School Choice: The Benefits And Why Congress Needs to Enact It

Steve Jobs was the founder of Apple, one of the worlds biggest and most successful

technology companies. As a company, Apple is prolific in its inventions; it invented the iPhone,

iPad, and the OS X operating system. The reason that Steve Jobs was able to build a company as

successful as Apple was because he received a first-rate public education. The American Public

School system, however, is in crisis. Despite increasing K-12 education spending from $4.5 billion

in 1965 to $40.2 billion in 2016,1 and despite spending more than the average of all nations in the

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the U.S. consistently has

mediocre educational outcomes compared to other OECD nations.2 If a lack of funding is the issue,

as some have suggested, why has U.S. education spending grown, and why does it rival that of

OECD countries? Spending more money on American education is not the answer to the nations

education problems. American education is monopoly for most people because they only have the

choice of attending their local school. Upper-income American students do not have to worry about

their education as much as their lower-income peers because they have the choice between their

local neighborhood school and several private schools whose tuition bills they can easily pay.

School choice schemes, such as vouchers and charter schools, give middle and lower-income

students the same choice and opportunities that rich students already have. Because school choice

would benefit students in all schools and give aid to disadvantaged students, the U.S. government

should expand school choice.

Opponents of school choice programs argue that school choice schemes harm the students

who participate in them, and that resources would be better spent distributing resources equitably

1"Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2017," Government Publishing Office,
GPO.gov, January 2016, 63, accessed March 30, 2017, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/
BUDGET-2017-BUD/pdf/BUDGET-2017-BUD.pdf.
2"Financial and Human Resources Invested In Education," Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development, OECD.org, 206, accessed March 30, 2017, http://www.oecd.org/
education/skills-beyond-school/48630868.pdf.
!1
across school districts. These arguments, however, ignore the countless quality studies that prove

these assertions wrong. Firstly, New Orleans Louisiana has had most of their students attend charter

schools since Hurricane Katrina, and the money follows each individual student. As a result,

students graduate high school more, and students attend higher quality schools. Graduation rates

have risen from 54% in 2004 to 77.8% in 2012; and 34% of students attend schools ranked A or

B by the state of Louisiana, compared to just 12% in 2004.3 Secondly, when poor New Jersey

school districts won the legal right to more educational funding, spending $3,100 more than the

states wealthiest districts, the extra spending produced lackluster results.4 For example, in Camden,

New Jersey, one of the poorest cities in New Jersey that received a substantial portion of the extra

funding and spent $19,204 per student, only 3 students had SAT scores that were considered

college-ready.5 Despite the good intentions of those opposed to choice, spending more money does

not solve the problem of students in failing schools. The data shows that the key way to increase

academic achievement is to have a properly designed school choice scheme.

School Choice helps students in both public schools and in non-public schools. School

choice aids students by giving them the opportunity to attend better private schools, and it also

improves the quality of the public school system for everyone, due to the increase in competition.

The data shows those students who have the opportunity to leave the public school system achieve

better outcomes. For example, in Washington D.C., while students who received a $7,500 voucher

to attend a school of their choice did not achieve statistically significant academic gains, they did

3 Stacy Teicher Khadaroo, "New Orleans goes all in on charter schools. Is it showing the way," The
Christian Science Monitor, Csmoniter.com, March 01, 2014, accessed March 30, 2017, http://
www.csmonitor.com/USA/2014/0301/New-Orleans-goes-all-in-on-charter-schools.-Is-it-showing-
the-way.
4Christopher D. Cerf , "Education Funding Report," State of New Jersey, NJ.gov, February 23,
2012, accessed March 30, 2017, http://www.nj.gov/education/stateaid/1213/report.pdf.
5The Associated Press, "Only 3 students scored college-ready in Camden," New Jersey On-Line
LLC, NJ.com, December 18, 2013, accessed March 30, 2017, http://www.nj.com/camden/index.ssf/
2013/12/only_3_students_scored_college-ready_in_camden.html.
!2
achieve a graduation rate of 91 percent, compared to 70 percent for non-voucher students. (6)

Moreover, the $7,500 vouchers were half of the cost of the Washington D.C. per-capita spending of

$15,000.6 While the equivalent academic results at first glance may be a case against the program,

the overall results are actually an argument in favor of it. For half of the cost to taxpayers, D.C.

parents get the same choice that richer parents get, and they get a substantially higher graduation

rate. That may seem like a trivial difference, but it is very important: those who graduate high

school are more likely to have a job and pay taxes and less likely to commit crime, go to prison, and

become a burden to society. Washington D.C. achieved better outcomes and at half the cost.7 The

data also demonstrates that those in the public school system will achieve better outcomes due to

the increased competition. For instance, students in Milwaukee Public Schools greatly benefitted

from the increased competition: A one standard deviation increase in private options available to

each student results in about one-tenth of a standard deviation increase [equivalent to two

percentage points] in achievement.8 Additionally, the results of that magnitude mean that if just 37

more private schools participated in the Milwaukee voucher system, it could be expected that

achievement for students remaining in MPS [Milwaukee Public Schools] will rise by about one-

tenth of a standard deviation.9 When competition is introduced into the marketplace, firms

traditionally engage in measures to increase their competitiveness and get more customers. The

