What You Should Know About School Choice

Governor Chris Christie Signed NJ Public School Choice Program Act

National School Choice Week

Since National School Choice Week is coming up at the end of this month, it is a good time to study the various issues involved in the different types of school choice.  More than 5,500 independently-planned events are being scheduled across the county in all 50 states by a variety of groups from January 22 to February 1, including rallies, information sessions, roundtables, school fairs and movies to raise awareness about the various types of school choice programs.  National School Choice Week will include a whistle-stop train and bus tour beginning in Newark, New Jersey on January 22 with stops in Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Charlotte, Columbia, Augusta, Birmingham, Jackson, Houston, San Antonio, Austin, Tucson, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Andrew Campanella, President of National School Choice Week said, "During National School Choice Week, millions of Americans will hear the uplifting and transformational stories of students, parents, teachers, and school leaders who are benefiting from a variety of different school choice programs and policies across America.  Our hope is that by letting more people know about the successes of school choice where it exists, more parents will become aware of the educational opportunities available to their families."

Andrew Campanella continued, "During the Week, Americans from all backgrounds and ideologies will celebrate school choice where it exists and demand it where it does not.  National School Choice Week will be the nation's largest ever series of education-related events, which is testament to the incredible levels of support that exist for educational opportunity in America."  “Americans Prepare to Support School Choice at 5,500 Events in January,” www.schoolchoiceweek.com/press/57.

Supporters of school choice believe that parents, working with their student children, are in the best position to choose the best educational system and environment for their children.   That choice could be a higher-performing and/or safer public school, a charter school, a private school, a parochial school, a magnet school, an academy, a Vo Tech, a computer-based educational program, an online virtual school or homeschooling.   Magnet schools might be in math and science or in performing arts.  Magnet schools are designed to match the program to the desires and talents of the students.

History of School Choice Around the County

In 1990, Milwaukee started the first school choice program in the nation, called the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program.  The Program allowed students who lived in Milwaukee to attend participating private schools, if they met certain eligibility requirements.  The private schools receive state aid payments for each of the eligible students that they accept and enroll.  Later the program, called the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program, was expanded to the entire State of Wisconsin.   “Milwaukee Parental Choice Program,” Wisconsin Dept. of Public Instruction, www.sms.dpi.wi.gov/sms_choice.

In 1992 Los Angeles established its first charter school and in January 2010 California adopted a “Parent Trigger” law, which some commentators say was the first Parent Trigger law in the country.   The California law allows 51% of the parents of a failed school to form a Parents Union and fundamentally take over control of the school with the ability to transform it into a charter school.  Subsequently, similar laws were adopted by Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, and Texas.  Arne Duncan, the Secretary of the US Department of Education, is reasonably amenable to the idea of shutting down failed schools and turning them over to private management, i.e. a charter school.  After all, that is basically what Duncan did when he was the head of the Chicago schools.  “Whistle-Stop Tour 2013,” National School Choice Week; “Parent trigger,” Wikipedia, 10/23/13; Eddy Ramirez, “A Plan for Parents to Shut Down Schools,” U.S. News & World Report, www.usnews.com/education/blogs/on-education/2009/05/12.

In 2012, New Mexico opened the New Mexico Virtual Academy, the state’s first virtual learning center.  “Whistle-Stop Tour 2013.”  NMVA offers full-time students in grades 6-12, tuition-free, online, award-winning, public school options supported by New Mexico-licensed teachers.  The virtual program leads to graduation with a high school diploma that meets all of the state’s requirements.  NMVA boasts a robust Advanced Learner Program that even allows students to earn college credits while in high school, as well as interesting courses that introduce students to a variety of careers.  NMVA offers a supportive school community and a range of extracurricular activities.  NMVA also provides a blended virtual and in person option at their Learning Center.   New Mexico Virtual Academy, www.k12.com/nmva.

