Author

Patrick R. Gibbons

Patrick R. Gibbons

Patrick Gibbons is public affairs manager at Step Up for Students and a research fellow for the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice. A former teacher, he lived in Las Vegas, Nev., for five years, where he worked as an education writer and researcher. He can be reached at (813) 498.1991 or emailed at pgibbons@stepupforstudents.org. Follow Patrick on Twitter: at @PatrickRGibbons and @redefinEDonline.

Coronavirus / COVID-19Demographic ResearchFeaturedNewsPrivate SchoolsSchool Choice

Survey of scholarship schools shows few have received federal COVID-19 relief

Patrick R. Gibbons
Patrick R. Gibbons

More than three months after the CARES Act appropriated billions of dollars to aid the education of low-income students in public and private schools, most eligible private schools in Florida have yet to see financial relief according to a recent survey of participating private schools conducted by Step Up for Students, which hosts this blog.

The nation’s largest state-approved nonprofit scholarship funding organization helps administer five scholarship programs in Florida, including two that are income-based programs, the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship and the Family Empowerment Scholarship, as well as the Gardiner Scholarship for students with unique abilities.

The Step Up survey asked more than 1,000 schools that participate in Florida’ scholarship programs questions about the Elementary and Secondary Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER), declining enrollment, and distance learning. Participants returned 662 completed surveys and 140 partial surveys.

Of 683 schools that provided responses regarding ESSER funding, 61%, or 415 schools, reported they qualified for the funding. But of those schools, nearly three-quarters – 74% – said they have not received any emergency funds.

Congress made available $13.2 billion to help stabilize K-12 education funding this summer amidst a global pandemic and rising unemployment. The U.S. Department of Education subsequently was sued over its directive on how to calculate the share provided to private schools. Though the U.S. Department of Education declined to appeal, it noted that local education agencies still were required to share the funds based on the enrollment of low-income students attending private schools.

Fifty-seven percent of survey respondents reported enrollment declines. “Unable to afford tuition” was cited in 63.7% of cases as to why parents no longer were enrolling their child. Forty-five percent of schools (298) expressed concern about losing new students because of the Family Empowerment Scholarship’s prior-year public school attendance requirement.

Additionally, the survey found that 54% of private schools worried that declining enrollment would impact their viability.

Though troubling, these findings nevertheless are more positive than those reported earlier in the pandemic. In April, 73% of private schools reported declining enrollments.

Overall, private school enrollment among lower-income students remains steady. For 2020-21, approximately 130,000 students are utilizing income-based scholarships, up slightly from last year, although these are preliminary enrollment figures.

The Florida Department of Education is expected to release its first-quarter enrollment reports either this month or in November.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Charter SchoolsCoronavirus / COVID-19Demographic ResearchEducation ChoiceEducation ResearchEducation SpendingFeaturedNewsSchool Choice

Trio of education surveys shed light on school trends

Patrick R. Gibbons
Patrick R. Gibbons

As schools continue to wrestle with reopening plans and what seems like the shortest summer break on record comes to an end, researchers have continued to churn out reports and surveys related not only to COVID-19 but to charter schools and per-pupil spending as well.

EdChoice, a school choice advocacy and research organization based in Indianapolis, released a survey on parent opinions regarding education during the pandemic.

According to the researchers, nearly 60% of parents with a child at risk for coronavirus complications said they would seek remote learning options compared to 39% of parents with a child not at risk. Additionally, Black parents were more likely to be seeking remote learning options than white parents, a finding in line with a previous survey conducted by Education Next that showed Black parents found greater satisfaction with remote learning than white parents.

A study by Ian Kingsbury from Johns Hopkins University and Robert Maranto from the University of Arkansas examined the impact of charter school regulations, finding that some regulations produce negative effects. Instead of protecting consumers, Kingsbury and Maranto concluded, bad regulations sometimes simply protect insiders.

According to the researchers, states with a high number of regulations like Texas, Ohio and Indiana saw Black- and Hispanic-run charter school applicants denied at far higher rates than white or Asian charter applicants.

“As states like California and Pennsylvania mull strengthening their charter regulatory regimes, they’d do well to take heed to ensure that people of color are stewards and not subjects of the charter schooling movement,” the researchers wrote. An Education Next article gives a good summary of the study.

Finally, a study by C. Kirabo Jackson and Cora Wigger from Northwestern University and Heyu Xiong from Case Western Reserve University, summarized in Education Next, found the Great Recession negatively impacted student achievement and college attendance. The researchers argue that a decline in education budgets because of the recession may have caused these declines.

