Charter Schools And Vouchers Getting Results

Success is generally a good thing. But you wouldn’t always know it, when certain people scramble to redefine “success” as “change, probably for the worse.”

A Rand Corp. study released recently reported that “more than 190,000 students nationwide had left a private school for a charter by the end of the 2008 school year,” according to The Los Angeles Times. Since 2008, the most recent year for which data is available, charter schools have increased in number substantially; the Los Angeles Unified School District boasts the most in the country, at 193.

One of the best pieces of evidence we could have that charter schools are working is that they are successfully competing for students, not only against under-performing, inner-city public schools, but also against private schools.

Despite naysayers’ complaints, this is good news for taxpayers, who are at least buying satisfactory education with their tax dollars, as well as for families that no longer feel the need to pay private school tuition. But charter schools are no panacea for the broader problem: Too many places in America pay too much for education that produces too little in the way of results.

Charter schools are one element of an answer. Another that is slowly but steadily gaining ground is vouchers that parents can use to pay for education at any private, charter or traditional public school. Such voucher systems are not only fostering improvement in public schools, which now have to compete more directly with charter and private alternatives; vouchers are also reviving private schools, especially parochial institutions, that were hit hard by the recession and faced the possibility of closing.

Teachers’ unions, public school boards and administrators generally hate voucher systems. The National Education Association even offers a list of talking points specifically aimed at arguing against vouchers. (The organization is more ambivalent on charter schools; given the nature of charter schools, this is as one would expect.) But the current system is geared toward preserving a status quo that doesn’t work. The goal of publicly funded education is to educate kids, not to create publicly funded jobs for public school employees. This hasn’t stopped principals in Indiana from going door-to-door, however, trying to convince parents not to withdraw their students – and the public funding that comes with them – from struggling public schools.

What makes an individual child succeed or fail is a complex mix of many factors. Still, it is similarly not hard not to see why the National School Boards Association would be quick to dismiss a recent study from the Brookings Institute at Harvard that shows voucher systems have had significant positive impact in college enrollment among African-American students. Anne L. Bryant, the association’s executive director, called the study’s conclusions “grandiose” and claimed that parental involvement allowed for the difference observed.

Public school productivity, like that of most public agencies, has lagged behind gains that the private sector has made over the last several decades, despite heavy investment in manpower and technology. In fact, those investments in manpower have arguably made public schools less productive, as we have more employees serving fewer students without commensurate gains in student success.

Competition is usually the best long-term solution to productivity problems. The results in charter schools and voucher programs across the country are evidence that it works for education, too.

About Larry M. Elkin 508 Articles

Affiliation: Palisades Hudson Financial Group

Larry M. Elkin, CPA, CFP®, has provided personal financial and tax counseling to a sophisticated client base since 1986. After six years with Arthur Andersen, where he was a senior manager for personal financial planning and family wealth planning, he founded his own firm in Hastings on Hudson, New York in 1992. That firm grew steadily and became the Palisades Hudson organization, which moved to Scarsdale, New York in 2002. The firm expanded to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, in 2005, and to Atlanta, Georgia, in 2008.

Larry received his B.A. in journalism from the University of Montana in 1978, and his M.B.A. in accounting from New York University in 1986. Larry was a reporter and editor for The Associated Press from 1978 to 1986. He covered government, business and legal affairs for the wire service, with assignments in Helena, Montana; Albany, New York; Washington, D.C.; and New York City’s federal courts in Brooklyn and Manhattan.

Larry established the organization’s investment advisory business, which now manages more than $800 million, in 1997. As president of Palisades Hudson, Larry maintains individual professional relationships with many of the firm’s clients, who reside in more than 25 states from Maine to California as well as in several foreign countries. He is the author of Financial Self-Defense for Unmarried Couples (Currency Doubleday, 1995), which was the first comprehensive financial planning guide for unmarried couples. He also is the editor and publisher of Sentinel, a quarterly newsletter on personal financial planning.

Larry has written many Sentinel articles, including several that anticipated future events. In “The Economic Case Against Tobacco Stocks” (February 1995), he forecast that litigation losses would eventually undermine cigarette manufacturers’ financial position. He concluded in “Is This the Beginning Of The End?” (May 1998) that there was a better-than-even chance that estate taxes would be repealed by 2010, three years before Congress enacted legislation to repeal the tax in 2010. In “IRS Takes A Shot At Split-Dollar Life” (June 1996), Larry predicted that the IRS would be able to treat split dollar arrangements as below-market loans, which came to pass with new rules issued by the Service in 2001 and 2002.

More recently, Larry has addressed the causes and consequences of the “Panic of 2008″ in his Sentinel articles. In “Have We Learned Our Lending Lesson At Last” (October 2007) and “Mortgage Lending Lessons Remain Unlearned” (October 2008), Larry questioned whether or not America has learned any lessons from the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s. In addition, he offered some practical changes that should have been made to amend the situation. In “Take Advantage Of The Panic Of 2008” (January 2009), Larry offered ways to capitalize on the wealth of opportunity that the panic presented.

Larry served as president of the Estate Planning Council of New York City, Inc., in 2005-2006. In 2009 the Council presented Larry with its first-ever Lifetime Achievement Award, citing his service to the organization and “his tireless efforts in promoting our industry by word and by personal example as a consummate estate planning professional.” He is regularly interviewed by national and regional publications, and has made nearly 100 radio and television appearances.

Visit: Palisades Hudson

1 Comment on Charter Schools And Vouchers Getting Results

  1. The author fails to mention that the very same study showed that Charter schools are costing the US an estimated $1.3 billion already since parents who used to pay tuition to private school are now sponging off the public system instead.
    I’m happy to see vouchers and charters talked about in the same breath, however: people have figured out how to turn charter schools into discount, taxpayer-supported private schools. This is why so much of the Charter student population (the study above says one third) are former students from private schools.

    Imagine you were fortunate enough to be able to afford an expensive private school for your children, and had done so for a number of years. Then you are suddenly given the “choice” to get the same fancy program at a charter school for less money–and your reduced “tuition” is even tax deductible now! Sounds like a bonanza.

    This is absolutely BAD for all taxpayers–except those few getting this new tax break. Charter schools and vouchers are simply a tax cut for the rich who have school-aged children.

    The results for charter schools show the same thing in every study: their results are mixed, but when they are positive, the reason is that they take only the best students out of a given population and reject the harder cases. It’s not rocket science–it’s not even innovation. It’s just hacking the system.

    (Disclaimer: I am a parent in the Los Altos School District in Los Altos, CA. I am not in the “teacher’s union” and am not now nor have I ever been employed by any public anything. I am here because our schools are being destroyed by a charter school. Read my blog above for more details).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*