Chicago currently has some 50,000 students attending approximately 126 charter schools.  These charter schools have raised the state’s test scores and allowed the students to reach their full potential.  Now there is a bipartisan movement to extend the charter program to private and parochial schools.    “Whistle-Stop Tour 2013.”  Pennsylvania has pioneered using tax-credit scholarships to allow some 41,000 of the state’s students to enjoy a variety of otherwise unavailable education choices such as charter schools, magnet schools and online education opportunities.  Id.

The first federally-funded school choice program passed Congress in January 2004 entitled, “The District of Columbia Choice Incentive Act of 2003.”  The program, also known as the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, provided up to $7,500 in scholarships to approximately 2,000 low-income students in Washington, D.C.  A Department of Education study found that students who received scholarships obtained higher academic achievement at their new schools, including higher reading scores, than their peers at the public schools.

Furthermore, several studies of both privately and publicly funded scholarship programs around the country, including studies in New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin, found that students who participated in scholarship programs made significant gains in math and reading achievement compared to similar students in the public schools.  Safety is often a primary motivation for parents to decide to participate in school choice programs, particularly in cities like D.C., where violence in schools is a persistent problem.   Shanea J. Watkins, “Safer Kids, Better Test Scores: The D.C. Voucher Program Works,” The Heritage Foundation, 6/20/08.

However, President Obama sided with the special interest groups, such as the teachers’ union and school administrators, and passed legislation to phase out the program in 2009, when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.  But after the 2010 elections, when the Republicans gained control of the House, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) introduced the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results (SOAR) Act, which reinstated the D.C. scholarship program and increased the amounts that could be granted to $8,000 for k-8 students and $12,000 for 9-12 students. SOAR was not a bad deal for the taxpayers, considering the average cost per student in the D.C. schools is $18,000.  After hard negotiations, the entire SOAR Act was included in the 2011 long-term continuing resolution.  Therefore, the SOAR Act received authorization to be the funded for five years.  However, Obama provided zero funding for the scholarship program in his 2013 budget, signaling that the fight will go on.  “D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program,” Wikipedia, 8/30/12.

School Choice in New Jersey

As part of her ‘good schools’ program, in 1996 Governor Christine Todd Whitman signed two programs into law.  One was a five year pilot School Choice Program that allowed families to send their children to schools with open seats outside their local districts.  This program had evolved from a 1992 law, for which the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) had successfully lobbied the state legislature.  This 1992 law allowed children of teachers to enroll in the district in which their parent taught, as a resident student, regardless of where the student resided.  Laura Waters, “New Jersey’s interdistrict school choice program is working well,” New Jersey Left Behind, 6/6/13 (“Waters, NJ Left Behind”).

The other law was The New Jersey Charter School Program Act of 1995, NJSA 18A:36A et seq.  This Act provided for obtaining a “charter” issued by the Commissioner of Education to operate a public school outside the control of the local school board, with fewer of the restrictions that are placed on public schools.  The charter school can be established by (1) the teaching staff, (2) parents of children attending the school, (3) a combination of teachers and parents, (4) by institutions of high education or (5) by a private entity located within the state in conjunction with teachers and parents.  An existing public school is eligible to become a charter school if at least 51% of the teaching staff or 51% of the parents of students attending the school sign a petition in support of the school becoming a charter school (both a “teacher trigger” and a “parent trigger”).  “Governor Christine Todd Whitman Biography,” Center on the American Governor, Rutgers, www.governors.rutgers,edu/njgov/whitman_biography.php.

In 2010, Governor Chris Christie signed the Interdistrict Public School Choice Program Act of 2010, NJSA 18A:36B et seq., which allows school districts with additional student space to apply to the Commissioner of Education to be approved as a Choice District.  The application shall, among other things, describe the proposed program, indicate the number of student openings in each grade, the application process, and any criteria required for admission, and potential impact on diversity of the student population.  Choice Districts are required to create a parent information center.  The state pays the Choice District for each student it receives and the student’s home district either provides or pays for the student’s transportation to the Choice District up to 20 miles.

