Voucher Schools Hurt Racine Unified Students and Schools More Than Help
Mount Pleasant-Sturtevant Patch resident Soren Gajewski is Principal of Jefferson Lighthouse School, and he offers his view of the voucher system.
As the Directing Principal for Jefferson Lighthouse, and as a former teacher in the Milwaukee Public School system, I feel obligated to warn my neighbors about the impending expansion of the school voucher system.
Initially, the idea was sold as a way to give poor children an opportunity to attend private schools. The competition, in theory, would give public schools an incentive to “do a better job.” Meanwhile, poor students would have an opportunity to attend alternative types of programs, including religious, in hopes that those programs would raise achievement. While the idea has some good will in it, the outcome should be of great concern for everyone.
Warning signs, for me as a classroom teacher, were seen shortly after the program had begun. Throughout the school year I had several former voucher school students added to my class roster. Those students came for different reasons; their voucher school was shut down due to mismanagement, the school had expelled them or couldn’t handle the child’s disability, or the program was awful.
Unfortunately, our school budget was never compensated for those students. So, my class roster would grow, but the school district received no returned funds from the voucher schools. Essentially, the taxpayer-funded voucher money was wasted.
Voucher schools are not held to the level of accountability that the public schools are despite getting your taxpayer dollars. In fact, voucher schools can expel students, deny students for various reasons, require public schools to cover special education interventions, avoid some or all standardized tests, and hire educators with less than stellar resumes. The result? In some studies, the schools that did participate in comparable testing measures scored even with the public schools. In other studies, including the most recent comparison, the voucher scored lower than the public schools. Considering the selective capability of a private voucher school and the necessity of a parent to actively pursue a voucher for their child, the data should show stronger scores for private voucher students.
Now former MPS Superintendent Howard Fuller, an original proponent of vouchers, is opposed to the governor’s proposal to expand the program and remove all income requirements. It was no surprise to many of us that the original intent was to privatize the public school system. It was odd that suburban and rural lawmakers were in such agreement with urban, often minority, districts over this issue, but the truth is this was not about helping poor students specifically, it was beginning of the process of privatizing public schools.
For Racine Unified, it comes down to this: Voucher schools are bad news for a tax base that is struggling. We have no money to waste on strip-mall schools that come and go. We are not a community that wants to relinquish our oversight on the education of our children. We don’t want our public school system to have to spend our taxes on advertising and marketing.
Competition is good. More competition within the public school system might be valuable. And, no doubt, our schools must become more flexible and adaptable to changing economic conditions. However, the impact of voucher schools - making kids equate to profit - has not, does not, and will not equal a quality education for all of our children.
What do you think of the voucher system?
Tell us in the comments.
Lisa Brennan
11:34 am on Tuesday, April 19, 2011
I think voucher schools are great and know several Milwaukee residents who schools are voucher school and they need to be active in the school, pay a portion of the tuition that is affordable. I welcome the voucher program!!
Chris Larsen
11:42 am on Tuesday, April 19, 2011
So which is it. Competition is good, but competition is bad. You are talking out of both sides of your face. You state "Competition is good. More competition within the public school system might be valuable" at the same time you state "We are not a community that wants to relinquish our oversight on the education of our children." That sounds like you dont want competition. You also state " We don’t want our public school system to have to spend our taxes on advertising and marketing" If you and your fellow administrators and RUSD board (Im not blaming teachers because they don't run the district so please dont flame me) were doing a great job this would not be necessary. You already advertise, for the referendums and spending issues ie. thousands spent on "lobbying" . I guess thats better then a new central office and paying half a mil for a sickout.
Heather Rayne Geyer
2:45 pm on Tuesday, April 19, 2011
The thought of taxes from the parents of a poor kid with no choices given to the rich parents with many choices - it sickens me.
What this ALL comes down to is the fact that there are basically two schools of thought/belief - two fundamentally different ideals which will never see eye to eye. One group cares more about people as a whole - a community. They are willing to pay taxes which go to help others less fortunate (financially, health, etc). The other group is of the thought that it is every man woman and family for themselves. Money is the bottom line and all that really matters in government. These two groups will never agree because the fundamental differences are embedded within us.
This was well written and great info - thank you.
Chris Larsen
2:49 pm on Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Did we read the same thing? You see well written with great info and I see contradictory information and fear of an alternative to the status quo.
Heather in Caledonia
8:43 am on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Heather, I think it is counter-productive for you to continually say that those who don't show your opinion are thoughtless, heartless and greedy. If you are thoughtful, care for everyone in the community and altruistic, try practicing that what you write your comments. You don't seem to care for those who disagree with your opinion and who seem to be so very heard-headed that they can't possibly change their minds.
Competition and free market are institutions that have helped to make this country great. It allows those businesses and individuals that are best at something to thrive and those that are not to find a better niche in which they would be more suitable. If I decide to work as a firefighter, but find I'm afraid of fire and can't lift more than 10 pounds, I would not be given the job and would have to look somewhere else where my skills can be put to better use.
That being said, there is also a place for government when it comes to taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves. Those who are mentally and\physically unable to work can be provided for. Those who are unable to be educated in a private school could be educated in the public schools. I am completely for the voucher systems as a way of privatizing the education system.
Duane Michalski
6:29 pm on Tuesday, April 19, 2011
School Choice = less waste in failing public schools. I am all for it!
