Competition = Success for Disabled Students

Researchers Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters weigh in in today's East Valley Tribune on how Arizona's voucher program has benefited the state's special needs population by creating competition between public and private schools. According to their research, special needs students who stay in traditional pubic schools benefit from the voucher program, because their schools are motivated to improve in order to retain students.

Greene and Winters's most recent project measured the impact that a similar voucher program had on public schools in Florida and was sponsored by the Manhattan Institute. The researchers employed their Florida research to analyze Arizona's program.

Initially, I am reluctant to agree with Greene and Winters. After all, just because vouchers have had a positive impact in Florida doesn't necessarily mean that they have been equally effective in Arizona. One must be careful about such slippery reasoning - I prefer hard data.

However, I would say that there's no reason why Greene and Winters can't use the same methods to evaluate Arizona's voucher program - and they should.

A School Choice Win in Washington

The Washington Post published an excellent editorial yesterday praising the city's voucher program and advocating for its renewal.

This is notable for two reasons. Firstly, it's an extremely compelling editorial and secondly, The Washington Post is a somewhat unlikely supporter of this issue. So congratulations to them for bucking the trend and speaking out for this program and the kids that are in it.

I am truly heartened by this city's renewed focus on the future of its children. Mayor Fenty and Chancellor Rhee have brought an amazing fresh breath of reform to Washington and they deserve considerable admiration for their commitment to improving the education of DC's kids.

Now, time will tell if our children's education will ultimately triumph over the status quo and the forces that keep it in place. Luckily, the WTU is embroiled in a nasty lawsuit right now, so maybe they will be distracted from this issue. One can only hope.

Chiming in...

The NY Sun adds it's $0.02 on Obama's voucher stance/slip.

Obama's Voucher Backlash

I pretty much always like reading Joe Williams's Democrats for Education Reform blog and this post on Obama's "scandalizing" voucher moment is a worthy, entertaining read, even though it's a few days old.

Here's some additional analysis on the V-word from Education Week's Campaign K-12.

Details: Pell Grants for Kids

Like all other cabinet-level departments, the Dept. of Education unveiled its 2009 fiscal year budget yesterday. Here are some details on the much-talked about and controversial Pell Grants for Kids:

• $300 million has been designated for the program.
• The scholarships are directed primarily towards minority, low-income students attending low-performing schools.
  
• Students receiving the scholarships will have to take national standardized assessments and have their progress tracked (although schools will not be held to NCLB standards).
• Individual states and LEAs will be able to apply for the grants on a competitive basis.

Latino students are likely to benefit significantly from the program, as they are some of America's students most likely to attend low-performing schools and thus, most likely to receive one of the Pell Grants for Kids.

If yesterday's budget hearing was any indication, this program is sure to incite strong feelings from voucher opponents. At one point, the questions from the audience actually devolved into a rant against Secretary Spellings's aides and their "love of vouchers and NCLB."

Hold on, friends...this is going to be a wild ride.

Data, Data, Data

A few new wonk-y things out and about:

The Cato Institute's Policy Analysis #605: The Public Education Tax Credit, which I was halfway through and is proving to be an exceptional policy brief.

The Pew Hispanic Center's report on Hispanic voters' party affiliation. Surprise! They are leaning back towards Democrats. I wonder if the immigration thing had any influence....?

Special Ed Vouchers in Texas

A Latino family in Texas is battling their local school district to cover the cost of sending their special needs son to a private school. They allege that the school district, Coppell ISD, has not fulfilled the requirements of their son's Individualized Education Plan (IEP) and has allowed for him to suffer bullying and attacks by other students. The Dallas Morning News has the whole story, along with a brief history of this type of legal case.

The deciding word of this case will be "adequate," as in, is this child receiving an "adequate" education from his public school? If the court decides that he is not, the legal requirements of the IDEA Act will require the district to pay for his private school education.

Other states have formal programs to serve the needs of special education children. One example is Washington, DC, which follows the IDEA Act's requirements.

DC's current program pays the private school tuition of special education students who cannot be "adequately" educated within the existing public school system. This program has come under fire in the past because of its cost. Earlier this year, Mayor Adrian Fenty pledged to reform the city's special education programs that are offered in public school, so as to reduce the amount spent on sending students to private school.

In contrast, Florida offers a private school scholarship program to ALL special education students, regardless of whether or not their public schools are serving them adequately. Any student who attends a public school and has an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is eligible. This program is called the McKay Scholarship Program.