The researchers also found that budget cuts impacted Black students more than white students and may lead to a widening of achievement gaps. They note, however, that “A particular concern is that it is changes in families’ economic circumstances due to the recession, not reductions in school spending, that account for the decline in outcomes.” Indeed, the college attendance rate began declining in 2006, years before budget cuts to per-pupil spending.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
AnalysisEducation ChoiceEducation Savings AccountsFeaturedGardiner ScholarshipNewsSchool ChoiceSpecial Needs Education

Popular scholarship program continues to serve more students

Patrick R. Gibbons
Patrick R. Gibbons

Growth in a Florida education savings account created for students with unique abilities continued its steady increase in 2018-19 according to figures released this week by the leading organization that administers the program.

A new report from Step Up For Students that includes information on enrollment, student eligibility and scholarship expenses shows that 12,245 students participated in the Gardiner Scholarship Program, a nearly 2,000 student increase from 2017-18.

For 2018-19, 11,393 students were enrolled in the program through Step Up for a total award of $117 million. Another 852 enrolled through the AAA Scholarship Foundation. A total of 71 percent of the students were renewing their scholarships, and 29 percent were receiving scholarships for the first time.

Funded by state legislative appropriations, the scholarships average $10,266 a year and increase in value, some exceeding $20,000, depending on the severity of a student’s medical diagnosis. Parents can spend the money on various educational expenses such as tuition, instructional material, therapies, tutoring and electronic devices.

Families of 6,648 students used the funds in 2018-19 for tuition at one of 1,130 participating private schools. Approximately 34 percent of students were enrolled in home education. The remaining students utilized a portion of their scholarship funding for private school tuition.

Nearly 58 percent of all funds, or $57.2 million, were spent on private school tuition and fees, while 22 percent, or $21.9 million, was spent on instructional materials. Families spent $8.9 million on therapies and specialized therapies and $4.7 million on part-time tutoring.

Students are eligible for the Gardiner Scholarship if they have one of several specific diagnoses including autism, Down syndrome, cerebral palsy and spina bifida. The majority – 63 percent – have a diagnosis of autism.

The full report, including additional breakdowns on expenses and enrollment, is available here.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
AnalysisCoronavirus / COVID-19Demographic ResearchEducation PollingFeaturedNews

Survey: What American families experienced when COVID-19 closed schools

Patrick R. Gibbons
Patrick R. Gibbons

A new Education Next survey reveals 71% of parents perceived their children learned less during the pandemic than they would have had they remained in brick-and-mortar schools.

COVID-19 upended and changed the lives of millions of Americans this spring, forcing the nation’s schools to close and requiring a shift from in-person to virtual learning. In retrospect, what do parents think about the quality of instruction their children received?

Education Next surveyed them to find out. The results, released earlier this week, paint an interesting picture.

Among the 1,249 parents of 2,147 children surveyed, 71% said they thought their children learned less at home than they would have had they been in school. But surprisingly, 72% said they were satisfied with the attempt.

Black and Hispanic parents reported higher satisfaction with remote learning (30% and 32%, respectively), than white parents (26%). Charter school and private school parents (45% and 39%, respectively), reported higher satisfaction than parents whose children attended a public district school (29%).

According to their parents, larger shares of the children of white respondents and children in higher income households learned less than they would have if schools had remained open than children of Black and Hispanic students and those in lower-income households.

Not all schools prioritized learning new content according to the survey. Overall, 74% of parents said their child’s school introduced new content, while 24% said the school focused on reviewing content students had already learned.

A large gap in perception persisted between high- and low-income families. Among low-income families, 33% reported that schools reviewed content students had already learned, compared to 19% of high-income parents.

Parents overall reported that one-on-one meetings between students and teachers occurred rarely, with only 38% saying such meetings occurred at least once a week. About 40% said one-on-one meetings never occurred.

Parents reported that class-wide meetings occurred more frequently, with 69% reporting class-wide virtual meetings with teachers occurred at least once a week.

Black parents reported their children spent more time per day (4.3 hours) on schoolwork than white parents (3.1 hours). Black parents also said their students suffered less learning loss than the parents of white students.

The survey also included a sample of 490 K-12 teachers who work in schools that closed during the pandemic. Teachers’ responses generally mirrored how parents described their children’s experiences with several exceptions.

Thirty-six percent of teachers said they met individually with students multiple times a week, compared with 19% of parents. Teachers also reported providing grades or feedback more often than parents. Meanwhile, teachers reported providing fewer required assignments than parents said their children received.

