Pros and Cons of School Voucher Programs

Education: Publically Funded Vouchers to be Used for School Choice

Introduction

School vouchers are an important tool for ensuring school choice and educational equity. By providing parents with a way to send their children to the school of their choice, vouchers give families more control over their child’s education. Additionally, vouchers can help to level the playing field between public and private schools by providing students from low-income families with access to higher quality schools. research has shown that school vouchers can improve academic outcomes for students, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. For these reasons, it is clear that school vouchers are an effective way to promote school choice and educational opportunity.

In my own personal opinion based on experience, school vouchers will expand the opportunities for students that otherwise do not have the option of choice financially when it comes to their parents selecting a private school to attend. With them, parents are able to compare public school performance results online and if their children happen to attend an underperforming school, then the vouchers would allow them more flexibility when looking for an alternative program to attend. Having myself attended a combination of public school, a STEM based charter school, home school, and earned early college dual credit, I am a strong supporter of school choice when it comes to maximizing educational opportunities.

More Control

School vouchers provide parents with more control over where they send their children to school. By using vouchers, parents can choose to send their children to private schools, which may offer a better educational experience than public schools. Additionally, private schools typically have smaller class sizes, which can allow for more individualized attention from teachers. They also tend to have more resources, such as state-of-the-art facilities and a wider range of extracurricular activities. But without publicly-funded vouchers, many parents would not have the option of sending their children to private schools where they could receive an excellent education.

Also, vouchers give parents the ability to send their children to religious schools, which can instill values and beliefs that align with the family’s religion. This can be really important for parents especially if they feel the public schools are not teaching the kinds of values that they want instilled in their children. In a pluralistic society like the United States, it is important that parents have the freedom to send their children to religious schools if they so choose. Religious schools provide an education that is grounded in principles that many parents feel are important, such as faith, morality, and service. Plus, religious schools often have strong communities of families who share similar values, which can provide children with a supportive environment. Moreover, research has shown that religious schools often outperform secular schools on measures of academic achievement (Alleman, 2015). For all these reasons, parents should be able to send their children to religious schools without restriction.

Moreover, school vouchers provide parents with the flexibility to choose a school that is geographically closer to their home, which can save time and money on transportation costs. Vouchers can also be used to attend a school that offers a specialized curriculum or educational program that is not available at the child\'s public school. For example, parents who have children with special needs may use vouchers to send their child to a private school that specializes in meeting the needs of students with disabilities. In general, school vouchers provide families with an important tool for finding the best educational fit for their children.

Ultimately, school vouchers give parents more control over their children’s education, which is why they should be used more frequently. They can also lead to more competition, which will ultimately improve the quality of education across the board. As more and more states begin to experiment with voucher programs, it is likely that we will gain a better understanding of the potential benefits of this type of education reform.

States Using Vouchers

As of 2017, 15 states had voucher programs in the US, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (2017). Many of these programs take the form of a choice scholarship program, a needs scholarship program, or an opportunity scholarship program. In other words, the voucher programs are designed to give parents more choice, students more opportunity, and special learners with a better chance to have their needs met.

However, that means 35 states have no school voucher program. In fact, it suggests that the prevailing mood among the majority of states is that voucher programs are a waste of public funds. Indeed, this is the view of the National School Board Association (2022), which is a national organization that supports the position against school vouchers for children as it perceives too much public funding will be diverted away from public education into the private school systems. In other words, organizations like this one, which are very influential with state governments, do not want funds moving away from public schools into private schools’ pockets. It is thus very much a financial battle that is being waged in the arena of school voucher programs, and unfortunately what is lost in the fog of war is the impact that such a program could have on a student.

On the opposite end of the battle, is EdChoice (2022), which is a 501 c-3 organization with the mission to advance educational freedom and choice for all as a pathway to successful lives and a stronger society. EdChoice was cofounded by famed economist Milton Friedman, who wanted to advance school choice for all children across the nation (Who We Are, 2022). Unlike the National School Board Association, EdChoice believes students should have the right to choose where they want to receive an education.

