“There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in a test score analysis …” Shakespeare by way of Ladner

Learning to read proficiently and to understand math are two jolly important goals for our schools. They are by far, however, not the only goals.

Americans want students equipped with the academic knowledge and training for success, but they also aspire to broader types of success in the formation of character – the ability to exercise citizenship responsibly and to function as productive members of society, for instance.

A new study from Patrick Wolf, a professor of education policy at the University of Arkansas, and Corey DeAngelis of the Reason Foundation, published in the Journal of Private Enterprise, tracks long-term outcomes associated with the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program. The MPCP makes low-income students eligible to receive a voucher to attend a private school.

The authors carefully construct a comparison group and analyze the long-term social welfare effects on students who have been offered a voucher after controlling for a variety of student background characteristics. They found that exposure to the MPCP is associated with a reduction of about 53% in drug convictions, 86% in property damage convictions and 38% in paternity suits. Effects tend to be largest for males and students with lower levels of academic achievement at baseline.

So, in addition to academic benefits of the program, including a higher high school graduation rate, MPCP participants also have lower criminal conviction rates and less time in family court. The average MPCP voucher was worth $7,943 in 2018-19 while the average total spending per pupil in the Milwaukee Public Schools was $15,250 in 2017-18.

Just imagine what Milwaukee students might do if they got equitable funding, and if their families could utilize that funding for educational benefits beyond private school tuition. There would almost be enough money left over to pay for the sort of enrichment activities that the top decile American families pay for things like summer camps and tutors.

“School choice is a political hobby of the rich.”

So goes a common indictment of the effort to subsidize parents’ preference of a specific school for their own child. Sadly, there has been a wee dash of truth to the charge.

The modern movement for choice did not originate in a widespread concern for the low-income family. It was born, rather, in the intellectual hot house of the free market missionary Milton Friedman. The professor of economics saw the flabbiness of our systems of protected “free” public schools available to all families living in each defined neighborhood. Competition from tuition-based private schools was, for most parents, reduced to near zero.

The public school monopoly is grossly inefficient. The obvious solution: Offer the parents a “voucher” for tuition at the school of their choice. Let the market decide which schools survive and prosper, thus lifting the quality of the entire system. More, competition would diminish every state’s investment in school bureaucracy, reducing the load on the taxpayer.

That message sounded good to free market minds, especially those who had already experienced success in business. Thus, in the 1970s, conservative money began to settle upon these new organizations formed to bring Friedman’s ideal into political realty. The problem with the concept soon became apparent. It proved to be very hard for most Americans to embrace a completely free market of the Friedman design.

Buying a seat in a school is not like purchasing tomatoes. Whatever the good intentions of these now well-financed activists and their corporate supporters, there seemed to many citizens a disregard for an obvious need to design the new order with specific concern for lower-income families.

For example, parents who had long been financially unable to choose would, for some time, need a system of information guaranteeing a minimum of sophistication as they are introduced to this new responsibility and opportunity. Participating private schools would also be asked to comply with an admissions routine ensuring some places for the poor. In addition, the vouchers would need to be accepted as full tuition (or nearly so) from such families.

Proposals for such lightly regulated systems proved threatening to Friedman himself, his intellectual descendants, and most of the wealthy donors to pro-choice non-profits. Thus, the cheerleaders for the idea of a subsidized choice that is focused upon the lower-income family have had to make do with comparatively feeble political resources.

One consequence: Critics like the teacher unions have been encouraged to portray the concept as precisely what it need not be – another government bonus for the well off.

So, hail to the market, but empower us all to choose and encourage the schools to play fairly with those among us who will most treasure this new responsibility to our children. Choice need not be either left nor right, but at the center.

I think I see signs of hope.

If you need to make a choice between reading this post or watching the video featuring the mom pictured above, please watch the video. Katie Swingle explains why families with children with special needs require and deserve access to education choice. Her story demonstrates why depriving them of choice is a terrible thing.

Sadly, there is an effort underway in Arizona to do exactly that.

