School choice would benefit students

e-mail this story discuss this issue in our forums Guest column • Cort Flint: County Council needs to pitch in on local projects (04/11/04) • Gary B. Melton: Communities must resolve to keep our children safe (04/11/04) • Thomas Ravenel: Here's how to cut $200 billion in federal spending (04/09/04) • Paul A. Barra: Vouchers will save good students from bad schools (04/07/04) • George Fletcher: Let's support the Braves in their last season here (04/06/04) More details Robert C. Enlow joined the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation in 1996 and became the executive director in 2003. The foundation, considered one of the top national advocates for school choice, has completed education and research initiatives in several states throughout the country.

The fiscal issue revolves around the state's spending on education. The Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation, wanting to provide facts and inform the public debate, recently released a report that describes exactly how much state government allocates in education dollars per district and per student type. This report used actual data provided by the S.C. Department of Education to determine that average per-pupil spending by the state of South Carolina is approximately $4,200, a figure that includes both operational dollars and capital dollars.

But while South Carolinians must weigh fiscal realities when considering enacting any school choice program, they must give equal importance to the moral reasons for offering school choice. Giving parents greater options for their children is really not about cutting state education budgets or forcing public schools to operate more efficiently.

Rather, school choice is about empowering parents with control over their child's education. It is about giving middle- and low-income families the same educational freedom that well-to-do families in South Carolina already have and take for granted, the ability to send their child to a school that best suits that child's needs. It is about helping a child, no matter where that child lives, who for whatever reason is not being served by his/her public school, find the best and most appropriate educational environment.

It is about admitting that one size does not fit all children, and that it is morally right to give every child a chance to have a prosperous future. This fundamental moral debate about who has control over a child's education, a parent or the public school system, is raging across the United States. Two new programs were enacted in the last year (Colorado and Washington, D.C.). In each instance, people who defend the status quo are ratcheting up the false rhetoric, arguing implausibly that all children should not have the same choices and defending a system that may work for some children, but not all.

The facts increasingly show that school choice is working for children. In the 12 programs currently operating around the country, students who are free to choose their school are experiencing increased levels of achievement. Additionally, parents of students in choice programs are more satisfied with their child's education and, critically, more involved in their child's school.

The real kicker is that public schools are improving, too. A peer-reviewed Harvard study of public schools in Milwaukee, home of the nation's oldest voucher program for low-income families, found that schools that compete for students have seen test scores rise 7.1 percent. In addition, a state-sponsored study of Florida's voucher program for failing schools found that schools that received "a failing grade from the state in 1999 and whose students would have been offered vouchers if they failed a second time achieved test score gains more than twice as large as those achieved by other schools."

Those who would deny parents the opportunity to choose their child's school should be asked some searching questions. If money is the answer, why has education spending in South Carolina (and the nation) continued to rise while results have remained mostly stagnant? If more parental involvement is the answer, why shouldn't choice be an option, since all studies show that low-income parents who choose get more involved?

In the 21st century, is it still reasonable to assign children to a school based simply on where they live, not on what their needs are?

An honest and high-level debate about school choice, one filled with optimism and facts, not fear and distortions, will serve the public better than standard rhetoric. Most importantly, that debate could lead to a reinvigorated system of schooling that will serve South Carolina's children well, and give them the chance at a prosperous future.

South Carolina can be on the leading edge of education reform in America, and dramatically improve its system of education. It would be tragic for children, parents, educators and public schools if this opportunity slips by unnoticed.