The Principal’s Office: The debate over school vouchers

Posted

By now, the presidential election is past tense. Donald Trump is at the helm; just as significant, at least for us, is that Betsy DeVos is expected to be Secretary of Education. Now we have to discuss how certain educational issues will be affected with the changing of the guard. Let’s look back at the campaign itself.

Trump and Clinton couldn’t have been farther apart on the following six issues facing education: (1) the school (education) voucher system, (2) charter schools, (3) merit pay for teachers, (4) debt-free college education, (5) the Common Core, and (6) the role of teacher unions. All of these were vigorously debated. Over the next few months, we’ll investigate all of these.

I’ll begin with an examination of the proposed school vouchers system which has been in the news lately. It certainly has been a hot button topic. In this column and the next, I will make every effort to present a balanced picture of the issues, both the pros and cons. As we’ll see, there are very strong arguments coming from both sides. I’ll enumerate them all— and the readers can decide which case is stronger.


But before we delve into the debate itself, I want to present some background information. Simply put, as we’ll see, the rationale for the voucher system is school choice. Things were much, much simpler when I (and many of you!) went to school. There was NO choice! As I explained in one of my reports on WCBS Newsradio 880, I attended neighborhood school PS 152 … Hudde Junior High School … and Midwood High School, all in Brooklyn. The lines were clearly drawn, literally. Back then, students attended their “zoned” school— unless their parents were willing to pay for private or parochial school. School assignment was rigid. My wife Sharyn also attended Midwood; however, just two blocks to the south of where she lived, students were zoned for Madison High School. No exceptions!

Some families tried to use alternate addresses, such as those of friends or relatives who did live in the zones for the preferred schools. However, it rarely worked. There was only one exception to the strict zoning rule. If a high school offered a particular course which the zoned school didn’t have, an exception would be made. For example, some families were savvy enough to have their children request a course (such as a specific foreign language offered only in one school) to gain entrée into the preferred school.

In the suburbs, the situation has become even more —desperate, for want of a better word. In short, each district is a separate entity. Residents pay school taxes to support that school system. On occasion, students have tried to “cross the border” and attend a preferred, neighboring district. The prevailing view is that those families don’t pay taxes to that district— and as sympathetic as the district may be, those children simply don’t belong there. Some school administrators have gone so far as to hire detectives to follow students whom they feel don’t belong in their schools.

How times have changed! It’s a 180-degree turn. Now school choice has become an option. And the voucher system which I will be describing facilitates the ability to choose— but with strings attached.
What exactly are vouchers? The definition is clearcut: government-funded stipends to attend private or parochial schools selected by parents— rather than having their children attend public schools. Here is one definition that nails it: “Parents are permitted to use their portion of the per pupil spending and re-allocate it as they choose.” The genesis of the voucher system is clear: to give children of low-income families the opportunity to attend first-rate schools.

In my research, I discovered that the amount of those stipends vary considerably, ranging from $2,000 to $5,000. However, in Oklahoma, subsidies for special needs children are as high as $25,000. Quite a difference!

In the next column, we’ll be looking at both sides of the story— the pros and the cons. Let me point out from the get-go that a major sticking point of the voucher system is the use of public funds to pay for a religious school’s tuition. Can you see where this is going? Separation of church and state, as stipulated in the Constitution, is at issue.

To get around that obstacle, proponents of the voucher system have come up with an alternative: to offer a tax credit to defray the cost of that tuition rather than giving an outright stipend.

Perhaps you can tell how heated this debate is becoming. In the next column, we’ll weigh the two sets of arguments and you can decide which case is stronger.

Dr. Steven Kussin was a high school principal for 21 years. You can hear his “CBS on Education” reports three times a day weekdays on WCBS Newsradio 880. He is also an adjunct professor at Hofstra University and an educational consultant for school districts around the country. Contact him at sk3015@aol.com.