6Jason Richwine, Ph.D., "D.C. Voucher Students: Higher Graduation Rates and Other Positive
Outcomes," The Heritage Foundation, Heritage.org, July 28, 2010, accessed March 30, 2017, http://
www.heritage.org/education/report/dc-voucher-students-higher-graduation-rates-and-other-positive-
outcomes.
7 Patrick J. Wolf and Michael Mcshane, "Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? A Benefit/Cost Analysis of
the District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program," Education Finance and Policy 8, no. 1
(2013): 77, accessed March 30, 2017, doi:10.1162/edfp_a_00083.
8Jay P. Greene and Ryan H. Marsh, "The Effect of Milwaukees Parental Choice Program on
Student Achievement in Milwaukee Public Schools," University of Arkansas Department of
Education Reform, uaedreform.org, March 2009, 14, accessed March 30, 2017, http://
www.uaedreform.org/downloads/2009/03/report-11-the-effect-of-milwaukees-parental-choice-
program-on-student-achievement-in-milwaukee-public-schools.pdf.
9 Ibid
!3
same market principle holds true for schools. When schools have to compete for funding, they

engage in measures to increase their academic performance, such as studying the methods of the

more successful schools that their students are flocking to. When competition is introduced in

eduction, not only do students benefit by having the opportunity to leave to better private schools,

but students left in the public school system also benefit due to the measures taken by public

schools to compete with private schools. Not only does choice improve the quality of education for

all students, but it most especially helps the most disadvantaged students.

School Choice helps disadvantaged students in and out of the public school system. Students

with learning disabilities are the ones who are most harmed by the lack of choice and competition in

the school system. They do not have the chance to pick a school best suited for their academic

needs, and the public school monopoly routinely underserves them. For example, a study done on

Floridas McKay special education voucher program found that students in Public Schools that were

forced to compete had an increase in academic proficiency of 0.01 standard deviations in both

reading and math.10 As per the Milwaukee study, this is another example of the marketplace

ensuring that competition has positive results. When schools have to compete for the business of

disabled students, they engage in measures to increase their academic performance and respond to

the unique needs that the student has. There is greater incentive to study the methods of the more

successful schools that disadvantaged students are flocking to. As a result, the entire school system

becomes better fit to serve the needs of disadvantaged students. When competition is introduced in

eduction, not only do disadvantaged students benefit by having the opportunity to leave to better

private schools, but disadvantaged students left in the public school system also benefit due to the

measures taken by to better fit their needs.

10Marcus A. Winters, and Jay P. Greene, "Public School Response to Special Education Vouchers:
The Impact of Florida's McKay Scholarship Program on Disability Diagnosis and Student
Achievement in Public Schools, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 33, no. 2 (2011): 77.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41238544.
!4
 The data behind school choice is clear. When students have the opportunity to choose a

school that suits their needs, rather than being forced to be a part of the monopolistic public school

system, everyone wins. Choice enables and empowers students to flee failing public schools and

choose a private school that will better suit their needs. This ability to choose leads to the public

school system as a whole improving. This leads to everyone getting a better education, including

the disadvantaged. Disadvantaged students get better educations with competition because schools

become more responsive to their unique needs. The government should expand school choice

because a marketplace of schools leads to better educational outcomes, and better aid for

disadvantaged students. While there are far too many cases of voucher schemes and charter schools

failing to meet their goals, they are but a fraction of the number of successful cases of choice and

competition improving educational outcomes. The beauty of competition is that a school does not

continue to get funding if it fails: it gets shut down and people are left with better choices.

Ultimately, school choice is the most moral way to reform education because it is immoral to punish

children for their familys financial situation. It is time for our education system to reflect that.

!5
 Bibliography

"Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2017. Government Publishing Office.

GPO.gov. January 2016. Accessed March 30, 2017. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/

BUDGET-2017-BUD/pdf/BUDGET-2017-BUD.pdf.

Cerf, Christopher D. "Education Funding Report." State of New Jersey. NJ.gov. February 23, 2012.

Accessed March 30, 2017. http://www.nj.gov/education/stateaid/1213/report.pdf.

Greene, Jay P., and Ryan H. Marsh. "The Effect of Milwaukees Parental Choice Program on

Student Achievement in Milwaukee Public Schools." University of Arkansas Department of

Education Reform. uaedreform.org. March 2009. Accessed March 30, 2017. http://

www.uaedreform.org/downloads/2009/03/report-11-the-effect-of-milwaukees-parental-

choice-program-on-student-achievement-in-milwaukee-public-schools.pdf

"Financial and Human Resources Invested In Education." Organisation for Economic Co-operation

and Development. OECD.org. Accessed March 30, 2017. http://www.oecd.org/education/

skills-beyond-school/48630868.pdf.

Khadaroo, Stacy Teicher. "New Orleans goes all in on charter schools. Is it showing the way?" The

Christian Science Monitor. Csmoniter.com. March 01, 2014. Accessed March 30, 2017.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2014/0301/New-Orleans-goes-all-in-on-charter-schools.-

Is-it-showing-the-way.

!6
Richwine, Jason, Ph.D. "D.C. Voucher Students: Higher Graduation Rates and Other Positive

Outcomes." The Heritage Foundation. Heritage.org. July 28, 2010. Accessed March 30,

2017. http://www.heritage.org/education/report/dc-voucher-students-higher-graduation-

rates-and-other-positive-outcomes.

The Associated Press. "Only 3 students scored college-ready in Camden." New Jersey On-Line

LLC. NJ.com. December 18, 2013. Accessed March 30, 2017. http://www.nj.com/camden/

index.ssf/2013/12/only_3_students_scored_college-ready_in_camden.html.

Winters, Marcus A., and Jay P. Greene. "Public School Response to Special Education Vouchers:

The Impact of Florida's McKay Scholarship Program on Disability Diagnosis and Student

Achievement in Public Schools." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 33, no. 2

(2011): 138-58. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41238544.

Wolf, Patrick J., and Michael Mcshane. "Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? A Benefit/Cost Analysis of

the District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program." Education Finance and Policy

8, no. 1 (2013): 74-99. Accessed March 30, 2017. doi:10.1162/edfp_a_00083.

!7