Arizona’s Save Our Schools group has proposed a statewide ballot initiative that would create an overall participation cap on Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Program of 1 percent of the total student enrollment of the public school system. Once that cap is reached, students other than those with disabilities, including Native American children, those who have been in the foster care system, are zoned for D- or F-rated public schools, orphans and dependents of active duty military service members among others, would be purged from participating.

Upon completion of this purge, the program would lack the ability to serve additional special needs students. Last week, I noted that 1.7 percent of the total public school enrollment in Florida makes use of private choice programs for children with disabilities. I should further have noted that Florida has a waitlist of students with disabilities for the ESA program.

Historical program data allows us to assess the length of time it would take for the proposed cap to deny access to disadvantaged students if something like it were to be applied in Florida. As a thought experiment, imagine Florida’s multiple-choice programs debuting as a state-funded program in the same year that the McKay Scholarship program debuted.

This next part will require you to suspend your disbelief. Imagine a group of advantaged urban Floridians who exercise choice in their own families managing, from the outset of choice, to implement a cap in Florida for disadvantaged students. Floridians, of course, would find it nearly impossible to live with such a level of moral hypocrisy.

In Florida’s actual experience, lawmakers created a voucher program for students with disabilities and one for children in failing schools, followed by a tax-credit scholarship program for low-income students. Our thought experiment involves envisioning Florida following closer to the Arizona ESA experience: a single program starting with students with disabilities. A few years into the program, the Florida lawmakers of our thought experiment add low-income students into the eligibility pool for the state-funded program. Okay. So, how long would it have taken for the SOS cap to have purged disadvantaged students in Florida?

Let’s look first at the McKay Scholarship program for students with disabilities.

If the McKay Scholarship program had been the only choice program created, it would have exceeded the 1 percent cap by itself in 2013. After 2013, additional special needs children would have been denied access. Of course, it wasn’t the only program; Florida lawmakers also made low-income students eligible to participate in choice.

The combination of McKay and the tax credit program would have exceeded the SOS cap around 2004. “Let them eat cake,” the cap supporters would tell the tens of thousands of low-income families piling onto waitlists.

This isn’t the end of the story, however. Florida also created a special needs ESA program in 2015. This is the program used by the all-too-real mom in the video.

Every single one of these families, including the Swingle family, would have been denied choice under an SOS cap. Arizona’s ESA program is only a few years of growth away from reaching the proposed cap.

Supporters claim the cap will not impact current beneficiaries, but it clearly will. Moreover, there are thousands of Arizona students with disabilities today, and many more yet unborn, who would be denied access through the proposed cap.

The Senate Education Appropriations subcommittee voted 5-3 today to bolster and align two state scholarship programs that provide education choice to economically disadvantaged students.

SB 1220, a bill that spells out rules for teacher training and qualifications, also includes provisions aimed at aligning policies between the new Family Empowerment Scholarship, adopted last year and serving 18,000 students, and the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship, created in 2001 and serving 108,000 students.

Both scholarship programs serve students from lower-income and working-class families. The primary difference is that the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship is funded by corporations that receive a 100 percent tax credit, and the Family Empowerment Scholarship is funded directly from the state education budget.

The bill adopted today included an amendment proposed by Education Committee Chairman Manny Diaz, R-Hialeah, that would increased the allowed enrollment growth in the Family Empowerment Scholarship. Under current law, the program can grow by up to 0.25 of total public school enrollment each year, which is roughly 7,000 students. His amendment increases the amount to 1 percent, or roughly 28,000. It also maintains the current income eligibility rules for Florida Tax Credit Scholarship. In that program, household incomes must not exceed 260 percent of the federal poverty level. An earlier version of the bill increased that percentage.

Other changes include:

• Allowing Florida Tax Credit Scholarship students to continue receiving the scholarship until they graduate from high school or turn 21, aligning it with the Family Empowerment Scholarship provision. Now, Florida Tax Credit students must reapply each year.
• Allowing any Florida Tax Credit Scholarship student to transfer to the Family Empowerment Scholarship, as long as he or she attended a public school the year prior to entering the program.
• Allowing students in the Family Empowerment Scholarship program to take up to two state-supported virtual courses each year without cost. That provision already applies to Florida Tax Credit Scholarship students.

