoned"; many are organized around particular academic specialties or emphases; and students and their parents are expected to make conscious choices about which juniorhigh they will attend. Each child fills out an application, listing up to six junior-highs in order of preference, and explaining why he thinks they are right for him. Sixty per cent of the students have been accepted into their first-choice school, and another 35 per cent get into their second or third.

Thus an educational marketplace arises within public education. "The continued existence of each junior high school," reports the Center for Educational In

novation, "is predicated upon its ability to attract a student body. A school that experiences a dip in applicants must assess its 'product' and make revisions where necessary. Over the years, the district has discontinued two schools that could not attract a clientele."

Over the years, the students in District 4 have also been learning more. Before the principle of choice was embraced, reading scores here were the lowest among New York City's 32 local school districts. By 1982 they had moved to 15th. In 1988, nearly two-thirds of the students in District 4 were reading at or above their grade level. And the schools are hugely popular with students, parents, and teachers alike.

It is said (ad nauseam) by edu

cationists tha"choice" is beyond the ken of poor and minority children and their parents. District 4 exists today as solid proof that that is untrue. Choice is good for everyone, rich and poor, and it makes for better schools and higher pupil achievement.

We knew it worked in theory. Far more important, it also works in reality. Kudos to the Center for Educational Innovation for the documentation.