The Public School Choice Act provides substantial restrictions on the enrollment process.  Section 18A:36B-21 of the Act allows the Sending District to limit the number of students that may transfer to the Choice Districts.  Section 18A:36B-20 requires the Choice District to hold a lottery, if there are more applications than there are spaces available.  The Choice District may evaluate a prospective student on the basis of the student’s interest in the program, but the Choice District is not permitted to discriminate on the basis of athletic ability, intellectual aptitude, English proficiency or any basis prohibited by State or federal law.  The Act provides that the Commissioner may take action consistent with State and federal law to insure student population diversity in the participating districts.

Benefits of the New Jersey School Choice Program

The New Jersey Department of Education described the following benefits of the New Jersey Public School Choice program, “The Public School Choice Program benefits students and parents, as well as the choice districts. Choice programs might have smaller class sizes, increased instructional time, and a school culture more conducive to a student's success in school. Many choice districts have established specialized and innovative programs and courses that focus on areas such as art, music, foreign languages, and technology, and are open to students who demonstrate an interest in the special programs.  Opening enrollment to students outside the district can bring in more students interested in taking advantage of these special programs and courses, allowing both the programs and students to grow and flourish.

“The state also has many small districts and schools that sometimes experience population shifts that result in budget crunches.  Opening enrollment beyond the district's boundaries can alleviate the effects of these shifts and bring greater stability to operations, since choice students bring additional funding to the district. The addition of students with different backgrounds and perspectives from those of the district's resident students also can enrich the school community.”  “Interdistrict Public School Choice Program,” NJ Department of Education, www.state,nj,us/education/choice/.

According to the NJ DOE there are currently 136 Choice Districts approved for the 2014-15 school year.  Id.  In the program’s first year, only 1,000 students and 15 schools participated in NJ School Choice Program.  The cost to the state in tuition aid was $9.8 million.  However, by 2013 4,700 students and 110 schools participated in the program with a cost to the state of $49 million.  Due to the popularity of the program the state felt forced to limit the number of seats a Choice District could offer in the 2014-2015 school year to 5% more than the number offered in the 2013-2014 school year.  “Working to Improve Public School Choice for New Jersey Students,” New Jersey Interdistrict Public School Choice Association, www.njipsca.org/?p=195 (“Working to Improve School Choice”).

Most Commentators appear to praise the New Jersey Interdistrict Public School Choice Program

Valarie Smith, who helped organize the school choice pilot program under Governor Christine Todd Whitman, had nothing but praise for the NJ School Choice Program.  She said “calling it an overwhelming success would be an understatement.”  She referred to individual programs in Deal Elementary in Monmouth County and Audubon High School in Camden County, which drew a substantial percentage of their students from underprivileged areas such as Asbury Park, Neptune, Long Branch, Camden and Gloucester City.  Audubon High School has 108 applications for the 2014-15 school year, of whom 64 are from disadvantaged areas.  However, with the new caps, Audubon is limited to only five new openings, even though it has the capacity to take 45 more students.  Because of the School Choice Act, Glassboro High School has been able to establish two specialized programs: a Performing Arts Academy and a STEM Academy, and Sterling High School has been able to establish a Navy ROTC program.  The recent caps may jeopardize these special programs.  Valarie M. Smith, “Demand for Seats Speaks to Success.” Id.

Wendell Steinhauer, the President of the NJEA, also had great praise for the NJ School Choice Program, while he went to great lengths to stress that it was not a voucher program.  On the praise side he said:

“By just about any measure, New Jersey’s Interdistrict Public School Choice Program is a success.  Students across the state have taken advantage of that program to attend public schools that they believe best meet their needs, while the districts involved in the program have benefited from additional state aid intended to protect both sending and receiving districts from financial harm as a result of their participation.