Diaz said the new bill seeks to continue what last year’s Legislature started: eliminating the wait list.

Present to speak in favor of the amended bill were stakeholders, including several parents and Elijah Robinson, a scholarship student from Jacksonville, who said the scholarship allowed him to escape the constant bullying at his public school that drove him to attempt self-harm.

“My life has completely changed from a year ago,” said Robinson, who will graduate this year from The Foundation Academy. “Please vote for this bill so that students like me can get help and not be forgotten.”

Michelle Porter, a mother of seven from Miami with three children on the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship, said she couldn’t imagine her life without the scholarship. One of her daughters was born with a rare disease and often was bullied at her public school.

“She would come home crying every night,” Porter said. “I wanted her to feel safe.”

Her daughter is now enrolled at a Catholic school, “where she is treated as an equal.”

Opponents called the bill an attempt to create a parallel state education system and expressed concern about possible discrimination. The Rev. Dr. Russell Meyer, executive director of the Florida Council of Churches, said he opposes allowing any public money to be used at religious schools, period.

“No public funds should be used to teach your religion,” he said. “If you continue to give a voucher so that households can go to any school, that any school meet all criteria and make sure no discriminatory beliefs prevent them from attending that school or harming their consciences while they are there.”

Sen. Jason Pizzo, D-Miami, who voted against the bill, said he didn’t think it was unreasonable to insist on “a baseline discrimination policy” for participating schools. He also said he thinks more emphasis should be placed on allowing families to have access to different public schools.

That’s already the case, Diaz responded.

“The Legislature passed an open enrollment policy that puts that decision squarely in the hands of the district,” he said. “It’s totally local control.”

Diaz also noted the scholarship program is small compared with the number of students educated statewide – 2.8 million.

“We’re trying to provide an opportunity for 28,000 kids,” Diaz said.

He said parents, not the government, are responsible for ensuring their children are in the learning environment that is best for them.

“At the end of the day, what they’re looking for is freedom and opportunity,” he said.

The bill now heads to the Senate Appropriations Committee. A similar bill, HB 7067, is scheduled to be heard today by the House Appropriations Committee, its final stop before heading to the House floor.

When Madelyn Carlisle was a toddler, a simple sip of apple juice could send her into shock.

Born with a rare condition called food protein induced enterocolitis syndrome, she survived on a liquid formula that had to be given at specific times. Until she was 4, her body could tolerate only 18 ingredients.

Madelyn’s diet has expanded. But her condition, along with learning difficulties that surfaced when she started school, led her mother, Christin, to choose homeschooling as the best education option for her daughter.

Madelyn, now 9, and her 4-year-old sister, Layla, who is severely allergic to tree nuts, are among 13,000 Florida students who benefit from a Gardiner Scholarship. Created in 2014, the program allows parents the opportunity to individualize the educational plans for their children with certain special needs, including autism, Down syndrome and spina bifida, as well as conditions classified as rare diseases like Madelyn’s.

The benefit of a Gardiner Scholarship for families like the Carlisles is that parents can direct the funding – currently an average of $10,400 a year – toward a combination of programs and approved providers. In addition to paying for private school tuition, this education savings account, provided by the state and administered by an approved scholarship funding organization, covers tutoring and specialized services such as speech and occupational therapy as well as instructional materials including digital devices like laptops and iPads.

Christin was thrilled to learn the scholarship would reimburse for education-related purchases, but like many families dealing with crushing medical expenses, the Carlisles aren’t always able to pay up front for the materials their homeschooled daughters need. Step Up For Students, which administers the Gardiner Scholarship (and hosts this blog), foresaw that dilemma and created MyScholarShop, an online catalog that allows parents to make purchases from vendors who are program partners.

Gardiner families simply log into their Step Up For Students portal and click on the MyScholarShop link, which takes them to an online marketplace populated with educational tools sold by dozens of vendors including BestBuy and Lakeshore Learning. They shop as they would on any online website, send purchases to their cart, and MyScholarShop does the rest, including checking to make sure available funds are in the family’s scholarship account. The order is processed and shipped to the family’s home.

