The Present System: Realities and Options
Education is indeed a very expensive enterprise. Billions of dollars are spent each year in the United States for elementary and secondary schooling. Still, many schools lack financial resources to provide good education. Numerous public schools are severely crippled by a shortage of funds, and many independent schools constantly live on the edge of closing.

Public schools receive almost all of their revenues from two sources: local property taxes and general revenue of the state. Federal funding for elementary and secondary schools usually amounts to approximately 7 percent of the cost.

Local school districts have different tax bases and tax rates. Consequently, different amounts of money are available for education. State funding formulae attempt to compensate for these differences by allocating more state dollars to poorer districts. In spite of these adjustments, great disparities in the amount of per pupil expenditures exist among school districts. Some school districts within the same state spend over $10,000 per student per year; others, less than $5,000.

Furthermore, the way districts spend their income also varies and helps to create inequities in education. Some examples:

Nationwide, the amount spent on repairing school facility damages caused by vandalism is about the same as spent on textbooks. In some districts, however, vandalism costs are ten times that of other districts. The reduction of financial resources for the classroom is obvious.

School District A pays five million dollars for security. School District B, with the same number of students, spends $250,000.

In School District A, one-third of the elementary school population comes from homes whose primary language is other than English. School District B has only four students from the same population. If their per pupil funds were equal, would equity be ensured?

School District A regularly passes bond issues to build modern, well equipped, air conditioned schools. School District B regularly defeats bond issues even for the repair of antiquated school facilities.

Educational outcomes also demonstrate great disparities among school districts. For instance, some public schools graduate 90 percent of their high school students and 80 percent of those go on to college. Other public schools graduate 45 percent of their high school students and send 35 percent of those to college. Our present system falls short of its ideal of providing equal access to high quality education for all students. In the face of existing realities, what are the options? There are basically six ways for parents to improve access to better schools:
1. Organize the community to work with the school to get better education with the money available.

2. Work to raise the tax base or the tax rate in the school district or pressure the state legislature to increase its support of education, or seek new federal funds so there is more money available for schools.

3. Move out of the community with poorer schools to a community with better schools. Buy or rent a more expensive dwelling that will give you access to better schooling.

4. Use your own money to enroll your children in an independent school.

5. Work through the political process to change the local property tax system for funding public schools.

6. Work through the political process to increase choice within the public school system through magnet schools, cross district choice and charter schools. Supporters propose that educational choice should be added to the list.

For Discussion
1. What is your perception of the equity and excellence of education children receive in the elementary and secondary schools of your school district? Think of another school district in your state that is quite different (either much better or much worse). What are the factors that make your school district better or worse?

2. Citizens prize local control and financing of their schools; yet, the system creates great disparities among school districts. How do you evaluate the system in your own school district and state? How does the relative status of your own district influence your views?

3. Identify an elementary or secondary school within your state that has a reputation for excellence. What makes that school excellent? Under what conditions could every school in your district be equally excellent?

4. Which of the six options for improving access to better schools are most realistic and most promising? Why?

More Equity in Access?
One group of advocates for educational choice supports this policy because they see it as probably the only way for many children who are poor to have access to good education. Other ways, they claim, are blocked. Their public schools do not educate, and the prospects for significant improvement are dim. Parents cannot afford to send children to religious or private schools. According to these advocates, a policy where government funding follows the child would open up greater educational opportunity for these children than would any other politically feasible alternative.

These advocates insist that a fair educational choice policy must grant more funds to poorer children than to middle income or wealthy children. Furthermore, some say, let us do some experiments. Select some poor communities and begin a full-scale, long-term project, and then test the results. Then everyone will have data to evaluate educational choice.

Opponents argue that educational choice would not promote equity but inequity, especially in cities. Parents who have some resources would transfer their children out of the public schools, leaving behind the poorest of the poor or those whose parents do not have the means or initiative to seek non-public school education for their children.

In addition, opponents foresee that many children would need transportation to a non-public school outside their district. They insist that implementing educational choice would require extensive busing and thereby significantly increase costs to taxpayers or take money away from educational programs.

Opponents warn that if educational choice were to begin among the poor, the political pressure to extend it to all students would be irresistible. When this happens, they claim, the real beneficiaries of the policy will be parents who can already afford to send their children to independent schools. Consequently, educational choice will drain scarce tax revenues from poorer children who should have prior claim on this money and give it to middle class and wealthy families. Educational choice would diminish fair access to quality education.

Supporters of educational choice envision a different scenario. They assume that no tax support for parents would equal the actual cost of public school education. Thus, whenever a student would transfer to a non-public school, the state would save money. They point to the hundreds of millions of dollars that are now saved by children attending independent schools. If some tax support permitted more children to attend, the savings to the state would be even greater.

