Conservatives believe school vouchers will expand educational choices for poor parents and solve many of the problems plaguing public schools across America. Poor students who attend private schools with vouchers are interviewed and glowing remarks about their experiences quoted in conservative opinion pieces as examples of why school choice could save the American educational system.
There are at least two sides to any problem, but when it comes to school choice, conservatives discuss only the positive. Many prominent liberals send their children to private institutions, pander to teachers unions for votes and practice hypocrisy. This comes in handy for the conservatives and buoys their cause.
Seeing the market model in school choice, they imagine when every parent in a bad school district is armed with a voucher, public schools will be jolted out of complacency. They would be forced to compete for students — improve and succeed, or lose students to better schools and shut down. As for the students, nothing but a rosy picture is painted: In safer environments, they would study harder and achieve more, dropout rates would fall, graduation rates would rise and college success would beckon.
Several facts should modify this conservative euphoria. Private schools are few in number. The most exclusive and expensive private schools are academically the best. Acceptance to these schools will always be based on merit or money or both. A few exceptional poor students with vouchers may be accepted and the gap in their tuition subsidized with scholarships. But certainly these schools don’t want to be flooded with many public school applicants. They maintain their distinction by keeping class sizes small and tuition high. They can’t afford to lose the support of their rich donors by becoming enthusiastic egalitarians.
Widespread use of vouchers could lead to a space crunch resulting in more students with vouchers than there are good schools to absorb them. This could be a logistical nightmare for poor parents. To handle choice and avoid confusion, they need clear guidance and sources of information. They should also have the astuteness, knowledge and education to sort out what is best and affordable for their children. Poor parents may not have computers to readily access reliable statistics about all the schools in their neighborhoods. Statistics about a school’s excellence may be hard to interpret or be sugarcoated for advertisement purposes. Therefore, state governments that hand out vouchers should help parents navigate the tricky waters of school choice, but doing so may not be affordable or feasible. Faced with these obstacles, flummoxed parents could decide to stick with the status quo.
School choice advocates downplay the importance of accessibility as though this issue can be solved with the snap of a finger. The nearness of neighborhood schools makes them attractive and convenient. Urban poor parents may not own cars, could be put off by long commutes on buses and trains, and may not even live where safe and affordable public transportation could ferry their children to distant but decent schools.
America has enough mediocre or failing private and parochial schools. Spoiled and ill-mannered students attend these schools, too. The belief that any private or parochial school will be better than a broken public school is misplaced. Private schools police themselves and may not hold themselves to high standards. A few happy students who attend such schools with vouchers should not lead to a paradigm shift in policy.
At the end of the day, all students return home. If this environment is not conducive to learning, good manners, respect for elders and reverence for knowledge, private and public schools will keep failing around us and vouchers will be nothing more than Band-Aids.
Usha Nellore is a columnist living in Bel Air. Reach her at [email protected].
