SCHOOL CHOICE: By Chicago for Chicago. No one else matters.

On March 26, 2010 the Illinois Senate announced passage of Senate Bill 2494, the "School Choice Program". Under the relevant provisions of the bill, a voucher program is made available for students enrolled in Chicago Public School District 299 elementary schools that scored in the lowest 10th percentile on state achievement tests. Students attending those schools would be able to opt out of the public school they attend and use the voucher to enroll in a private school. The voucher could be in an amount up to $6,119, but cannot exceed the actual cost of private school tuition which averages $3,234 in Illinois. The $6,119 figure represents the average state "Instructional Expenditure" per pupil enrolled in the public school system.

The bill co-sponsored by Senators James Meeks (D) and Dan Cronin (R) is a good start. Finally, some Democrats are considering supporting the concept of school choice. But as the bill stands now, it is flawed and arbitrary. Section 10 of the bill defines low performing school as the schools that rank in the lowest 10th percentile on the Illinois Standard Achievement Test in Chicago elementary School District 299. An article published October 30, 2009 by the Sun Times illustrates that the lowest 10th percentile is not and cannot be static.http://www.suntimes.com/news/education/1855121,chicago-elementary-schools-rank-1009.article In comparison to the previous year, Mitchell elementary school boasted a 21 point increase in test scores, while Clissold elementary school dropped by more than 8 percentage points.

Thus, the schools that compose the "lowest performing" are subject to change every year. The bill does not specify how the program will be administered after the first year of implementation. A strict reading Section 40 of the bill seems to indicate that if a student's assigned public school drops out of the lowest 10th percentile, that student would no longer be eligible to receive the voucher. Such strict implementation is highly unlikely. No politician would allow such a repeal of vouchers from families enjoying the benefits of a private school education. Moreover, stability of the students and the public and private school systems would be non-existent. Therefore, there would be only method then to account for schools falling into the lowest percentile for the first time in subsequent years. The School Choice Program would have to be expanded.

Section 50 of the bill indicates that any given year when the number of qualifyng pupils requesting vouchers exceeds the amount allocated, the Illinois State Board of Education can adjust the qualification standards by using other criteria such as family income. The language of this section suggests that there could be a situation where families who contribute nothing to the state tax system would receive vouchers, while those who do will not.

It is unlikely the bill as drafted will survive scrutiny of the voters, the Illinois House of Representives, and the Governor's veto power. Constituencies will not tolerate a statewide funded benefit awarded only to an arbitrarily hand picked consituency residing soley in the city of Chicago. What about schools in East St. Louis, Peoria, Rockford and other cash strapped cities? In what way does this bill seek to help Chicago Hispanic students that have the highest high school drop out rate of all ethnic or racial groups? Section 5 of the bill cites "many pupils are dropping out of school before completing the ordinary course of a secondary education", yet the bill fails to address the ethnic group most at risk of dropping out of high school.

The only logical manner in which "School Choice" can truly survive is to make it available to all constituencies throughout the state. It cannot be disputed that any voucher awarded at an average of $3,234 would save the state of Illinois $2,695 per pupil. This does not take into account the savings in the state's "Operational Costs" of $10, 417 per pupil. Although it is recognized that not all operational costs will decrease in proportion to each student opting out, as fixed asset maintenance costs will not decrease (i.e. existing public schools will still have to be heated and maintained), other operational costs such as busing and school lunches would necessarily decrease.

Although it is expected that the National Educational Association, the Illinois Federation of Teachers, and other groups will oppose vouchers, legislators in the state will have to justify why reducing the cost of education per pupil does NOT make sense, especially in a climate where the State of Illinois is on the verge of bankruptcy. Nor does this place the value of creating a mechanism whereby the student/teacher ratio could improve by relieving some overcrowded classrooms. The NEA and IFT are not the only groups of expected opposition. Even before the ink on the bill had dried, the Illinois ACLU announced it's intention to oppose the Voucher proposal.http://aclu-il.org/blog/

Ultimately, it's YOUR choice.

 

Paul Fuentes