EDUCATION NOTEBOOK:
By Dan Lips and Lindsey Burke
The families of the 1,900 children participating in the D.C.
Opportunity Scholarship program breathed a sigh of relief when the
Congressional Appropriations Committee approved funding to provide
scholarships for another school year.
The Appropriations Committee's move came a week after a
subcommittee chaired by Rep. Jose Serrano voted last week to
include $14 million in funding for scholarships for the budget.
Although this is less than the $18 million requested by the Bush
administration and D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty, it keeps the program
alive for another year.
Before yesterday's full Appropriations Committee mark-up, word
circulated on Capitol Hill that Democratic lawmakers were
considering an amendment to strip out the funding for the voucher
program. In response, families with children in the scholarship
program sent letters to Capitol Hill asking Representatives not to
kill the program.
Fortunately, no such amendment was offered and the funding for
the program remains, for now, in the federal budget. But parents
and other school choice supporters fear that those intent on ending
the scholarship program haven't given up yet.
The ongoing debate over the future of the D.C. Opportunity
Scholarship program forces members to decide who comes first in
education--children in need or special interest groups. No children
will benefit if Congress kills the voucher program. Since 2004, the
D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program has helped disadvantaged
children escape the District's low-performing and often violent
public schools to attend a private school of their parents' choice.
This year, more than 1,900 children are attending private schools
thanks to the program. The average income of these families was
barely above the federal poverty line: $22,736 for a family of
four.
By all accounts, the scholarship program is working. Mandated
evaluations of the scholarship program conducted by Georgetown
University and the Department of Education have found that parents
report higher levels of satisfaction with their children's schools
and the safety of the learning environment.
Moreover, a recent evaluation of participating students' test
scores found that students who received vouchers realized higher
academic achievement than students who were not awarded a voucher.
Although researchers cautioned that the test score gains were not
statistically significant, any progress is encouraging--especially
since the evaluation reviewed only two years worth of testing data.
(For an in-depth analysis of the testing evaluation, see this
Heritage Foundation web
memo by Dr. Shanea Watkins.)
If Congress takes away their opportunity scholarships, most of
these 1,900 children will be forced to re-enroll into the
Districts' struggling public school system, which former D.C. Mayor
Anthony Williams once dubbed a "slow-moving train wreck." On the
2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress, Fourth and Eighth
Grade students from the District scored lower on reading and math
tests than any state in the country. The District also has a lower
high school graduation rate than any other state.
Beyond the low performance in the classroom, D.C. schools are
often violent or dangerous. A federal government study found that
12 percent of D.C. students were threatened or injured by a weapon
on school property during a recent school year--well above the
national average. According to the Washington Post,
Anacostia High School alone saw 61 violent offenses, including
three sexual assaults and one instance of the use of a deadly
weapon.
Ending the program would harm--not help--D.C.'s struggling
public schools. Since Congress funds the voucher program, the D.C.
education budget would remain the same if the scholarships
rescinded, forcing 1,900 kids to transfer back into the public
school system. Ironically, the transfer of these students would
have the same effect that opponents of vouchers often threaten
(inaccurately) will occur with expanded school choice: the
siphoning away of resources from other public school students.
Unfortunately, this additional burden placed on the public
school system is a consequence of which many legislators will never
feel the effects. Strained resources, academic underperformance,
and compromised safety only concern those whose children are
obligated to attend these schools. Members of Congress voting on
whether to continue the scholarship program should ask a simple
question: Would they send their own children to one of the
District's the low-performing public schools?
For most, the answer is surely no. Since 2000, the Heritage
Foundation has surveyed Members of Congress to determine how many
Senators and Representatives have practiced school choice by
sending their own children to private school. In 2007, the updated
survey found that 37 percent of Representatives and 45 percent of
Senators in Congress had sent a child to private school--well above
the national average. Yet many of these same lawmakers have a long
history of voting to deny low-income parents the same power.
Low-income children should have the same opportunities as the
wealthy offspring of Members of Congress. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill
should demonstrate that they support equal opportunity in education
by putting children first and ensuring that these 1,900 hopeful
children continue to receive the excellent education options that
they so desperately need.
Dan
Lips is Senior Policy Analyst and Lindsey Burke
is a Domestic Policy Research Assistant at the Heritage
Foundation.