The main argument between the two sides is over where public funds should go. School choice is a contentious issue in the United States (Hentschke et al., 2017). Supporters of school choice argue that it gives parents more control over their children\'s education and allows them to choose the school that best meets their needs. Critics argue that school choice diverts needed resources away from public schools, creates a two-tiered system of education, and decreases the overall quality of education. Advocates of school choice argue that public funds should be used to support voucher or scholarship programs because they give parents the ability to send their children to the school that best meets their needs (Peterson & Hassel, 1998). The debate is likely to continue for many years to come, as there are pros and cons to both sides of the argument and major organizations lobbying for each position.

Still, there are some state leaders like Texas Governor Greg Abbott, who is strongly in support of school voucher programs (Svitek, 2022). Abbott argues that both sides of the debate can be reconciled so that a win-win is reached for all: “We can fully fund public schools while also giving parents a choice about which school is right for their child” (Svitek, 2022). Abbott’s main belief, however, is that “Empowering parents means giving them the choice to send their children to any public school, charter school or private school with state funding following the student” (Svitek, 2022). In other words, school choice is really about empowering people—learners as well as parents who get to choose.

Not Being Shackled by Underperforming Schools

The big argument of proponents like Abbott, organizations like EdChoice, and parents who more power in the decision-making process is that students should not be shackled by underperforming schools. If students cannot get out from under the chains of schools that are failing them they are destined to never have the opportunity to rise in society. Yet society teaches that everyone should have opportunities to better their lives. Thus, it only makes sense that people should get to choose where they want to send their children for school.

All students deserve to receive a quality education, but sadly this is not always the case. Students who are assigned to underperforming schools are often at a disadvantage from the start. They may not have access to the same resources and opportunities as students in other schools, and they may not receive the same level of instruction. As a result, these students can fall behind their peers and find it difficult to catch up (Svitek, 2020).

Underperforming schools are in fact a big problem for many. They especially tend to disadvantage learners in a number of ways. First, underperforming schools are far less likely to receive the resources they need to be successful, which means they are kept in a poor state for generation after generation until they finally close their doors. It is unfortunately a self-reinforcing dilemma: for while it may seem logical that underperforming schools should receive additional funding in order to improve their performance, the reality is that these schools often receive less funding than their higher-performing counterparts. One reason for this is that many states allocate funds to schools based on student test scores. Since underperforming schools typically have lower test scores, they receive less funding. Another reason is that businesses and other donors are often more likely to donate to schools with higher test scores, as they perceive these schools to be more successful. As a result, underperforming schools can find themselves at a disadvantage when it comes to funding (Peterson & Hassell, 1998). And by obliging students in their districts to attend them, it means that every student in that district is going to receive a poorer education than one outside that district—and the only way to get a better education would be to move.

But not every family can afford to get up and move. And to expect them to be able to do so is what really shows how unequal the system is. Equitability in education should mean that all doors are open to all learners—but public school systems know that they would lose out to private schools if those doors were truly opened. At least, that is their fear—so they lobby through organizations like the National School Board Association to keep those doors closed. It is essentially a self-serving method that they employ for survival: it keeps them going, but it does harm to the learners they purportedly work to serve.

Second, underperforming schools often have a higher teacher turnover rate, which can lead to inconsistent instruction, as new teachers may not be familiar with the school\'s curriculum or philosophies. In addition, they may not have the same level of experience as their predecessors. As a result, students may receive an inferior education. High teacher turnover rates can also adversely affect morale. When experienced teachers leave, they take with them years of institutional knowledge and expertise. This can be disruptive for both students and remaining staff. In order to improve educational outcomes, it is crucial for underperforming schools to address their high teacher turnover rates (Hentschke et al., 2017).

Third, underperforming schools are more likely to be located in areas with high crime rates, which can make it difficult for students to focus on their studies. For example, learners may have to deal with the trauma of witnessing violence, or they may need to work long hours to help support their families. These learners who grow up in communities with high rates of violence are more likely to drop out of school and struggle academically, join gangs, or engage in criminal activity themselves. Neither the communities nor the schools themselves ever improve.