“We love the addition of MyScholarShop, if for no other reason than we do not have to wait for reimbursement,” Christin said. “Aside from that, I also save time by not having to submit a reimbursement request.”

Her daughters have benefited from an array of educational products, including a calendar from Lakeshore Learning that helps with counting skills. They’ve also used the popular curriculum Hooked On Phonics and one called Math U See, which begins at the primer level and advances as the girls progress. The package includes three-dimensional blocks, a math workbook, a parent manual and an instructional DVD.

“We like it because it’s a solid program that also uses hands-on learning,” said Christin, who estimates about 70 percent of her children’s educational products came from MyScholarShop this year.

Since going online in 2018, MyScholarShop has processed approximately 50,000 orders. And because of the relationships Step Up has built with vendors who offer discounts through the online platform, more than $1.3 million in Gardiner funds have been saved.

The popularity of MyScholarShop is expected to grow as more students are approved for Gardiner Scholarships and with the development of another partnership that will allow families who participate in the Reading Scholarship, a program for Florida public school students in grades 3-5 who struggle with reading, to participate.

Step Up For Students president Doug Tuthill predicts that programs like MyScholarShop will become increasingly important as a way for families to make spending decisions and contain costs as more scholarship programs evolve into education savings accounts.

“Customization is the holy grail of education,” Tuthill said, adding that while education savings accounts offer that personalization, they’re more challenging to administer because of the diversity of products and services families can purchase.

“Consequently,” he said, “building out the infrastructure necessary to support several hundred thousand families using ESAs will be a key focus over the next few years.”

As the nation’s largest tax credit scholarship program has expanded, students attending public schools most likely to be affected by the competition of private schools are experiencing higher test scores, reduced absenteeism and lower suspension rates, according to a new report from the National Bureau of Economic Research.

The findings of David Figlio, Cassandra M.D. Hart and Kryzstof Karbownik are contrary to what scholarship opponents like the Florida Education Association, which sued to stop the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship program in 2014, have claimed.

The report, “Effects of Scaling Up Private School Choice Programs on Public School Students,” is the latest in a series of studies demonstrating positive impacts of the tax credit scholarship program. And in this case, those positive impacts go beyond the students who benefit directly from the scholarships.

The Urban Institute found last year that students participating in the scholarship program were more likely to attend and graduate from college than eligible peers remaining in public schools, while annual evaluations from the Florida Learning Systems Institute repeatedly have revealed that Florida’s most disadvantaged students have the same annual learning gains as all students of all income levels nationally.

Figlio and company found the positive impacts of the program, which is providing more than $600 million in scholarships this year to help more than 109,000 economically disadvantaged students, were largest for schools facing the most competitive pressure from scholarship-eligible private schools and for lower-income students as well as black and Latino students.

The researchers previously had studied the scholarship’s impact on public school students and found positive results, but the program has grown significantly since then, encompassing 4 percent of Florida’s K-12 student population. Their new study was focused on determining the effects of the expansion.

Measuring the impact against six categories of competition – density, distance, diversity, slots, churches and a combined measure they call the “competitive pressure index” – they found positive impacts across all of them for reading scores, combined math and reading scores, absenteeism and suspension rates. (See charts below.)

Using standard deviation to measure the impact, they were able to determine that suspensions and absences would be reduced by 0.6 to 0.9 percent of a standard deviation for every 10 percent increase in program size. To put this in perspective, the researchers pointed out that the black and white achievement gap itself is 62 percent of a standard deviation.

The upshot: The researchers’ results were consistent with their past findings, which showed modest benefits at the time the voucher program was introduced and indicated further growth of those positive effects as the program has scaled up.

 

The Florida Department of Education today unanimously approved the renewal of an application from Step Up For Students as an eligible Scholarship Funding Organization, allowing Step Up to continue administering the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship program, the Gardiner Scholarship program, the Hope Scholarship program, the Reading Scholarship program and the Family Empowerment Scholarship program for 2020-21.

