Private Educators Muted on Vouchers

Whether to fund private schools with public money is a question that divides educators just as sharply as U.S. Supreme Court justices, who are considering a Cleveland program that allows children to attend religious schools at government expense.

But the divide among educators is not simply between the public sector, which complains that school vouchers sap already struggling neighborhood schools, and the private sector, which stands to benefit from the windfall of government money. Rather, private educators, in particular, express nuanced opinions of school vouchers.

Many in private education support vouchers as a way to give parents, especially those with low incomes, more say in their children’s education. And while they do not typically include it in their arguments, vouchers, even if they cover just part of tuition, bring money and students to private schools that might need both.

But particularly at the more selective--and more expensive--private schools, educators say they favor “school choice” but stop short of pushing for vouchers.

Largely free to operate as they please, the independent schools don’t want the government regulation that might come with the money and, more practically, they can’t withstand a flood of students who can afford only a few thousand dollars of the $15,000 tuition.

Also, the high-end schools don’t want to advocate programs that might benefit one type of school to the detriment of another.

‘Aversion’ to Seeming to Lure Public Students

“There is an aversion to supporting something that might give the appearance that we are trying to lure even more students away from the public sector,” said Thomas Hudnut, headmaster of Harvard-Westlake School in Los Angeles and one of more than 3,000 independent school educators meeting this week in San Francisco.

The voucher issue is on educators’ minds because of a case from Cleveland heard Feb. 20 by the Supreme Court.

The justices are expected to rule by late June on whether paying for church-related schooling with public money compromises the Constitution’s doctrine of separation of church and state.

Proponents of the Cleveland program argue that it is legal because parents, not the government, choose where to apply the vouchers, which are worth as much as $2,250 yearly for each child. Largely because of their lower tuition, religious schools have been the choice for 99% of voucher students, drawing opposition to the program from public school teacher unions, education groups and free speech and civil rights organizations.

The justices’ questions during the case’s argument suggested a slim majority favors upholding the six-year-old program. A victory for the pro-voucher side could encourage other states to subsidize nonpublic schools, so those in private education are watching the case closely.

Florida already has three statewide programs that offer money for students to attend private schools, but there too it has largely been religious schools that have admitted the students--and reaped the windfall. Only a few of the state’s independent private schools have participated.

“We have encouraged our [independent] schools to look at the programs carefully before they buy into them, because we’re all concerned about the question of accountability,” said C. Skardon Bliss, executive director of the Florida Council of Independent Schools. For example, the council does not want the state to impose standardized testing on its schools that receive voucher money, he said.

Also concerned about governmental regulation is the National Assn. of Independent Schools, the group holding its annual conference in San Francisco.

On behalf of more than 1,200 nonprofit private schools, the NAIS filed a friend of the court brief with the Supreme Court generally supporting more options for parents. But the association does not support programs that extend vouchers to all parents regardless of their income, as did a California initiative rejected by voters in 2000.

Aid Should Target ‘Needs of the Poorest’

“We support educational choice--but the real issue is making sure money doesn’t get drained off the public schools,” said Debra Wilson, staff attorney for the NAIS.

Likewise, Catholic schools, which have received many of the Cleveland students bearing vouchers, support programs tied to families’ incomes, said Ned Dolejsi, executive director of the California Catholic Conference.

“We believe that any serious voucher program in a society should focus on the needs of the poorest first,” which is why California’s Catholic schools also opposed the Proposition 38 voucher initiative.