Parents and teachers generally agreed on how much students learned during distance learning, with teachers more likely than parents to say children learned less than they would have if schools had remained open.

The survey was conducted from May 14 to May 20 by the polling firm Ipsos Public Affairs via its KnowledgePanel. Respondents could elect to complete the survey in English or Spanish.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
AnalysisCourtsEducation ChoiceEducation EquityEducation LegislationFeaturedParental ChoicePrivate School ScholarshipsPrivate SchoolsReligious EducationSchool Choice

Court lays to rest age-old debate with Espinoza decision

Patrick R. Gibbons
Patrick R. Gibbons

After more than a century, the U.S. Supreme Court finally has determined that Blaine amendments, which were created in the late 19th century under a wave of anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic bias, violate the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise clause.

“A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious,” ruled the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision this week.

Montana’s school choice program became the first tax credit scholarship to be struck down by a state supreme court, but not the first private school choice program to be struck down because of a “Blaine Amendment.”

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling reverses the Montana Supreme Court, arguing the state’s  “No Aid” provision violates the rights of parents, students and religious schools under the Free Exercise Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The ruling is in step with the Trinity Lutheran (2017) decision which argued denying grants for playground resurfacing simply because the institution was religious was unconstitutional.

Though the Court ruled that the Blaine Amendment violates the Free Exercise clause, it declined to rule whether it also violated the Establishment Clause or Equal Protections Clause.

Not surprisingly, school choice opponents are up in arms about the decision.

“… the court has made things even worse opening the door for further attacks on state decisions not to fund religious schools,” said National Education Association president Lily Eskelsen García in an NEA blog post.

But the court’s decision does nothing of the sort. The decision to create and fund education scholarships still falls to the people.

Other school choice opponents are arguing the decision erodes separation of church and state.

Ron Meyer, lawyer for the Florida Education Association, went so far as to state in an interview with the Miami Herald, “It’s another chipping away of the free exercise of religion.”

But the decision falls in line with a long-standing recognition of religious neutrality required of governments. Though many of these cases deal with the Establishment Clause rather than the Free Exercise Clause, they demonstrate this long-standing precedent on religious neutrality. 

The first case to apply the Free Exercise clause to a state matter was Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940), which reversed a criminal conviction of three Jehovah’s Witnesses for proselytizing door-to-door without a state license. In a unanimous decision the court ruled:

“Freedom of conscience and freedom to adhere to such religious organization or form of worship as the individual may choose cannot be restricted by law. On the other hand, it safeguards the free exercise of the chosen form of religion. Thus, the Amendment embraces two concepts, freedom to believe and freedom to act.”

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), the court defined the Establishment Clause beyond simply establishing a national church by declaring the clause prohibited the aid of one religion or even all religions. However, the court still upheld public bus fare reimbursements to parents sending their children to Catholic schools because the reimbursement was available to all. Regarding New Jersey’s publicly funded programs, the court ruled:

“Consequently, it cannot exclude individual Catholics, Lutherans, Mohammedans, Baptists, Jews, Methodists, Non-believers, Presbyterians, or the members of any other faith, because of their faith, or lack of it, from receiving the benefits of public welfare legislation.”

In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), the U.S. Supreme Court held Ohio’s voucher program “does not offend the Establishment Clause” because the program was neutral with respect to religion.

As with Zelman, several other national cases support tax exemptions and other public benefits for seemingly religious activities, but only so long as the programs pass the “Lemon Test.”

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) established the “Lemon Test,” a three-part test to determine if a program violates the Establishment Clause. The test requires the program to have a secular purpose, to not advance or inhibit any particular religion, and to not excessively tangle government with religion. In Lemon, the court allowed state subsidies of textbooks, educational materials and even teacher salaries at private schools in Pennsylvania.

Mueller v. Allen (1983) upheld a Minnesota tax law that allowed individuals to deduct parochial school expenses. The Supreme Court ruled the program was neutral with respect to religion since the tax deduction was available to all, and that helping to fund education (even through tax deductions) was a secular purpose.

Agostini v. Felton (1997) allowed public funds to pay the salaries of public school teachers educating economically disadvantaged children, including private religious schools. This landmark ruling reversed Aguilar v. Felton (1985), which held that paying public school teachers to teach parochial school students was “excessive entanglement” with religion. Agostini reversed that decision and determined the program was neutral with respect to religion and that the purpose of educating disadvantaged children was a secular one.

Deference to religious neutrality flows down to the state courts as well.

Florida cases such as Koerner v. Borck (1958) argued that, “State power is no more to be used so as to handicap religions, than it is to favor them.”