Step Up For Students, which hosts this blog, served more than 99,700 of Florida’s most economically disadvantaged students on the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship program last year. The organization was able to serve 11,458 students with unique abilities on the Gardiner Scholarship and is projecting to serve more than 14,000 in the current year.

Additionally, Step Up served 127 students on the Hope Scholarship and 5,639 students on the Reading Scholarship.

Charitable organizations that seek to be a nonprofit funding organization must submit applications for initial approval or renewal to the Office of Independent Education and Parental Choice no later than Sept. 1 of each year prior to the school year for which the organization intends to offer scholarships. The Office, in consultation with the Florida Department of Revenue and the state’s Chief Financial Officer, reviews applications, and the Commissioner of Education then recommends approval or denial of the application to the Board of Education.

In a separate vote, the Department unanimously approved the renewal application from the AAA Scholarship Foundation to administer the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship program, the Gardiner Scholarship program and the Family Empowerment Scholarship program for 2020-21.

Editor’s note: National Catholic Schools Week, celebrated nationwide since 1974, traditionally coincides with National School Choice Week. The theme – Catholic Schools: Learn. Serve. Succeed. – encompasses what Catholic school leaders consider the core products and values that can be found in Catholic schools across the country. James Herzog, associate director for education for the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops, contributed today’s post in honor of this annual event.

There’s excitement in the air for Catholic schools this week.

Across the nation, colorful signs and banners announcing the 46^th annual National Catholic Schools Week are proudly displayed. Alumni are returning to their roots with gratitude to share with today’s Catholic schoolchildren their career journeys and life lessons. Activities including community service days, open houses and Masses are being held, all celebrating the academic, spiritual and financial benefits our society reaps from Catholic schools.

In Florida, we’re celebrating 244 Catholic schools that serve more than 85,000 students from Pre-K to 12^th grade. Enrollment across the Archdiocese of Miami and the state’s seven dioceses – St. Augustine, St. Petersburg, Orlando, Pensacola/Tallahassee, Palm Beach and Venice – totals 85,416 for the 2019-20 academic year. Enrollment in Florida Catholic schools has held steady around 85,000 for the past decade, despite a plethora of other education choice options, and in the face of declining enrollment in other states.

An additional cause for celebration is Florida’s leading role in creating robust school choice scholarships for children from lower-income families and for those with unique abilities. A total of 25,300 Catholic school students rely on either a Florida Tax Credit Scholarship, a Family Empowerment Scholarship, a Gardiner Scholarship or a McKay Scholarship. Many of these children would not otherwise be able to attend a Catholic school.

But an overwhelming reason for our joy as we celebrate this very special week is the academic success of our students. Ninety-nine percent of students who attend Catholic high schools graduate; of that percent, 86 percent attend four-year colleges, according to the National Catholic Educational Association. The NCEA further reports that the student achievement gap is narrower in Catholic schools than public schools.

Even more remarkable, latest National Assessment of Education Progress scores show that Catholic school students outperformed their public school peers in the percent considered proficient in fourth-grade and eighth-grade reading and math. Thirty-five percent of Catholic school fourth-graders were proficient in reading compared with 26 percent of public school students, while 39 percent were proficient in math compared with 32 percent in public school. Forty-three percent of Catholic school eighth-graders were proficient in reading compared with 9 percent of public school students, while 31 percent were proficient in math compared with 23 percent in public school.

So the buzz about National Catholic Schools Week is more than just hype. It’s supported by demonstrable academic achievement as well as very tangible contributions to our communities and our nation.

The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Education today approved a $42 million funding increase to the Gardiner Scholarship program which would boost by slightly more than 28 percent last year's allocation of $147.9 million.

The scholarship currently serves more than 13,000 students with unique abilities. Approximately another 3,500 remain on a wait list, despite the Legislature’s agreement last year to provide an additional $23 million in funding.

Created in 2014, the program is named for former Florida Senate President Andy Gardiner, who led the legislative effort to create the program, and his family. It differs from other state scholarships in that it allows parents to personalize their child’s education by directing money toward a combination of programs and approved providers.

