HippoBLOGamus

As an Angeleno educated in public schools, you’d undoubtedly want to question the quality of my education. I don’t blame you. I did not live in the best neighborhood when it came to school quality. Furthermore, my family was never in a financial position to buy a new home. After all, top dollar schools require a top dollar mortgage.

Fortunately, my mother was able to take my education into her own hands (somewhat) and placed me in the best traditional public schools in the region. Not private or parochial. Not charter. I say somewhat because my mother still relied on the California Department of Education and tax dollars to educate her two sons, but she took school choice into her own hands by going downtown, scheduling meetings with superintendents, utilizing local connections, and praying in order to get her sons what she felt was the best. I am not advocating that you follow in my mother’s footsteps. However, I do advocate that we as a country reevaluate how our schools are operated so that all American students have the best.

In recent news, President Obama has flip-flopped on funding the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program, which allocates $60 million to educate Washington, D.C. students. These funds are divided among traditional public schools, charters, and private schools. In theory, the idea of school choice sounds like a good, but in practice we see failing schools and segregation in numbers as high as those in the civil rights era. No wonder many Americans wonder why our public schools are in such disarray.

I’ll be the first to tell you that American schools work. And they work well.

Throughout suburban America, we find many successful schools. In fact, most can compete with private schools. The overarching issue is money. Most schools are funded through property tax. In suburbia, more times than not, property values are higher than in the inner city. The higher one  spends on their property tax, the more of one’s money can be allocated to the classroom. Along with property taxes, those who can afford pricier homes are more likely to donate money to their child’s school. This money can be used to attract better teachers, more teachers if necessary, update textbooks, and fund elective programs, adding to a well rounded public school experience. Those who have more enriching school experiences can then go on to college, have higher earning potentials, and bring wealth back to their communities and eventually their children. This cycle is what keeps the haves from the have-nots.

Absent such enrichments, low-income, racial-minority, and English-as-a-second- language (ESL) students are relegated to the self-fulfilling prophecy that they cannot succeed. It is not because of their determination. Most of these students want to learn and have the same chance as the other kid across town. It’s just hard to do with less resources and a group of politicians or school board members who feed into the same hype. When we ask these people to help us, some simply respond with  “you need stronger work ethic” or “stop complaining.” If they like to call themselves nice, they respond with private school vouchers or legislation like No Child Left Behind.

The GOP likes vouchers for three main reasons. First, the haves look like they are giving to the have-nots. Second, it enables parents to choose what school they want their child to attend outside the realm of public schools. Lastly, conservatives argue that vouchers encourage free-market competition between public and private institutions, encouraging efficiency. They all sound great at first, but there are some major drawbacks.

First, vouchers undermine the power of public education. With money from the DC voucher program being split amongst traditional public schools, charter schools, and vouchers, public schools are missing out on funds that they desperately need. Money used for vouchers could easily staff schools with better teachers, more teachers if necessary, and equipment for electives and extracurricular activities. With a high quality, free public education experience, students can easily be accepted to and graduate from a college or university of their choice.

Second, vouchers will continue the private school practice of leaving behind students they deem “unacceptable” for admission. Since private schools do not have to adhere to any standards set by the government, they have the power to choose whomever they want, usually the best and brightest. Although this can sustain the competitiveness of the school, it leaves out thousands of schoolchildren, even if they were eligible for vouchers. Public schools are required to educate every student that comes through their doors. Through this requirement, students are able to interact with people from different walks of life. There are very few opportunities in society today where students of different socioeconomic statuses or racial groups can learn together and from each other. As a part of a well-rounded public education, Americans will need this invaluable social education to navigate life in the workforce and in a society where the minority will soon become the majority.

Finally, vouchers create a lack of accountability in education. Since a private school does not have to adhere to standards set by the government, they can teach whatever they please, however they please. A free market model suggests that private schools will be able to go above and beyond what is happening in most public schools, but unless a parent is sitting in the classroom with their child, how do they know this is true? Although there needs to be a revamping of content standards in certain states, the fact that there are standards in place to begin with ensures that both instructors and students are held to a standard.

 

It’s apparent that education must not be a popular topic when it comes to government transparency. We as Americans like to talk about how we’re the best. Let’s start acting like it.

 

blog comments powered by Disqus