Meanwhile, in Johnson v. Presbyterian Homes of Synod of Florida, Inc. (1970), the Florida Supreme Court ruled on a tax exemption:

“A state cannot pass a law to aid one religion or all religions, but state action to promote the general welfare of society, apart from any religious considerations, is valid, even though religious interests may be indirectly benefited.”

Espinoza isn’t deviating from the U.S.’s “separation of church and state,” as critics have misunderstood. The ruling follows a long history of allowing religious institutions and persons to benefit from public programs, in this instance extending that right to K-12 education where powerful opponents attempted to carve out an exemption.

 A fight over how much religion can be taught in a private school may be around the corner. But that is a fight for another day.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
FeaturedSchool Choice

EdChoice publishes results of literature review on private, charter school safety

Patrick R. Gibbons
Patrick R. Gibbons

A new study examining literature linking private and charter schooling to perceptions of student safety, while acknowledging that more research is needed, suggests that private and public charter schools generally are associated with higher levels of safety as reported by students, parents and principals.

Researchers at EdChoice reviewed dozens of studies, narrowing their focus to high-quality research based on education in the United States published in academic journals and working papers. These criteria winnowed the landscape to eight studies on charter school safety and 11 on private school safety.

The upshot:

·       The eight studies on charter schools found that charter school safety outcomes are null to positive.

·       Each of the 11 studies on private schools found that access to private schooling is associated with improvements in safety as reported by students, parents and school leaders.

·       None of the studies concluded that access to public charter schools or private schools was associated with reductions in reports of school safety overall.

“These positive safety results suggest that increasing access to public charter schools and private schools can increase safety for students,” the EdChoice researchers concluded.

Seven of the eight charter school studies indicate people perceive charter schools to be safer than district schools. One study found no difference in perceived school safety between the two sectors. Charter school stakeholders reported fewer assaults, physical injuries, weapon offenses, false alarms and sex offenses compared to district schools. Additionally, the studies indicate charter schools are far less likely to use metal detectors and more likely to enforce a dress code or require school uniforms.

Of the 11 private school studies, six focused exclusively on private schools participating in school choice scholarship programs. Mirroring the charter school results, private school students and parents perceived their school to be safer than their district school. One of the studies reviewed surveyed 16,000 students and found “private school students in particular reported a more positive school climate and less bullying” than their peers who enrolled in district schools.

In another report, this one surveying 10,000 students, findings revealed that “private schools are best at minimizing disruptions within the classroom, as well as fostering a nonhostile and safe school environment.”

The researchers classified a particular study as “positive” if the majority of the statistically significant safety results were in favor of private or charter schools, “negative” if the majority of the statistically significant safety results were in favor of district-run public schools, and “null” if there was no statistically significant differences between sectors overall.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Education and Public PolicyEducation ChoiceFeaturedNewsPrivate School ScholarshipsSchool ChoiceTax Credit Scholarships

Wisconsin advocacy group sues on behalf of family seeking school choice scholarship

Patrick R. Gibbons
Patrick R. Gibbons

Katrina Olguin, pictured with her husband and sons, is fighting the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction to secure private school scholarships.

When Katrina Olguin applied for private school scholarships for her sons, she probably never imagined she would be disqualified for being over the income threshold – by less than $50.

Unfortunately for Olguin, of West Allis, Wisconsin, her state’s Department of Public Instruction rules prohibit parents from reapplying in the same year, even if they amend their application.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty believes that rule is illegal and has filed suit on behalf of Olguin and her sons.

According to the institute, Olquin reapplied for the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program after making legal contributions to her IRA so her family was again income eligible. The state denied the application, citing the rule prohibiting same-year reapplication.

Wisconsin’s scholarship program provides scholarships to low-income and working-class students. Household income must be at or below 220 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $66,000 for a family of five.

“We were just $47 over and I did everything to adjust it legally,” Olguin wrote in a blog post that was published on Medium. “And then they were just like, no, sorry.”

According to the article, Olguin wants three of her sons to attend Heritage Christian Schools, a high-performing school her two older sons attend and where she is a teacher. The school attempted to appeal on Olguin’s behalf, but the Department of Public Instruction still would not consider the application.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty claims the rule is illegal because the Department of Public Instruction was “required to proceed through a rulemaking process outlined in state law,” including allowing public review and comment, but failed to do so.

“DPI’s job is to facilitate education in Wisconsin,” wrote Lucas Vebber, a lawyer for the institute. “But too often DPI finds ways to work against families and schools in the parental choice program.”

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail