Fifty years ago, James Coleman released a landmark report on the state of educational opportunity in America. Not long afterward, he turned to the topic of school choice.
[T]he report’s ink was barely dry before Coleman injected the issue of school choice into the discussion. “The public educational system is a monopoly,” he wrote in 1967, offering choice only to “those who [can] afford to buy education outside the public schools” and thereby amplifying the influence of family background on student achievement. Later, he amended that observation, noting that the opportunity to choose one’s residence permits school choice within the public sector as well. But in reality, only the middle class and the affluent can fully exercise that choice, he pointed out. “Public schools are no longer a ‘common’ institution,” Coleman wrote. “Residential mobility has brought about a high degree of racial segregation in education, as well as segregation by income … and it is the disadvantaged who are least able to select a school … that continues to function reasonably well.”
In the latest edition of Education Next, executive editor Martin West writes that many of the fruits of Coleman's inquiry are still hotly contested today.
The modern literature on school choice does, however, confirm two promising patterns that Coleman was the first to document: First, the benefits of attending a private school are greatest for outcomes other than test scores—in particular, the likelihood that a student will graduate from high school and enroll in college. Second, attending a school of choice, whether private or charter, is especially beneficial for minority students living in urban areas. These findings support the case for continued expansion of school choice, especially in our major cities. They also raise important questions about the government’s reliance on standardized test results as a guide for regulating the options available to families.
And yet, after decades of research, voucher opponents continue to rely on test-based measures to argue school choice makes "no difference."
Meanwhile...
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush drops out of the presidential race, taking his extensive K-12 policy record with him. Any candidates want to steal this plan?
Oklahoma's state Supreme Court unanimously upholds a school voucher program in a decision that could help clear a political path for education savings accounts.
A teachers union leader wants more funding for vouchers. Yes, really.
Running a coherent unified enrollment system isn't simple.
Low parental involvement should not be an excuse for low academic performance.
A report critical of New Orleans education reforms gets taken down a few pegs.
Inside the fight against California charter schools.
Community schools gain new momentum.
ICYMI, this week on redefinED:
Charter schools win contested Florida appeals.
A legislative proposal highlights the financial upside school choice can offer fast-growing districts.
Where school choice issues stand in the Florida Legislature.
Tweet of the Week
"Why is the @FloridaEA only suing the option that’s available only to low-income kids?" https://t.co/MMhblKFUVI @HispanicCREO #dropthesuit
— Bob Bellafiore (@bbellafiore) February 19, 2016
Quote of the Week
Sometimes, it appears we’re just trying to save our job. With parents, it’s saying, ‘We’re trying to protect our kids.'
— John Cox, superintendent of Peggs Public School and president of Oklahoma's Organization of Rural Elementary Schools, on whose voices actually carry weight with legislators on education.
Help our voice carry more weight. Send links, tips, pushback and feedback to tpillow[at]sufs[dot]org.
This Week in School Choice is our weekly roundup of news and notes from around the country. It's published on Monday mornings, but you can sign up here to receive an advance edition on Sundays via email.