Heather in Caledonia
8:51 am on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Soren,
Here are my points in response to your article:
1) I must first take your position into account when reading your article. Thank you for full-disclosure. Since you are writing as someone who's position may be threatened by increased competition, I understand how your option may be a bit bias. (By the way, how many principals does that school have? We only had 1 for our schools back in the day.)
2) 3 or 4 students were transferred mid-year to your school and you didn't receive compensation? How much more did it cost to educate those children? Did you need to hire another teacher or some more support staff? Was a room needed to be added to the school? This is something that could be written into the program to provide for funding to be transferred along with the child. Maybe the charter schools are only paid quarterly?
3) As for being able to release students from their school, I take that as a good thing. Some students are unable or unwilling to be educated in a manner that does not disrupt the work of the other children. They can then be sent to the public school. Just like welfare is for those who can't\won't work, public schools will take those who can't\won't behave in school.
4) Avoid some testing? I haven't heard this one. That can also be taken care of by writing it into the program. They should all take the same tests.
5) So, you're unsure why the charter schools didn't get better testing scores? Let's investigate, shall we?
wisconsincitizen
9:33 am on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
@HRG " The thought of taxes from the parents of a poor kid with no choices given to the rich parents with many choices - it sickens me. " You have this backwards.
The extremes on the income spectrum have more choices than those in the middle. If you are "poor" you have a multitude of programs available to you at low or no cost. Those that are "rich" not only pay their own way, but pay the way for the poor through taxes. It is those in middle that have limited choices. You make too much to qualify for a program but don't make enough to pay for it.
Every child deserves a good education. If voucher schools up the competition and force public schools to perform better, then everyone benefits.
SturtResident
11:08 am on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
@Caledonia Heather--
Jefferson has only one principal, and that is Soren. It is one of the highest performing elementary schools in RUSD becuase of the efforts of Soren and his staff in trying to implement the IB program there. Too bad the school board wouldn't back them up by making Jefferson to a K-8 IB school, and instead made the decision that "North Star" is the plan RUSD is to follow. Might as well be called "North Pole" for all that the kids will get out of that plan, as it seems to come from the land of great wishes but no reality.
Adding students to a classroom would have some obvious incremental costs, but since individual school budgets are set based on the first week's attendance (as I understand it) not only are those incremental costs not captured but neither are other additional staff costs such as library aid schedules, school nurse schedules, instructional specialist schedules, etc. More often than not transfers from other schools would be expected to be those underperforming students who would require these additional costs, at least that is my expectation, though I am not in the education field.
Heather in Caledonia
12:15 pm on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
SturtResident,
Thank you for clarifying that there is only one principal there and I do remember hearing how this school has been doing very well. I know 2 students who have left that school due to bullying issues, but I don't remember there being any problems with academics.
If this was an independent school, the principal would have much more freedom to implement programs and expand grades.
As for costs, did the school not loose some students throughout the year, also? I see no problem with paying out to the schools quarterly based on enrollment.
Urban Pioneer
12:52 pm on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
The testing that was cited recently for 3rd grade reading comparing MPS vs. Milw. Voucher schools is more than a little mis-leading.. but that won't stop the critics from using it to stop the expansion of the best option for parents which is true choice! The youngest kids, are amoung those from the poorest conditions and thus are eligible to join the Voucher Program. by the time you get to 5th and 8th grade these kids far out perform the MPS kids. If the program wasn't limited to Low income.. the numbers would stunning, and the attendance of the Public system schools would rapidly declining. See when you get to keep the middle class and upper class kids from more stable family situation and you lose the most challenging kids you are naturally going to have stronger numbers, especially when you haven't had much time to work the "magic" which is found in the Voucher/ success oriented schools. Bring school vouchers to Racine, and lift the income limitations. Not only will the tax-payers save a fortune, but the kids will succeed and we all win!
Urban Pioneer
12:52 pm on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Continued:
As for the IB program. this program averages 5 graduates per year...FIVE!! the year with most graduates was NINE!!! This program cost $350-400,000 per year and is not mandated by the State of Wisconsin to be offered. At $400,000 a year and only 5 graduates the cost PER STUDENT is $80,000.00 per year!!! The avg. per student cost is $12,000 per year and the Voucher program is around $6,500.00 per student. Why is only educators can't do math?? Call Voss, Mason, Turner, and Wangaard and tell them to bring vouchers to our city, now. We can't afford not to.
SturtResident
1:26 pm on Wednesday, April 20, 2011
@Urban Pioneer - IT sounds like we are somewhat in agreement with one exception. I fully support the IB program in addition to offering voucher and charter/magnet schools in RUSD. The number of graduates you mention is somewhat misleading because it is the number of kids that actually graduate with an IB certificate, which is only offered at Case. Until recently the IB program was offered only at Case, starting in 9th grade - there were no IB courses available before entering Case. That has recently started to change, with Jefferson attempting to secure the IB elementary school certification, and McKinley starting up the same for middle school. Once all the pieces are in place the opportunity will exist that a student can start IB in Kindergarten and pursue it all the way through high school. That's another reason I believe RUSD is boneheaded for not seriously considering Jefferson as a K-8 IB school instead of filling in the gaps and attempting certification at another site. Until that possibility was broached by Jefferson PTA, IB was being offered in K-5 and 9-12 only. Talk about screwing up efficiencies, where were the 6-8 graders supposed to go after completing the IB program at Jefferson? I still think it's a mistake to not alter Jefferson to K-8, but at least it's a little better (not much, mind you) than what it was.