 |
|
Home | Contact Us |
|
|
|
|
|
School Choice Info History of the Movement The future of school choice lies in understanding and accepting that we are merely returning to the roots of American education.
Education and the Founding Fathers Public schooling as we know it does not resemble the democratic ideals of our founding fathers. Moreover, the public schools of today — government-owned, government-run, highly centralized bureaucratic institutions — are not the schools of yesterday.
The founders’ emphasis on education did not result in a system of government-owned, government-run schools. Rather, consistent with their values and traditions, formal schooling from 1630 to 1830 was typically a mix of private academies and local, denominational schools. It was sometimes tax-supported, but primarily paid for by parents. Schools were predominantly private and entirely under local control. Parents who could not afford individual tutors chose religious schools for their children; the idea that parents who choose religious schools should be excluded from the same educational support available to all other parents would have been outrageous to them.
While the educational system favored by the founders was both privately funded and privately administered, some of the more forward-thinking founders saw that the funding of education need not be married to the administration of schools. Thomas Jefferson proposed a statewide education system in which the secondary schools would be funded primarily by student tuition, with government scholarships for poor students. Thomas Paine argued that government should pay private-school tuition for families too poor to afford an education for their children – the equivalent of vouchers. In Paine’s system, government could fund education (thus ensuring that all students get the chance to learn) without actually owning or running schools.
The Beginnings of Our Current Public School System It wasn’t until the 1830s and 1840s that our current system of government-funded, government-controlled schools began to take root in America. At that time, the emphasis changed from schooling that was mostly parent-supported and privately run to schooling that was mostly state-supported and government-run: “common schools,” as we have come to call them.
The common-school movement destroyed parental autonomy and family choice, and shackled the government’s financing of education to the government’s ownership and administration of schools. Centralization rapidly ensued, with schools becoming increasingly bureaucratic and uniform. Education moved from a customer focus centered on parents and children to a provider focus centered on schools and the state.
This short history of American education illustrates two points: school choice is not a new idea that somehow conflicts with the principles of our republic, and the heart of school choice lies in the pre-common-school principle that maintained a clear distinction between government financing of education and government ownership and operation of schools.
The Return of School Choice The modern trend towards greater choice in K-12 education began in earnest in 1955 when Nobel laureate Dr. Milton Friedman gave new articulation to an old idea of liberty and freedom. He contended that tax dollars should follow the child, allowing parents to choose the school that best fits their child’s unique needs. His proposal, which came to be known as school vouchers, was based on his belief that choice in schooling will “create effective competition and improve performance in education, all to the eventual benefit of children, parents, educators, taxpayers and the society at large.”
The idea, which fell squarely in line with the thought of Jefferson, Paine and Adam Smith, was simple: improve education by separating the government financing of education from the government administration of schools. However, like so many simple and correct ideas, it ran counter to the prevailing trend. It also ran counter to the growing power dynamic of the educational establishment, which was in the midst of centralizing its control over the systems that tax communities and run schools, and institutionalizing the radical educational theories of Horace Mann, John Dewey and others.
The Modern School Choice Movement In 1990, the movement took a substantial step forward with the creation of the nation’s first publicly financed urban school choice program, the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program. Several similar initiatives were established in the years following; utilizing both the voucher and the tax credit model, with publicly funded and supported choice programs developing in areas such as Arizona, Florida, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. With the development of these programs came the institution of multiple state-based and national organizations whose function was the protection and expansion of school choice. In 2002, the movement earned a momentous triumph with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on the constitutionality of the Cleveland scholarship program in the 2002 Zelman v. Simmons-Harris decision.
