Giving Kids the Options They Need

In 1982, a released report shocked the nation. The National Commission on Excellence in Education found that "the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people." Based on test scores, teaching methods and the self-preserving bureaucracy engulfing students, the commission's conclusions became a rallying cry for putting America's future first.

What has become of this movement? We have certainly put more money into the system: Education spending has leapfrogged from $162 billion in 1982 to $300 billion in 1998. Yet despite this talk about "investing more in education," the money has simply gone down the drain. Scores from the National Assessment of Education Progress have remained flat throughout the decade. The Third International Math and Science Study conducted last month reported that American high school seniors placed 19th out of 21 nations in math and 16th out of 21 in science. Our advanced students did even worse, scoring dead last in physics. This evidence suggests that, compared to the rest of the industrialized world, our students lag seriously in critical subjects vital to our future.

There are reform programs that can change this. One of these, currently under consideration by school boards around the country, is charter schools.

Charter schools are semi-autonomous public schools run by an administration free from a central bureaucracy. Their charter demands specific educational goals of all its students. If students do not meet these goals, the school is simply closed. Charter schools can be funded by businesses and private foundations, but are designed by teachers and educational innovators who do not have to go through the sea of red tape that many schools face today. The use new programs which are tailored to fit the needs of the students they serve. Freed from repetitive and bureaucratic compliance, teachers at charter schools can focus on achieving student excellence.

So far, these schools have been largely successful. In Los Angeles, it typically takes local school districts a year to buy computers for its classrooms. But in San Fernando Valley's Vaughn Next Century Charter School, it took only six days-and the school paid less. In Mesa, Ariz., 2,000 students attend 50 charter schools, with phenomenal results. In Detroit, charter schools have been implemented to improve the poor results of inner city schools. According to Superintendent David Snead, "The charter idea is helping encourage other schools in our district to examine what they are doing." Polices such as these have been implemented in 34 states, and continue to become more successful.

There are more controversial methods of school reform, too, such as school vouchers. Vouchers give parents a money grant, usually what the average spending-per-student is in that school district, so that the parents can send their child to a school of their choice, whether it be public, private, magnet or parochial. The idea was conceived by parents in inner cities who wanted their children to escape the poor performance of neighborhood schools. Vouchers have been implemented in Cleveland, Milwaukee and throughout Vermont and Maine. Future states may include Arizona and Minnesota.

Both charter schools and vouchers allow for accountability and innovation. They are freed from bureaucratic hassles and provide for healthy competition, making other public schools raise their standards of instruction and results.

Although most Americans support the idea of school choice, voucher programs from around the country are being pounded by lawsuits. The National Education Association (NEA), the largest teachers union and one of the most powerful political forces in America, is opposing school reform with all its might. In several states the NEA has sued county school boards which have tried to implement these reforms. They argue that any public money that goes to parochial schools violates the First Amendment and that charter schools and vouchers will compel the best students to leave crumbling schools, leaving teachers with kids who are harder to educate.

While the union may claim to represent the majority of Americans, they conveniently leave out the fact that, as a union, they have protection clauses in school districts which make it impossible to fire a teacher whose performance is subpar. They also leave out the fact that they oppose stricter standards for teacher testing, which is essential to getting better educated teachers.

The issue of vouchers for parochial schools is murky, but, as the State Supreme Court of Wisconsin and the Supreme Court of the United States have said, vouchers give parents money so that they can decide which school is best for their child. It is the parents, not the government, who decide where their child will attend.

Secondly, vouchers are given out by lotteries which target "at-risk" students (the poor and disadvantaged whose schools are falling apart) and give them the opportunity for a better education. In no way do they take the best students from poor schools and leave the rest behind. Instead, public schools will now have be competitive-meaning they will have to improve their commitment to education.

Proponents of school choice are by no means anti-teacher. Rather, they oppose the idea that their hard-earned money is producing stagnant student test scores-scores which place American students far below the rest of the world in basic educational skills. Teachers are crucial to the improvement of American schools, and they need to be consulted in the implementation of curriculum which will return America to the top. But first, they need to accept change. The NEA must stop its politicking and decide to put America's future first.

School reform in the form of charter schools and vouchers will help students cross that bridge to the 21st century. As Lisa Keegan, the state superintendent of education for Arizona, said of school reform, "It's public education in the finest sense of the word: It serves the public, not the bureaucracy." School choice will help alleviate the crisis in American public education Vasant M. Kamath '02, a Crimson editor, is a government concentrator in Thayer Hall.