“That’s exactly what NJEA believed would happen when we supported the original legislation establishing the pilot program over a decade ago.  By matching public school districts that have capacity to educate additional children with students who would like to attend the public schools in those districts, the program helps facilitate the efficient and effective use of public tax dollars.  It’s the sort of win-win solution that is often available to policymakers when they are willing to be creative.”  Wendell Steinhauer, “PROGRAM HELPS MEET INDIVIDUAL NEEDS,” Id.

Wendell Steinhauer went on to say:

“[IPSCP] meets an important need, and it does so utilizing New Jersey’s excellent public schools.  Students in the program may find opportunities to take classes and study subjects not available in their home districts.

“At the same time, Choice districts may find it easier to offer such specialized opportunities if they are able to draw from a wider pool of students.

“Together with county vocational and technical schools, charter schools and district magnet schools, schools in the Interdistrict Public School Choice Program provide another option for families looking for the best public school fit for their children’s specific needs and interests.  Along with New Jersey’s excellent traditional public schools, it’s a rich menu of opportunities for New Jersey families.

“The success of the Interdistrict Public School Choice Program is evidence that parents are eager for their children to attend great public schools.  It’s also a reminder to all of us that we can never stop working to strengthen and improve our public schools.  That imperative drives NJEA, because we believe that every child in New Jersey deserves access to a great public school.”  Id.

Laura Waters, the President of the Laurence Township School Board, has expressed a substantial amount of praise for the IPSCP, except for the recent cap, which she severely criticized.  In one of her New Jersey Left Behind blogs, she traced the program from the 1992 teachers’ children only law, to the Whitman pilot program and Christie 2010 law.   She felt that the series of small steps was the reason that it was able to survive severe political attacks.  Laura Waters said, “An anemic tip-toe through the feral fields of education reform, right?  Hardly worth the bother [for a political battle] for 900 kids [who had continued from the expired pilot program].”  However, once the 2010 NJ School Choice was enacted into law, it blossomed, as Laura Waters continued, “In 2011, 2,131 kids attended choice schools in 56 districts. In 2012, 3,356 kids attended 67 choice schools and crossed those hallowed district boundaries. In September 2013 there will be 6,144 non-resident kids attending 107 choice districts.

“A typical story comes from Ocean City Public Schools, which in 2011 offered 14 seats to students outside the district. In September [2013] the district will accept 58 kids, who will generate tuition revenue, fill empty seats, and allow the district to maintain programs, class size, and upgrade technology. That's a win for the choice district and a win for those out-of-district families who, moneyed or not, get a choice. It's not a win for sending districts, which lose students and pay tuition…. But maybe it forces them to up their game. Maybe it forces a little healthy competition into a moribund marketplace.”  Waters, NJ Left Behind, Id.

 Professor Paul Tractenberg of Rutgers Law School raised many questions about the program, but appeared to have few, if any answers.  He criticized the states charter school program by saying, “Overall, charter school students perform about the same as, or even a bit worse than, comparable students in regular public schools.”  He seems to agree with the ACLU, which urged that school choice should be used to advance a civil rights agenda, without mentioning that the School Choice Act makes it clear that the Choice District cannot discriminate based on race and that other commentators pointed out that the program actually has increased minority representation in the Choice Districts.  Paul Tractenberg, “MANY DISTRICTS OPT FOR CHOICE FOR THE WRONG REASON: MONEY,” “Working to Improve School Choice.” Id.

Conclusion

It is amazing that the NJEA, teachers, parents, school districts, Republican Governors, Republicans and Democrats in the legislature, were able to come together to pass and implement a series of school choice laws that appear to most people to allow for win-win improvements in New Jersey’s educational achievement.  Other states also appear to be experiencing encouraging results from their school choice programs.  With 5,500 events planned for School Choice Week, it is likely more people will become aware of the choices that are available where school choice programs exist and demand such programs where they don’t exist.