Fordham Institute analyst rebuts Beacon Journal editorial on vouchers | Guest opinion

The Beacon Journal editorial board recently praised Akron Public Schools for joining a lawsuit seeking to dismantle the EdChoice Scholarship program. Unfortunately, it parrots the familiar — but very one-sided — arguments made by school choice opponents.

Opponents typically start by arguing that EdChoice drains money from public schools. It’s true that when a student uses a voucher to attend private school, the local district no longer receives state funding to educate that student. But the same thing happens when a student moves from Akron to Hudson. Opponents aren’t accusing Hudson of “draining” money from Akron. Nor should they. Ohio’s funding formula is student-centered, and state dollars generally follow students to the schools that are actually educating them.

EdChoice opponents also like to say that the program is expensive, thereby implying that taxpayers would save money if it disappeared. But taxpayers don’t pay more when students participate in EdChoice. On the contrary, fewer taxpayer dollars are spent to educate scholarship students in private schools ( $8,408 for students in grades 9-12 ) compared to APS’s expenditure per-pupil in FY23 ( $21,475 ).

Beyond dollars and cents, voucher critics often cite concerns that EdChoice threatens the barrier between church and state, as most participating private schools are religious. But EdChoice doesn’t prioritize religious schools. All Ohio private schools, regardless of religious affiliation, can participate.

Moreover, voucher programs like EdChoice have established legal precedent on their side. In 2002, in a case originating in Ohio, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris that the Cleveland Scholarship Program didn’t violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that the program “is entirely neutral with respect to religion” and that it “provides benefits directly to a wide spectrum of individuals.” The same is true for EdChoice, which is also neutral with respect to religion and provides scholarships to families from all backgrounds. It’s the families, not the state, who decide what schools their children will attend.

Another common argument is that private schools are not accountable for student outcomes. Such accountability is crucial, both to safeguard taxpayer dollars and to ensure that children receive a quality education. The Fordham Institute, the Ohio-based organization where I work, has long argued in favor of increasing accountability for voucher-accepting private schools.

But preferring more accountability doesn’t mean there’s none today. For years, Ohio has required EdChoice participants to take state-approved assessments. Student results are reported to parents, and schoolwide results are publicly reported by the state . Thanks to a recent change, student learning gains will also be reported beginning next year.

If parents of EdChoice students don’t like what they see in their child’s school, whether that’s test scores or something else, they’re free to go elsewhere, private or public. Every family deserves that right and the opportunity to send their children to better schools. When families have that choice, schools have a stronger incentive to deliver quality education. If EdChoice is eliminated, that will be much more difficult to do.

Akron families should protest the district’s position. During the 2022–23 school year, over 2,000 APS students attended private schools using a scholarship they were eligible for because their assigned public school was performing unsatisfactorily. That same year, state report cards showed that 65% of APS students fell short of proficiency on state exams. Only 44% of third graders were proficient in reading . Just 12% of eighth graders were proficient in math.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Akron families want better for their children. Until district performance improves, no one should fault families for choosing to send their kids to the schools that they believe will better serve them.

Jessica Poiner, a Stow native, is a senior education policy analyst at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

This article originally appeared on Akron Beacon Journal: Fordham Institute analyst rebuts Beacon Journal editorial on vouchers | Guest opinion