Today, 11 states and the District of Columbia have enacted 19 school choice programs. Some programs target low-income families, while others provide options for a broader range of parents. All of these programs ultimately trace their ideological and philosophical roots back to Dr. Friedman’s idea of school choice for every family. For 50 years his voucher idea has been pulling education back towards the kind of educational liberty preferred by our founding fathers. School Choice in Utah 1988 In the 1988 election, voters turned down a referendum proposal to create a tax credit for education expenses.[1] The proposal would have provided parents a credit equal to half of state per-pupil spending for elementary school students and 60 percent for secondary school students.[2] 1990 On March 7, 1990, then-Governor Norman Bangerter signed a school choice bill that expanded the state's 43-year-old interdistrict school choice program. Under this legislation, districts could choose not to participate, and participating districts had to establish standards for review of applications. Formerly, districts could decide whether to take a student on a case-by-case basis.[3] The law was later amended to make open enrollment mandatory.[4] 1997 According to a 1997 survey by R. T. Nielsen, 79 percent of Utah voters supported parental choice laws that included public and private schools. The survey, conducted for the Utah Coalition for Freedom in Education, also found that 61 percent of respondents supported using tax dollars to provide scholarships to children to attend a school of choice.[5] In 1997, the Utah Senate passed a tuition tax credit proposal, Senate Bill 61, which offered refundable state income tax credits to parents who chose to send their children to non-public schools. The amount of the proposed credit was equal to the tuition at a private school or the per-pupil expenditure of public schools, whichever was less. The bill was defeated in the House.[6] 1998 In 1998, the legislature approved a relatively weak charter school law. It stipulated that, to qualify for conversion to a charter school, a public school must show evidence of support from two-thirds of its parents and teachers. The law instituted a cap of eight charters and required that teachers in charter schools must be certified. [7] The Utah School Boards Association filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of this charter school law on the grounds that the state constitution authorizes the Utah State Board of Education to control one uniform system. On January 19, 2001, the Utah Supreme Court upheld the law, calling the challenge ”unreasonable.” The court ruled that the state constitution allows the state school board to oversee charter schools, as it grants the board authority over “such other schools and programs that the Legislature may designate.”[8] 2000 Another tax credit bill was introduced in 2000. House Bill 401, the Income Tax-Private Investment in Education Act, would have provided a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to parents who transfer their children to a private school. In addition, any taxpayer (either individual or business) would have been eligible to receive a tax credit for contributions to the tuition of a child in private school, and taxpayers could have received a credit for contributions to organizations that provide private school scholarships to low-income children. The bill died in the House.[9] 2001 On March 19, 2001, then-Governor Michael Leavitt signed S.B. 169, the Charter School Amendments bill. The law gives school districts the authority to approve new charter schools and allows schools whose charters have been rejected to appeal to the State Board of Education. The cap for state-issued charters was raised to 16 charter schools for the 2002-2003 school year.[10] In January 2001, Children First Utah, in conjunction with Children First America, launched a $2 million, statewide, privately funded voucher program. The scholarships provide up to 50 percent of students' tuition costs each year, up to a maximum of $1,700 per child.[11] In 2001, then-Representative John Swallow (R-Sandy) introduced H.B. 138, which would have given taxpayers a non-refundable $1,500 tax credit for tuition, textbooks, or school fees. The bill was approved in committee but received no further action.[12] 2002 Three school choice bills were introduced during the 2002 legislative session. State Senator D. Chris Buttars (R-Salt Lake) introduced S.B. 69, which would have given taxpayers a credit of up to $2,116 for contributions to scholarship organizations or for the tuition costs of individual students. To be eligible to receive tuition support, either directly or through scholarship organizations, families would have had to earn less than $30,000 and students could not have been attending a private school. The bill was approved in committee but stalled in the Senate.[13] Representative David Cox (R-56) introduced H.B. 76, which would have allowed a county commission to form new school districts out of existing districts either in response to a citizens' petition or at the request of the State Board of Education, the legislature, the governor, or the existing school district. If the bill had become law, a popular vote would have been necessary to ratify a commission's decision to create a new district. The bill was passed by the House but suffered a narrow defeat in the Senate.[14] The governor signed S.B. 138, the Charter School Amendments bill, on March 26, 2002. S.B. 138 allowed the State Board of Education to sponsor up to six New Century High Schools (magnet charter schools focused on math, technology, and science); allowed local school districts to sponsor an unlimited number of conversion schools and start-up charter schools, as long as they enrolled no more than 4 percent of a district's student population; and authorized the state superintendent to allocate grants for both start-up costs and ongoing expenses of charter schools.