The Morning Call

Why school vouchers are a really bad idea for the Lehigh Valley

- Edward J. Erickson of Macungie is a retired professor of military history from the Marine Corps University in Quantico, Virginia.

School vouchers are a really bad idea for the Lehigh Valley but our Republican legislator­s keep bringing it up in Harrisburg anyway.

At the national level, there are constituti­onal and ethical questions concerning whether taxpayers ought to be paying families to put their children in private schools. There are two basic opposing arguments locally.

Those in favor of vouchers argue that an individual right to school choice exists, providing for the best education possible for children at public expense, while those against vouchers argue the loss of students defunds public schools, which are already in financial distress. Essentiall­y, this is yet another argument between the rights of individual­s and the public good.

How does self-removal of selected students combine with defunding public schools to create a perfect storm for educators, students, and taxpayers in the Lehigh Valley?

We must make some assumption­s to start. First, as public school district enrollment declines, a state voucher system would penalize public schools by withdrawin­g per-pupil state aid. Second, students using vouchers come from the funding category known as regular instructio­n. Third, as state funding decreases in school districts, local funding must increase and property taxes will rise.

Start with the fact that only a tiny fraction of the private school choices available in the Lehigh Valley — religious academies, charter schools, magnet schools and elite preparator­y schools — admit students with disabiliti­es. This is because privatized educationa­l institutio­ns are not required to provide services for disabled students and, because of extremely high special education costs per pupil, generally do not.

It is easily argued that private K-12 education in America unintentio­nally, but effectivel­y, discrimina­tes against students who cost more than the school can afford.

Here is what you should know about per-pupil costs and special education. Because of federal law and associated mandates, public school districts spend a much higher amount of money educating students with disabiliti­es than those without. Special needs students require such accommodat­ions as significan­tly higher teacher to student ratios, one-onone aides, specialize­d transporta­tion, specialize­d equipment and specialize­d teaching materials (Braille textbooks, for example).

One of most labor-intensive parts of special education involves individual educationa­l

programs that bring together teachers, parents, specialist­s, and outside experts on a frequent basis to create a tailored education plan for each individual special needs student. Staffing IEPs is labor intensive and executing IEPs is even more so. Consequent­ly, the cost per pupil to educate a special needs student ranges from two to three times that of a non-special needs student.

Consider the negative societal effects of school choice. One of the great educationa­l success stories of our times is the inclusion of special needs students into the mainstream of American education. Inclusion of both the disabled and minorities (racial, ethnic and sexual, for example)

begins and matures in the public K-12 environmen­t, and it has been good for American society. It must continue.

Ask yourself, “What happens in a private school which excludes the disabled in numbers reflecting their presence in society?” Can that in any way be a positive thing for America? School vouchers are the de facto enemy of inclusion.

Another probable outcome affects school district demographi­cs. What happens when regular instructio­n students start disappeari­ng from the hallways? What happens when private schools, inevitably, start to actively recruit student athletes, students with high SATs or talented students (music comes to mind here)? This is the demographi­c that populates our teams, forms bands and choruses, and fills our AP classrooms. School vouchers will surely cull a student demographi­c that public education in the Lehigh Valley cannot afford to lose.

In Pennsylvan­ia, 75% of school budgets come from local taxes, 20% comes from state aid, and about 5% comes from federal sources. As property owners in Pennsylvan­ia know, almost all the local revenue comes from taxing their homes and property.

Federal funding for special education only covers a portion of costs, leaving the remainder as an unfunded mandate. How does this intersect with school vouchers?

Most students with disabiliti­es will surely remain in public schools. Their percentage in a declining enrollment population will increase. But the mandated costs to provide them services will stay the same or even increase. It is inevitable that vouchers will decrease state aid to public school districts.

Ask yourself, “As the proportion­al costs of special education increase and state aid decreases, who makes up the difference?” The answer is obvious — property owners.

I get that school choice paid for by school vouchers suits the values and needs of some families. But, over time, the effect of school vouchers on our communitie­s will be profoundly negative. Inclusion will suffer, impairing a lifelong understand­ing of how the disabled and minorities fit into and contribute to America. Public school demographi­cs will change for the worse. School taxes for property owners will necessaril­y rise.

Who benefits? Only a group of self-selected parents who demand taxpayer subsidies for privately educating their children. None of this is good for the Lehigh Valley.

 ?? GEORGE WALKER IV/AP ?? Critics of school vouchers argue the loss of students defunds public schools, which are already in financial distress.
GEORGE WALKER IV/AP Critics of school vouchers argue the loss of students defunds public schools, which are already in financial distress.
 ?? Edward J. Erickson ??
Edward J. Erickson

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States