Best of Miami Portfolios 2001 - Units.muohio.edu

1991 it has spent more money on private schools ($1.1 billion) than it has to refurbish its public
schools ($1 billion). Furthermore, by the end of the 1999-2000 school year, Milwaukee’s program
will have spent almost $100 billion in taxpayer funds for private school tuition.
Taxpayers’ money would be better spent improving public schools than on private schools.
In the CQ Researcher, Kathy Koch writes that state-commissioned evaluations of the Milwaukee
and Cleveland voucher programs found no appreciable academic gains in the participating students.
Effective programs have been developed that could be implemented in the public schools and
provide more results from a greater number of students for less money. In Milwaukee, one such
program is SAGE (Student Achievement Guarantee in Education). This program, which reduces
class sizes, saw its participating students keep pace with voucher students in math and actually
outpace them in reading. The NEA reports that “Success for All,” an intensive reading program
developed by Johns Hopkins University, has a ten-year record of boosting student achievement,
especially for disadvantaged youngsters. This program could be implemented in all 113 of
Milwaukee’s elementary schools at a cost of $7.9 million and still have $21 million left over from
what the city’s voucher program costs. Cleveland could also use “Success for All” in its 80
elementary schools for $5.6 million and have $3 million left over.
The school voucher system may very well end up hurting the very students it intends to
help, leaving behind poorer and disadvantaged students. The Anti-Defamation League reports that
private school tuition can be as high as $10,000, and vouchers, typically providing students between
$2,500 and $5,000, would only cover part of that cost. Poor students would most likely not be able
to make up the cost difference and would therefore not benefit from the vouchers. Providing
vouchers could also encourage elite private schools to raise tuition, increasing the burden on lowincome
families. Another problem faced by the poor is the proximity of these schools. Few private
schools are located in inner cities and other economically depressed areas. Many private schools
tend to “skim” the best students out of public schools, rejecting those with disabilities, serious
educational deficits, and behavioral problems, and leaving those students behind in public schools
already losing money to the voucher programs. The NEA Today reports that 75 percent of private
schools have no special education programs. A 1998 U.S. Department of Education report found
that 46 percent of private schools would not accept vouchers if they had to accept students
randomly, and 68 percent would not accept school vouchers if they had to accept special-needs
students.
Voucher proponents claim that vouchers would create healthy competition between public
and private schools, but public and private schools are not on a level playing field. Private schools
typically cater to the economically elite, while public schools must accept any and all students.
Furthermore, decreased funding could force public schools to slash salaries, reduce faculty, and
make other cuts in funding. This would cause decreased teacher quality and larger classes. Finally,
when the future of America is on the line, there is no room for winners and losers in education; we
all must work together to allow all to succeed.
School voucher supporters argue that a favorable effect of vouchers will be that they will
make public schools less crowded, allowing the schools to save money. PFAW states that in
Milwaukee, the school districts lost only an average of twelve students per school; such a small
29