Question:  But there are so many ads on television and the radio suggesting that the voucher movement is grassroots.  Don't these ads reflect that vouchers are what the black community of D.C. wants?

Response: The African American community is not a monolith so it is ill-advised to speculate on what the 'black community' wants.  Moreover, in a 1981 referendum on vouchers, the predominantly African American Washington, D.C. rejected vouchers by 8 to 1.  In November 2002 an NSBA/Zogby survey confirmed these results.

The expensive and often slick ads promoting vouchers are the clearest sign that the pro-voucher movement is not a grassroots one.  The organizations that claim to represent local 'pro-voucher advocates are D.C. Parents for School Choice and the Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO).  These organizations are heavily financed by national funders who sponsor similar measures around the country.  These ads play in prime markets at prime time, and this belies the claim that this indicates the existence of a populist movement for vouchers.   The low income communities to which vouchers are targeted lack the spending power to support the expensive and extensive promotion of vouchers being conducted through multimedia channels into the minority communities of Washington, D.C..  Ironically, one big funder of D.C. Parents for School Choice - the Bradley Foundation - also funds suits challenging affirmative action.  The Bradley Foundation, through grants

to D.C. Parents for School Choice, purports to support educational choice for black children through vouchers, but then would take away educational choice from black children in their university years by destroying affirmative inclusion programs at the post-secondary level of education.

Question:  Vouchers are another opportunity to escape a poor performing school, so why should a parent wait for improvements that have been promised in the public school system for several decades?


Response:  Evidence seriously challenges the notion that vouchers provide a real opportunity out of a poor quality educational system.  We do not know that the educational opportunities afforded by the vouchers are better than the options in the public schools. Likely, we won't know because private schools do not have to report test scores or performance levels of their students.

Although D.C. needs many more of its model and charter schools, the existing ones provide many choices for excellent educational opportunities in the D.C. system of public schools.  D.C. provides over 40 charter schools, transformation schools, and a variety of model public programs accessible through the out-of-boundary enrollment process

Model programs abound in DCPS: Banneker Academic Senior High, a magnet, citywide program, Jefferson Junior High School science and math program in S.W., Oyster Elementary with its immersion program, Merritt Elementary, etc..  We need more of these and in our low wealth districts of the city.  But they exist and we should improve the system by creating more of these and imposing the standards that these programs use to all of the schools in the system.

We have reason, in fact to question the quality of some of the schools within price range of the proposed vouchers.  Many of the Catholic schools which would be affordable with the low-value voucher are shutting down left and right, likely as a reflection of the decreased demand for their educational programs. 

Let's remember that the proposed tuition voucher amount will likely not cover most of the costs of these private schools. The most likely beneficiaries of these vouchers are the very private and parochial schools that are financially ailing.  

 

Don't students with vouchers outperform their peers who remain behind in public schools?

The GAO report issued in the fall of 2002 indicates that children show no statistically significant achievement gains from enrollment in voucher programs over those in public school.  What is more is that while the new education reform bill - No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) - has established all kinds of accountability measures for public schools, these same measures would not apply to students in private schools with publicly funded vouchers.  Here is an excerpt from NCLB, signed into law by the same Bush Administration that requires this extensive accountability by public schools.

These standards for the public won't apply to private schools attended with vouchers.

"The NCLB Act will be requiring States to implement statewide accountability systems covering all public schools and students. These systems must be based on challenging State standards in reading and mathematics, annual
testing for all students in grades 3-8, and annual statewide progress objectives ensuring that all groups of students reach proficiency within 12 years. Assessment results and State progress objectives must be broken out
by poverty, race, ethnicity, disability, and limited English proficiency to ensure that no group is left behind. School districts and schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) toward statewide proficiency goals
will, over time, be subject to improvement, corrective action, and restructuring measures aimed at getting them back on course to meet State standards. Schools that meet or exceed AY objectives or close achievement
gaps will be eligible for State Academic Achievement Awards."

Public schools must now meet the above and certain teacher performance standards. Private schools are not required to meet the same standards.  We can not trust private schools to voluntarily subject themselves to these standards.

Public schools are accountable, now more than ever, for reporting the performance of its students whereas private schools must tell us nothing about how well their students perform.  We have no guarantees about performance and no incentive mechanism to compel quality instruction in private schools.  Vouchers would not guarantee access to quality schools that are accountable for student achievement. 

There are numerous model schools in the public school system of D.C. - why not fully fund NCLB and put the money into replicating schools like Oyster, Banneker, Montessori programs in the poorest neighborhoods?  Why not put the money
into teacher training and smaller class sizes?

Studies in Cleveland which has had private school vouchers for some time, have actually shown that  public school students performed a bit better than students with private school vouchers.  According to studies of the program
in Milwaukee, there has been little evidence that this scheme will actually improve the public schools by making them more competitive.

Why shouldn't vouchers be available to the middle class as well as the poor?  Isn't this a way to give African Americans of all backgrounds a a desperately needed shot at a better education for their children?


If people favor this voucher initiative being extended to middle income parents, then we are essentially moving toward a completely privatized school system. Private schools are not required to admit children who apply to them - this
means that the most vulnerable groups - African American, non-English speakers, members of disfavored religious groups, and disabled children will face discrimination, and unlike in public schools - they are not accountable
to the public for it.  We can complain and gripe and target with email campaigns and publicize to the media - all the wrongs and evils of our public schools systems and keep our kids in public schools.  We can complain and gripe, and well, private schools have no such obligation to keep our children.

Historically, and just look at the Michigan University case, it is the public sector, the government where minorities and vulnerable groups have been able to hold society accountable for equal treatment, equal access for its vulnerable groups. Now we want to trust the private sector to monitor itself?  Where is the justification for that?

In the Michigan affirmative action case, we are beating back an attack on affirmative action - on using public dollars to foster inclusion of vulnerable groups; so even the public sector is under attack in its efforts to admit vulnerable groups to
colleges and law schools.  If our public institutions are under attack in their effort to be inclusive, it is looking like soon we won't be able to look to the public, state-run institutions to advance the rights and opportunities of the vulnerable.

If the public sector is under attack (Michigan State) for trying to include minorities in its educational system in the greatest numbers, and the public institutions have a mandate to include us and are accountable, the private sector promises nightmarish results for historically excluded groups.  If the public safety net for the disadvantaged is being ripped to shreds and it is accountable, surely it is ill advised to put our trust in the private sector, which is not accountable.
 

That is what the civil rights movement was all about, making society accountable for its treatment of minorities and the vulnerable. The voucher programs attack that accountability and strike right at the heart of all our civil rights gains.- stripping away the requirement that the schools do the right thing by us.

Also, private schools have no requirement to give children the services they need.  In fact, a report released by the Government Accounting Office just last year indicated that children in private voucher programs tend to leave
at a 20% rate in part for the very reason that they do not receive the wraparound services that public schools provide directly or give children easy access to.  Also, the cost of emergencies and other fees related to
private schools are often not covered by school vouchers.