OP/ED: Vouchers Offer False Hope

By Laura Hainey

If a medication isn’t working, a doctor would say to stop using it. If a puzzle piece doesn’t fit, you wouldn’t keep try to fit it into the space. If studies consistently conclude that vouchers don’t improve student achievement, why would you support it?

Despite the evidence, voucher advocates like state Rep. J.R. Hoell, (who wrote a Monitor Forum, Oct. 17) inexplicably want to waste scarce public dollars on tuition for private schools. Call it what you want — vouchers, scholarships, education tax credits — they’re all the same thing: an indefensible, ineffective scheme that gives families false hope that kids receiving vouchers will do better academically than students in regular public schools.

Let’s not live in an evidence-free zone. Numerous studies, using a range of methodologies, have conclusively shown that vouchers do not improve student achievement.

• Milwaukee: A three-year study shows that the Milwaukee voucher program did not raise student achievement. In March 2011, voucher advocate Patrick J. Wolf of the University of Arkansas found that in Milwaukee “there are no statistically significant differences in student achievement growth either in math or reading between [voucher and public school] students three years after they were carefully matched to each other.”
• Cleveland: In 2010, Cleveland public school students significantly outperformed the voucher students, with 45.6 percent of the public school fourth-graders scoring proficient or above in math, compared with only 22.1 percent of the voucher students.
• Washington, D.C.: After studying the program since its beginning and collecting data from 2004 to spring 2009, researcher Wolf and his team found that “there is no conclusive evidence that the [D.C. voucher program] affected student achievement.”
• Ohio: Test scores of voucher students generally lag behind those students attending the public schools that the voucher students would have attended, according to the pro-voucher group Black Alliance for Educational Options in 2010.

Vouchers are unpopular with the public, having been soundly and repeatedly rejected at the ballot box and in polls. The American public consistently favors improving and strengthening existing public schools rather than finding an alternative to the current system.

As voucher supporters push their schemes that would divert tax dollars to private schools, we’re dealing with the cruel consequences of budget shortfalls and severe education cuts. Especially in a time of scarce resources, we should be focusing like a laser on what works to help prepare all students for the 21st Century knowledge economy. We need to give all students a well-rounded curriculum; great teachers who have the supports, resources and conditions to do their jobs; school buildings that are modern and safe; small class sizes so teachers can give as much attention as possible to each student; and wraparound services like after-school programs, tutoring, and health and counseling services to deal with the out-of-school factors that affect disadvantaged children’s achievement. 

We often hear about the many countries whose students outperform ours, but are we heeding the lessons of these countries? Not one of the top-ranked countries uses a voucher or any type of school choice program. These countries are teaching-focused, not test-focused like the United States. The high-performing countries concentrate on teacher preparation and continuous improvement. They attract the best candidates to teaching, have excellent teacher mentoring and coaching programs, develop data systems so teachers can evaluate the learning needs of each student, and provide teachers with ongoing professional development to improve their instructional skills.

At a time when our students need the best education possible to be well-prepared for life, college and career, taxpayers shouldn’t be fooled by false claims made by voucher advocates. Let’s keep our eye on the ball and do what works to give our kids a great education.

Laura Hainey is president of the AFT-New Hampshire.