In states where educational choice legislation has been introduced, tax experts have devised computer- generated models to show the financial consequences for the state. Supporters claim that virtually all the models show an increased draw on state treasuries in the early years of the program. Over a longer period of time, however, they show the state budget accruing significant savings if there is a sufficiently increased number of students who transfer from the public schools to other schools. These funds, then, could be used for the most needy public schools.

For Discussion
1. Join in the discussion. Do you think educational choice would offer more equity in access to good education or not? Who do you think would benefit most from this policy?

2. Would experiments in educational choice help citizens evaluate whether the policy is a good one or not?

3. Consider inviting to your group a person (or persons) knowledgeable in public financing of education. You may want to invite your state representative, an ELCA advocate in your state, an administrator of a Lutheran school, and/or a teacher or professor of economics.

Competition: Blessing or Bane?
Some observers view the present public school system in economic terms. They think the system should be understood as a virtual monopoly. In a given school district, they point out, public schools provide the only schooling that all students are required to have by law and that is affordable to most. As long as there are a sufficient number of students in their district, public schools will have students, no matter how poorly they educate.

One line of argument for educational choice builds on this economic analysis. The reason why public education is mediocre or worse is due to the near monopoly status of public schools. In order to have excellence in education, this monopoly must be broken and competition among schools established. Choice gives "consumers" of education more influence over what goes on in schools. By empowering parents and students to decide what school to attend, educational choice introduces competition that will lead to excellence.

Educational excellence, continues the argument, is especially crucial today when individuals and the country as a whole must find their way in a global economy. The impact of the new technology of the information age on education is only beginning to be felt. The limitless access to information represented by the computer and the Internet will dramatically change the way students learn, the role of teachers and the nature of the classroom. A monopolistic school system lacks the flexibility to respond creatively to this new situation. Educational choice would invigorate citizens to support a diversity of schools ready to experiment on how best to prepare children for a new day.

Critics of this argument disagree with the very terms of the discussion. In the current context, they say, words like "monopoly" and "competition" are loaded terms. "Monopolies" are perceived as bad and "competition" as good. These concepts from the market, however, are not helpful in understanding the role of public schools in society. Public schools are institutions of the whole society established for the common good. When people speak of public schools with words like "monopoly" and "competition," they are really denying their own accountability for this public institution. When public schools do not serve the needs of all, citizens and government have the responsibility to improve them.

Critics also point to other governmental "monopolies" that citizens accept as necessary public institutions, such as the military, police forces, sewage and highway systems. A strong public school system is the best assurance for individual and national success in the global economy.

Some critics see the key to providing excellence in education as cooperation and partnership, not competition. "It takes a whole village to educate a child," they say, "so let's discover new structures for cooperation among all those who educate." They envision new coalitions of parents, public and private schools, community leaders, businesses, governments, churches and synagogues working together to bring about excellence in education for all children.

Proponents of educational competition respond: "Our higher educational system is competitive. Competition among public and private universities and colleges has produced the best system in the world. Competition also exists among school districts. Communities compete to attract corporate and individual tax payers. To do so successfully, a community must have good schools with a good reputation. People with children, looking to buy or rent, inevitably ask, 'Well, how are the schools?' Competition in education is not evil; it simply exists wherever people have choice among various goods. Today most parents have limited or no school choice."

Another voice coming from independent schools speaks to the issue: "We are already in a competitive environment. We need to maintain or gain the confidence of our constituency every year. The moment our parents are dissatisfied, they exercise their option to enroll their children somewhere else. Our school must be excellent, or we lose our students. If educational tax dollars followed the student, we'd all be on a more level playing field, and there would be more excellence in both public and non-public schools."

A dissenting voice replies: "Tax-supported competition will damage public schools. There will be no level playing field as long as public and independent schools do not have the same requirements for admission and expulsion. Educational choice will make public schools a dumping ground for all the students other schools will not accept."

For Discussion
1. "Monopoly" and "competition" are often "lightning-rod" words when people discuss educational choice. Why do you think this is the case? What other arguments would you add to those the text offers?

2. Proponents differ on what is most basic and compelling about educational choice. Some make "competition for excellence" the center of their argument; others make "parental responsibility" and "values" the center. (See session 3) Which of the two do you think offers the most fundamental reason in favor of educational choice?

3. The financing of education should strive to promote equity, excellence and effectiveness; that is, the best results for all students at the lowest possible cost. How do you think educational choice would measure up to these goals?