[15] 2003 In 2003, the Utah Senate passed a tax credit bill, S.B. 34, by a vote of 20 to 8. The proposal was included in the education omnibus bill, S.B. 154. The tax credits, however, were removed from S.B. 154 before the final vote. The Utah House voted 41 to 32 to put a non-binding referendum, House Concurrent Resolution 3, on the November 2004 ballot that asked: "Should Utah's public tax dollars or potential tax dollars be used to fund private education through the use of a tuition tax credit?" The bill died in the Senate.[16] 2004 2005 In 2005, Representative Merlynn Newbold (R-50), along with 24 co-sponsors, reintroduced H.B. 115 as H.B. 249.[21] The bill passed the House by a 58 to 17 vote on February 21, the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee on February 23, and then the full Senate two days later (21 in favor and 6 opposed, with 2 members not voting).[22] Governor John Huntsman, Jr., signed the bill on March 10, making Utah the second state to provide vouchers to special education students.[23] The bill is retroactive for to 2004-05 school year. At the beginning of the 2005 legislative session Representative Ferrin reintroduced tax credit legislation, formerly H.B. 271, as H.B. 39, altering the legislation so that the benefits would be means-tested. Families of private school students eligible for the federal Free and Reduced Priced Lunch program (household income below $34,873 per year) would be eligible for tuition tax credits of up to $3,700. Families with higher household incomes, up to 300 percent above the FRL level, would receive less.[24] Initially, the bill would also have allowed parents of current private school students to qualify for the credits—not just parents transferring a student from a public to a private school.[25] But Representative Ferrin removed this provision after reviewing a fiscal analysis of the bill.[26] The bill was voted down on the House floor, 34 to 40, at the end of February.[27] State Senator Mark Madsen introduced S.B. 59, a bill for homeschool students, in January 2005. The bill stipulates that school boards cannot require homeschooled students to take state assessments, and it prevents the state from requiring homeschooling parents to report details of their curriculum to the state. In February, the bill passed the Senate 26-0, with 3 abstaining, and the House 70-0, with 5 abstaining. Governor Huntsman signed the bill on March 18.[28] 2006 In January 2006, Rep. Brad Dee (R-Washington Terrace) introduced H.B. 340, a bill that would create a voucher program for specific student groups. Students could receive vouchers worth up to $3,500, depending on family income. The student groups that would be eligible are students new to the state, students transferring from public to private schools, and low-income students currently attending private schools. The bill was referred to the House Education Committee but never voted on. [29] [1] “Voters Support Lotteries, Gun Control,” Associated Press, November 10, 1988. [2] Mark Walsh,“3 States Bitterly Battle On Fiscal Ballot Items,” Education Week, November 2, 1988.[3] "News in Brief," Education Week, March 28, 1990. [4] Education Commission of the States, "School Choice: State Laws," December 2002, at www.communitycollegepolicy.org/pdf/ECSDualEnrollStateNote.pdf. [5] Blum Center for Parental Freedom in Education, Educational Freedom Report No. 58, April 24, 1998. [6] See Utah State Legislature Web site at www.le.state.ut.us/. [7] Center for Education Reform, "Charter School Legislation: Profile of Utah's Charter School Law," 2001, at http://edreform.com/charter_schools/laws/Utah.htm. See also Utah State Office of Education Charter Schools Web site at www.usoe.k12.ut.us/charterschools. [8] Center for Education Reform, Education Reform Newswire, Vol. 3, No. 4 (January 23, 2001), and Associated Press, "Charter Schools Are Ruled Constitutional," Utah Deseret News, January 19, 2001, p. B2. [9] See Utah State Legislature Web site at www.le.state.ut.us/index.htm. [10] Ibid. [11] Telephone conversation with David Salisbury, Children First Utah, January 15, 2001. [13] See Utah State Legislature Web site at www.le.state.ut.us/index.htm. [14] Ibid. [15] Ibid. [16] See Utah State Legislature Web site at www.le.state.ut.us/. See also Shinika A. Sykes, "Supporters Lobby to Save Tuition Tax Credit," Salt Lake Tribune, March 4, 2003. [17] See Utah State Legislature Web site at www.le.state.ut.us. [18] Jennifer Toomer-Cook, “Tuition Tax Credits = Big Savings?,” Deseret Morning News, November 10, 2004. [21] Jennifer Toomer-Cook, “Special-Ed Voucher Bill is Back, with Heavy Support,” The Deseret Morning News, February 1, 2005. [22] “Senate Committee OKs Vouchers for Special Ed,” The Deseret Morning News, February 24, 2005 and Utah Legislature, 2005 Session, H.B. 249, available at www.le.state.ut.us/~2005/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0249.htm (March 3, 2005) [23] Ronnie Lynn, “State School-Voucher Program is Under Way,” The Salt Lake Tribune, March 11, 2005. [24] Jennifer Toomer-Cook, “Revised Tuition Tax Credits Bill Would Aid Only Poorest Students,” The Deseret News, February 9, 2005 and Ronnie Lynn, “New Approach on Tax Credits,” Salt Lake Tribune, January 27, 2005. [25] See Utah State Legislature Web site at www.le.state.ut.us and Lynn, “New Approach on Tax Credits.” [27] Jennifer Toomer-Cook, “Hope Dims to Revive Tuition Bill,” The Deseret Morning News, March 2, 2005. [28] Utah Legislature, 2005 Session, S.B. 59 and Karla Dial, “Homeschoolers Protected by New Utah Law,” School Reform News, May 1, 2005. [29] Jennifer Toomer-Cook, “New School-Voucher Bill Called a Compromise,” The Deseret Morning News, January 27, 2006; Utah Legislature, 2006 Session, H.B. 340, at www.le.state.ut.us/~2006/htmdoc/hbillhtm/hb0340.htm (February 5, 2006).
|
|
|