Last year, the more than 18,000 students who participated in the McKay Scholarship Program received an average of $7,206 to attend private schools. The program has been ranked as exemplary amongst school choice supporters, especialy because of its broad reach and few participation restrictions.

Vouchers versus CTC Scholarships, Part II

Today's goal is two-fold:

1.) Point out some of the philosophical differences between vouchers and CTC scholarships.

2.) Discuss how these philosophical differences could affect the CTC push in Utah.

Numero uno:

School choice opponents are often quick to label tax credit scholarships as "vouchers," however, in reality, the two models operate quite differently - and have different philosophical underpinnings.

Vouchers come from public tax dollars - essentially, as money "returned" to the citizen for his/her own use. Voucher systems function on the belief that individuals have the right to control how their tax dollars are used for their children's education. Generally, voucher programs are proposed as "universal" and available to all residents of a particular state. This fits with their underlying philosophy - after all, if one family has the right to decide how its tax dollars are used, all other families should have the same.

On the contrary, corporate tax credit scholarships are created by the donations of various corporations. The donating corporation is the one who receives the tax credit; the student is the individual who receives a scholarship for private school. Rather than emphasize taxpayers' rights, CTC programs emphasize a philosophy of responsible business. They are also generally targeted to a specific audience - low-income families, for example. This results in a feel-good situation for both businesses and the general public. By participating in a CTC program, businesses enjoy a tax break and the squishy "I made a difference" feeling while families receive the money they need and the comforting thought that Big Business cares.

Numero dos:

The difference between "taxpayers' rights" and a focus on philanthropy cannot be understated for the Utah case. Utah's legislators would be seriously remiss to assume that their constituents who favored vouchers will also support a CTC scholarship program. My guess, based on what happened earlier this month, is that Utah's citizens will not be particularly enthusiastic about CTC scholarships.

To back this up, I must again refer to the Salt Lake Tribune poll, which found that only 6% of Utah voucher supporters favored the program because it would "help the poor." For most voucher supporters, "parental choice" was the driving factor in their approval. However, if a CTC program is initiated, it is likely to be restricted to low-income families. Thus, it will focus exclusively on helping the poor.

It's a recipe for resistance. While voters may not decide the future of this program, they'll have plenty to say to their legislators, who will be listening.

Additional Notes:

One of the most common misconceptions and fears about the Utah voucher program was that it would "take money away from public schools." Since the CTC program clearly has nothing to do with public funds, Utahns may be much more supportive of it despite the fact that it conflicts with some of their original reasons for supporting vouchers.

I will also be watching to see how the idea of competition figures into this debate - will the proposed CTC program actually provide enough scholarships and influence to change the public system itself? We shall see...

Tomorrow Wednesday Issue is Career and Technical Education, so stay tuned for some good information and hopefully, lively discussion!

"I'm Not Dead Yet!" : Utah Voucher Update

Okay, the Monty Python reference was cheap, but I decided to go for it anyway...as it appears, the Utah vouchers are NOT dead yet.

Paul Rolly of the Salt Lake Tribune is reporting that the Utah legislature is considering starting a Corporate Tax Credit (CTC) scholarship program following the defeat of voucher legislation that would have created a universal voucher program in the state.

We have seen this happen before in Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Minnesota. At one point, these states all had voucher legislation on the table, but when the legislation was defeated, the states came back with CTC scholarship programs. And they won.

So what are the chances that this program will pass? When asking yourself that important question, here are some facts to consider:

1.) This campaign will be different. First of all, let's remember that the original voucher legislation passed in the House and Senate and was signed into law by the governor. Then, and only then, was it defeated in a voter referendum. The proposed CTC scholarship program will likely never go to a voter referendum, so instead of convincing everyday citizens, the school choice movement will have to focus their efforts on people in power.

2.) The November 6th vote will have a major effect. School choice suffered a major defeat in the voter referendum - a defeat which could alter the outcome of this (possible) legislation in two ways. On the one hand, the voucher defeat could motivate Utahn legislators who support school choice to re-commit themselves to the cause and ensure that the CTC program is passed and protected.. On the other hand, a 60/40 vote against the voucher program is difficult for legislators to ignore. Well, it's difficult for legislators who want to please their constituents to ignore. Granted, the CTC program is not a voucher program, but polls show that the general public is not very well informed on school choice programs; therefore, the nuances of vouchers vs. CTC just might be too much for them.

