Parents should oppose back-door voucher plan

e-mail this story discuss this issue in our forums Guest column • By Marc H. Wilson : Enjoy the symbols of the season (12/14/04) • Tom Swatzel: Professor fails test on education reform issue (12/13/04) • Ed Leap: Here's advice for shopping for that special woman (12/12/04) • David Shi: Cultures must learn from their mistakes (12/12/04) • Judith S. Prince: Education is engine of opportunity in today's society (12/12/04) More details Paul Thomas, who taught high school English in the Upstate for 18 years, is an assistant professor of education at Furman University. He can be reached at paul.thomas@furman.edu.

NCLB has begun a false assault on public schools. When a school meets 18 of 19 standards — missing one goal by one-tenth of a percent — NCLB deems that school a failure. This all-or-nothing approach to accountability has only one goal — dismantle public education.

Put Parents in Charge is a state political initiative claiming one goal while actually pursuing another. Gov. Mark Sanford and choice advocates are using this cleverly named initiative to infuse South Carolina with school vouchers and school choice.

The basic premise for Put Parents in Charge is terribly flawed. South Carolina has suffered the "urban legend" for decades that we have the worst school system in the country. We don't. In fact, there is no credible way to compare state school systems and no real need either.

Let's look closely at the stated support for Put Parents in Charge offered on the South Carolinians for Responsible Government's Web site. Each argument reveals the wolf under the sheep's clothing.

"Restore to all parents their right to select the best schools for their children." This first argument is odd in its use of "restore," since it doesn't designate when some golden age of education existed because of parental choice of schools. The history of public education has been punctuated for over 100 years with public outcries against its effectiveness. There has never been any golden age of schooling driven by parental choice.

"Improve public school performance by allowing parents to be customers with the power to leave." First, schools are not businesses. Parents and students are not consumers, and students certainly are not products. The free market, competition model is not a silver bullet in business and not the proper solution for the problems we do have in schools. Competition is the solution when monopoly laziness and disregard are the problems. Are the supporters of Put Parents in Charge blaming school failure on teacher laziness and lack of motivation? If so, let's hear Gov. Sanford and others say so. If not, then the competition model is not the right solution.

"Provide low- and mid-income families options that wealthy parents have." First, this initiative would benefit financially middle-class parents who use private or home schooling. If passed, this initiative would immediately send state funding to those who already use private schools or home schooling; that will drain money from school budgets, and it will send money to schooling situations that do not have the accountability structures that public schools must address.

Low-income families, however, across the United States do not use school choice — primarily because the tax credit being offered will not cover the total expense of private schooling, it will not address the hidden costs of changing schools (transportation, additional fees and materials), and it cannot confront the reluctance of private schools to accept student populations they simply do not want.

"Improve public school performance without more revenue or higher taxes." This final and senseless statement should be met with a resounding "How?" Again, political initiatives based on a blind allegiance to free-market ideology are seriously misguided. The problems with our schools have virtually nothing to do with the benefits of competition-based models.

Currently, schools labeled failures by NCLB or our own state report cards have many students who succeed, while our schools labeled excellent have many students who fail. The reasons for the successes and failures are terribly complex and often unique to each student.

The problems in schools often grow from situations that are firmly a part of students' lives at home. Due to factors both in and out of the parents' control, students fail in school and schools fail students. A recent international study (UNICEF, 2002) shows "the social, economic and cultural status of a child's home is the most powerful influence on the likelihood of educational success." The ironic reality is that parents are already in charge of the most crucial factor in school success for children.

The real dilemma faced by our schools is how to help those students who do not have the support they need to succeed. In most cases, the parents of failing students have already abdicated support for their children. Public schools are the only hope left for those children left behind — and ultimately those families.

"Put Parents in Charge" is misguided and misleading political rhetoric. Residents of South Carolina should speak up now and take charge by saying "No" to back-door vouchers and "Yes" to the children who do fail in our schools but need us desperately.

Paul Thomas, who taught high school English in the Upstate for 18 years, is an assistant professor of education at Furman University. He can be reached at paul.thomas@furman.edu.