School Choice Ohio Blog

England recently unveiled a few new initiatives to encourage more choice in education, starting with their national network of “academy” schools, which basically operate like American charter schools.

This week’s Economist featured a study of Britain’s current policy goals and reported that England’s newly elected government “aims to allow parents more choice in their children’s education. Existing schools are encouraged to switch to academy status, and newly created ‘free schools,’ set up and run by not-for-profit businesses, charities, faith groups, universities, private schools, or parents themselves, will be in operation.”

And the funding model? It sounds delightfully similar to the “Fund the Child” model proposed by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute: “The state will pay for the premises and provide the funding per pupil; poorer children will attract more [funding], so that schools are keen to take them on.”

England, just like America, is very concerned about its economy and a large fiscal deficit. This strong push for school choice at such a time speaks to a general belief that school choice tends to save money rather than waste it.

The Economist is optimistic that “the injection of choice and competition into an unusually rigid school system could transform it. Schools will compete for pupils, not the other way around.” Up to this point, there seems to be good popular demand and enthusiasm. “So far around 160 schools have applied to become academies, and there have been over 60 bids to set up new free schools. The numbers may well increase as the policies take hold.”

Take heart: If you love school choice and want the best opportunity for your child, you are not alone. School choice is global – parents want the best for their children all over the world. Check out our website for more information about your choices in Ohio.

- Sarita Zaffini

Education reform discussions around the country have been focusing recently on President Obama’s $4 billion “Race to the Top” initiative. Essentially, it establishes a funding source for states that have created a positive environment for education reform.

Friday’s Wall Street Journal offered some thoughts on the way the program is shaping up. The WSJ editorial contains some interesting data related to the size and scope of education funding in the United States. It is definitely worth taking a quick look.

The editorial also pointed out that several states—Tennessee, Rhode Island, Louisiana, and Massachusetts—have passed legislation that could benefit charter schools. Here in Ohio, Senator Jon Husted sent a letter to Governor Strickland last week suggesting several changes that the state should consider to both improve education and position itself to compete for “Race to the Top” dollars.

The question now becomes—will federal education policy make Ohio friendlier to charter schools? Time will tell.

–Chad Aldis

In the wake of a difficult state budget, EdChoice students, parents, and schools have taken a direct hit.

In a blow to hardworking Ohio parents, Governor Strickland reduced scholarship amounts for the popular scholarship program.  Scholarships have been reduced from $4500 to $4250 for K-8 and from $5300 to $5000 for 9-12.

Unfortunately, this change was unnecessary.  The House and Senate had already made a compromise on funding the vouchers by taking out the automatic increase for changes in the cost of education that the scholarship had included.

Thus, the scholarship was both cut by 6% (back to 2006 funding levels) and given no ability to adjust upward in the future.  This is more than everyone sharing in what was a painful budget process for many, as public schools were only cut by 1% (before taking into account federal stimulus dollars). This is a weakening of a parental option for parents whose children had been assigned to attend Ohio’s lowest performing public schools. Why?

The veto message from the governor stated, “This provision would increase the maximum award for the Educational Choice scholarship program.  In a time of limited resources and shared sacrifice across state government, it is not in the public interest to increase these scholarships.”

First, the vetoed language would not have been an increase in the scholarship amount—students this year received scholarships with a maximum value of $4500 and $5300 depending upon grade level. This represents a decrease in funding. Second, during this time of shared sacrifice, education was not supposed to be on the list of cuts.

These cuts when coupled with the reductions in state aid to Ohio’s parochial and other nonpublic schools might force schools to increase tuition to make up for the lost revenue. 

During these trying economic times, these parents have already and are continuing to sacrifice for their families. It is now more important than ever that we do not take from parents quality educational choices for their children.

We all want our children to have a quality education.  This means improving all schools to fit the needs of the child.  It is imperative for us all to work together.   If we fail to strip away the dogma that surrounds education and treats public education as the only available source of education, then we have not embraced the change that President Obama has called for.

As the governor seeks to turn around Ohio through the promotion of education as the main thruster of economic resource, this action is truly a curious way to make education a top priority and show a commitment to all Ohio students.

– Tisha Brady