Competing private with public schools improves student performance

By Michael Delgado

Last year I worked with UCLA Project Literacy, tutoring an
eighth grader with a first grade reading level. I came home after
every tutoring session upset that our public educational system
constantly passes kids just like him from grade to grade, not
holding anybody responsible. We all want the best education
possible for students in California, but the situation looks
terribly dim.

Gov. Gray Davis is pouring half of our state’s budget into
public education, allotting roughly $8,000 a year for each public
school student. But even with half our budget funding education,
our pupil spending is still 40th in the nation, coupled with the
fact that 30 percent of California’s ninth graders
won’t even graduate from high school. It’s no wonder
then that many parents send their children to private schools,
where class sizes are smaller and test scores constantly surpass
those of public institutions.

In the upcoming election, we have an opportunity to improve
public schools by voting yes on Proposition 38. Under the school
voucher initiative, the state government will fund each student
with $4,000 dollars to attend the voucher-school of their choice.
Though the opposition to this initiative is strong, I think school
vouchers will improve our state’s educational system for
three reasons:

First, the competition that will occur as a result of the school
voucher initiative will cause schools to perform better. We all
know that competition drives athletes to perform their best, even
forcing Olympians to aim at beating current world records. We all
know that competition drives a good economy, causing businesses to
provide consumers with better prices. Our country even preserves
business competition by creating laws against monopolies (just
think about the pending Microsoft case). But why aren’t our
public schools competing for our students?

Public schools have a virtual monopoly on government money and
teachers have no financial motivation for improving the quality of
education. I believe school vouchers will provide competition
between schools.

The argument is simple: if a school is underperforming, parents
can take their children out and move them to a better school.
I’m not arguing that teachers in the public school system
don’t have to meet certain standards; rather, I’m
arguing that because competition doesn’t exist, school
standards have dropped and our children are suffering. School
vouchers will provide the competition needed to increase the
educational standards.

Critics to this proposition argue that competition between
public and private schools will ultimately only hurt the public
school system. “Let’s fix our public schools, not
abandon them” is the message touted by our voter’s
guide. They argue that vouchers will strip away millions of
tax-dollars from public schools, which will only benefit private
institutions. It seems like a good argument and I was almost
convinced of its truth, but then I found out that California will
actually save money through the voucher program.

Here’s how it works: California spends roughly $8,000 per
student enrolled in public education. The school voucher initiative
will only cost California $4,000 per student, which cuts per pupil
spending in half.

Let’s pretend that half the students in a class of 30
decide to use school vouchers. Government spending would drop from
$240,0000 to $180,000. The $60,000 saved could then be used to
increase per pupil spending in that class. In fact, the voucher
program is estimated to save California $3.4 billion dollars, which
could then be pumped into public education to increase teacher pay,
decrease class sizes, and upgrade our schools.

The second reason why vouchers will improve our educational
system is that they will encourage parents to be more involved with
how their tax-money is spent. The school voucher initiative is
pro-choice, trusting that parents know what’s best for their
children. School vouchers will give parents more control over their
tax-money and give them the option to send their children to better
schools. according to the Center for Education Reform, a recent
poll indicated that 70.4 percent of African American parents making
below $15,000 a year support school choice.

Furthermore, under this initiative, children in these
destructive school districts have the opportunity to move into
better schools with higher standards. In an article for CNN, Clint
Bolick writes: “In Milwaukee, several thousand low-income
children were able to escape abysmal public schools to attend
private schools at public expense.”

Critics of this proposition claim that $4,000 vouchers
won’t help poor families pay for private education; but, the
Cato Institute states that the average private school tuition
nationwide is only $3,116.

Many critics also argue against school vouchers because private
school teachers aren’t required to have state certification.
If anything, this argument points against the current certification
program. Regardless, private school teachers constantly produce
students that score higher in state tests than those in public
schools. Secondly, voucher schools must satisfy state requirements
and file with the California Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Clearly, the critics need to further examine this initiative.

Finally, we should vote for Proposition 38 because vouchers
work. Milwaukee started a parental choice program 10 years ago and
according to Harvard University, “students gained 6.8
percentage points in math and 4.9 percentage points in reading on
standardized tests” in three years. And to kick it up another
notch, according to the Center for Education Reform, in Milwaukee,
“both per-pupil funding and overall funding for the public
schools increased significantly under school choice.”

Harvard Economics Associate Professor Caroline Hoxby found that
students living in areas where private and public schools are in
competition with one another experienced a “12 percent
increase in the probability of college graduation,” and
increased test scores. It makes sense that vouchers work because it
gives parents the opportunity to send their children to the best
school in the area. Under this proposition, school choice would
dismantle the monopoly held by public schools and make the
educational marketplace more responsive to the demands of the
consumer.

Even though Vice President Gore is against vouchers, he said:
“If I was the parent of a child who went to an inner city
school that was failing … I might be for vouchers, too.” Of
course, Gore didn’t need school vouchers; he was wealthy
enough to send his daughters to private schools.

Senator Lieberman’s argument for school vouchers makes
sense: “Competition in schoolyards and athletic fields across
our country has built stronger minds and bodies and greater
self-esteem for generations of American children. Isn’t it
time we applied those lessons indoors to improve our ailing
education system through competition, and offer more choices to
parents and kids trapped between the rock of the status quo and the
hard place of waiting for the needed reform of public
schools?”

I agree with Lieberman. We need competition to drive our schools
to perform better and school vouchers will provide that
opportunity. Please vote yes on Proposition 38.