3.) The NEA still has lobbyists. Tying in to the fact that the general public is uninformed about school choice programs, we must expect that the NEA will vilify the CTC program as an underhanded way to get vouchers into Utah. Not that I'm trying to give them any ideas; I'm sure they're already thinking that. So the school choice side must be prepared with a strong strategy to educate our legislators about the benefits of the CTC program and how it differs from vouchers.

I'm sure I missed a few points there, so please chime in.

Tomorrow I'll take a deeper look at the history of CTC scholarship program legislation in Arizona, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania to explain how Utah can move forward. I'll also ask the more philosophical question: Should CTC scholarships be accepted as a "consolation prize" after the defeat of a voucher program?

IQ/Insanity Tests for Utah's Voters - So which is it?

Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com and a tireless school choice supporter, published a strongly worded op-ed in Saturday's Salt Lake Tribune, sounding his own "grito" against Utah's declining education system. The rhetoric is strong and maybe off-putting to some, but his righteous anger is something to be admired.

Here's the problem, though: Byrne's argument is that Utah's schools are not working for low-income and minority students and thus, Utah needs school choice. While this is true, we already know that not even the voters who supported the vouchers did so because of a concern for poor/Latino/African-American children. Thus, we have a marketing problem on our hands. Byrne is missing an opportunity to connect with voters and tap into their value system as a way to motivate them to vote for vouchers.

There are better arguments. The Tribune's polls show that voucher opponents in Utah were largely frightened that the voucher program would take money away from public schools. I can affirm this; while I was in Utah, every Referendum One opponent that I spoke with cited the argument "Vouchers take money away from public schools." Every. single. one.

So while I understand that Byrne was speaking on his own behalf - and probably not thinking about how to best "market" the school choice cause - his words still raise some imoortant questions for those of us involved in school choice. It may seem ironic and counter-intuitive, but perhaps the best way to GET school choice for low-income and minority students is actually to focus less on those students themselves and more on the worries of the voters.

T Minus 1 Day: Utah Voucher Melee

Tomorrow, Utah's citizens will vote on one of the most controversial and innovative programs to be recently proposed in their state. Their collective "yay" or "nay" will determine whether or not a new universal voucher program will be created and opened to all the children in Utah.

With only one day to convince undecided voters, both sides are working in full-gear, frantically trying to win over the public. I should know this, because I've spent the past three days in Utah and I'm just not sure I can stand to watch another NEA-sponsored commercial while trying to enjoy my late-night "Meerkat Manor."

All joking aside, the media efforts of both sides are impressive. Salt Lake is literally covered in pro- and anti-voucher propaganda, from highway signs to flyers to radio and TV ads. The voucher yard signs are even competing for space with the mayoral candidates' signs. It almost seems as if there is no other issue on the ballot this year.

And while these PR campaigns seem to be well crafted for their main audience - the White, middle-class population of Utah - they are missing a critical segment of the state's population - Latinos. Hispanics comprise 13% of Utah's population and arguably, are the group that stands to benefit the most from the voucher legislation. All this adds up to a powerful vote. So why isn't anyone reaching out to Latinos?

Here are two possible obstacles (and some ideas on how school choice groups can work around them):

1.) A perceived language barrier.

School choice groups may reluctant to reach out to Latinos because of the time and resources involved in producing bilingual materials and advertisements. However, according to the US Census, only 3.5% of Utah's population speaks only Spanish (no English) at home. Therefore, choice groups could continue to produce materials in English and reach a large segment of the Latino population. However, their materials will have to be tailored to the Latino population - could I please get a single Latino face in a voucher commercial? It would be nice.

As a former teacher, I also have to add this: give your audience materials that they can actually read. Materials written at a college level may look sophisticated and thus, “credible,” but if the community can’t read them, they’re essentially worthless. You CAN write about school choice at a 5th grade level (I have!), but you’ll need to be creative with your style.

2.) Irrelevant outreach tactics.

Blogs, You Tube videos, and newspaper Op-eds are great, but they are not necessarily the best ways to reach a Latino audience. In this community, face time is still the best way to get your message across. The voucher debate is big in new and traditional media, but few groups are attempting any grassroots work. This is a critical strategy for the Hispanic community. Utah's Latinos need information about the issue, but they also need to know about the voting process, how to register to vote, and the impact of their vote. To truly convince Latino voters of their political power and get them to exercise that vote, you have to work in the community, get to know the voters, and be available (and able) to walk them through the process.

Any other ideas? I would love to hear them.

Note: Another interesting article to consider is yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune poll on why Utahans support or oppose vouchers. It's good data to consider when we're developing our marketing and outreach strategies.