Approved expenses include tuition, therapy, curriculum, technology and a college savings account. Unspent money can roll over from year to year.

Gardiner Scholarship amounts vary according to grade and county. The average amount for most students in the 2019-20 school year is $10,400.

The budget proposal must win approval from the corresponding House committees, as well as the full House and Senate, to be included in the final proposed budget sent to Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Editor’s note: The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral argument in the latest chapter of the battle over the use of public funding for religious schools. Supporters of such funding argue that the government should not be allowed to discriminate against religious families and schools, while opponents warn that requiring the government to allow public funds to be used for religious schools could harm public education. redefinED executive editor Matt Ladner shares his thoughts in today’s post. Stay tuned for an analysis from Leslie Hiner, vice president of legal affairs at EdChoice, coming next week.

I’m not an attorney, nor do I play one on television. Nevertheless, the transcript of the Espinoza vs. Montana oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court make for fascinating reading.

In 2015, the Montana Legislature passed a small scholarship tax credit under which taxpayers donate to groups providing scholarships to students wishing to attend private schools. The state provides the donor with a credit against their state tax burden and the nonprofit collects funds to provide scholarship aid to eligible families.

After the Montana program passed, the Montana Department of Revenue made an administrative ruling that the scholarships could not be used at religious private schools. The amendment reads:

The legislature, counties, cities, towns, school districts, and public corporations shall not make any direct or indirect appropriation or payment from any public fund or monies, or any grant of lands or other property for any sectarian purpose or to aid any church, school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other literary or scientific institution, controlled in whole or in part by any church, sect, or denomination. This section shall not apply to funds from federal         sources provided to the state for the express purpose of distribution to non-public education.” (Montana Const. Art. X, § 6)

A group of Montana mothers challenged the administrative ruling in state court, noting that the position of the Montana Department of Revenue was contrary to a number of U.S. Supreme Court rulings requiring government neutrality toward religious groups. The Montana Supreme Courts ruled against the mothers and struck down the entire program. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

So, let’s get a few things out of the way.

The Montana Department of Revenue ought not to have made this ruling in the first place. The Montana Legislature did not make an appropriation, and the purpose of what it did was not to aid any church or school, but rather to aid students and families.

Read the argument in its entirety, but in my book, the crucial exchange came in a question from Justice Kavanaugh to the attorney defending Montana’s action:

JUSTICE KAVANAUGH: But this is a – this is a school, in education, there satisfies the compulsory education laws of the state, correct?

UNIKOWSKY: That's true.

This exchange reveals that the scholarship program fulfills a public purpose in providing a K-12 education to students. For however long Montana has had compulsory K-12 attendance laws is the same period that attendance at a private school has satisfied that state requirement.

The U.S. Supreme Court has established a standard of government neutrality toward religious groups, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia Inc. v. Comer  being the most recent. Thus, a Montana fire department would be engaging in unconstitutional religious discrimination if it refused to put out a fire in a burning place of worship for fear of “aiding” religion.

Several justices further noted that if Montana decided to establish a scholarship program but then decided to strike it down based upon the race of the recipients, that would represent unconstitutional discrimination. Why, they asked, should the Montana Supreme Court be allowed to strike down this neutral program simply because some of the families would choose a religious education?

Disbanding a program simply because some of the beneficiaries would be religious lies at the heart of this case.

The Institute of Justice’s Dick Komer summed it up well in his closing:

What we're saying here is that Trinity – what Trinity Lutheran says, the state can't discriminate on the basis of religion. The decision is crystal clear when you read it that that is what they are doing in this case. They focus on the religious affiliation or religious nature of the schools. They are not talking about what the schools do. They are talking about what the schools are.

Second, Zelman has already answered the question about who this program is aiding. It's not aiding the schools. It is aiding the parents. You have a choice to make about the parents here. You can either view them as mere inconsequential conduits through which public funds flow to the religious schools they choose or you can regard them, as you did in Zelman, as free and independent decision-makers who are being given the power to choose a religious education or a secular education in private schools.

We’ll learn the ruling of the justices later this year.