- WHERE
& WHEN PARENTS CAN CHOOSE WITHOUT FINANCIAL PENALTY
We are drawing lessons from an exceptionally important study from the Center for Educational Research and Innovation of the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). School: A Matter of Choice describes genuine educational choice programs in Australia, the U.K., Netherlands, New Zealand, and Sweden; public school-only choice efforts in the U.S.; the limited choice effort in Milwaukee; and also includes brief case studies of genuine choice in Denmark and France. All parenthetic citations are from this volume. (OECD, Order Dept., 2001 L St. N.W., #700, Wash., D.C. 20036, $22.00)
Attached is "The Automatic Benefits of School Choice," a synthesis of essays in Freedom Reports #7, 8, and 9. Among its points are these two: educational finance monopoly's (EFM's) success in preventing true choice in the U.S. is exploited by EFM supporters with the ironic refrain "We have no experience with this radical experiment"; but logical analysis, and careful examination of our own and others' experiences, can show Americans the virtues of school choice in contrast with the vices of monopoly funding. OECD's new study provides splendid evidence of this.
There is one caution to express about OECD's excellent report. Its tendency is to compare real world choice programs with abstract choice ideals and unarticulated models and hopes for choice reform measures. It is this feature, perhaps, which caused American news services to misunderstand the thrust of the report (see Freedom Report #9). Naturally, even the best systems operating in the real world will pale a bit by comparison with abstract models or untested proclamations. Compared to the other real world, however — the U.S. under EFM — the true school choice systems described in the OECD report seem remarkably humane, natural, and educationally fruitful. Indeed, even measured against the abstract models, these parent-serving systems are extraordinarily impressive.
One incidental benefit of the use of model comparisons, by the way, is of special importance: every time the author shows where a choice system in practice is falling short of aspiration, he is able and obliged also to show how the shortcoming easily can be remedied. Ease of remediation within the structure of school choice — there being no monopoly and no entrenched vested interests able to block change — is a major advantage of school choice, and it is well-established in the OECD study. The following nation-by-nation synopses, provided by the Center's Nicholas A. Freres, will illustrate other choice realities:
· even in particularly homogeneous societies there is a natural supply of educational alternatives that will emerge if financial penalties for choosing them are replaced with incentives;
· parental involvement in schools, state-owned or private, is a natural corollary of choosing among them, and this illustrates the "moral contract" which the Blum Center talks much of;
· parental esteem for the chosen school, and for the ability to choose, is an unsurprising companion;
· in schools chosen rather than imposed it is entirely customary to find relatively disciplined and orderly educational environments;
· the mere fact of comparison and competition which choice brings provides great stimulus to improve all schools, as one would expect;
· parental concern for the child's welfare clearly extends to concern for the ethical standards of schools under consideration;
· one manifestation of this is the relative strength of religious schools when financial penalty is removed from choosing them;
· and, while acknowledging the difficulties of measuring educational outcomes and hence statistical "quality," the study shows conclusively that school characteristics normally associated with educational achievement are routinely encouraged by choice.
Until we are able to accomplish comprehensive school choice in the U.S., we must rely on logic to remind us of the general superiority of a free environment over a monopolistic one; on our own analogical experiences — e.g., GI Bill, private choice programs, pre-school vouchers, etc.; and on the experiences of other nations to provide the evidence of choice's virtue. This OECD study is a greatly important addition to that body of evidence. We hope this Freedom Report summary will alert readers to it and whet their appetites to study the whole volume. And we hope they share its "good news" with others. Extra copies are available on request and, as always, readers are free to copy this Report themselves.
AUSTRALIA
In 1973, Australia, under the leadership of a liberal-leaning
Labour government, adopted choice in education by establishing a system
of financial support for the nation's private schools. As a result, many
Australian families who could not otherwise have afforded to do so have
been able to choose private schooling for their children. An indication
of that is the growth in private school enrollments under Australia's school
choice system: from 21% of total enrollments in 1971 to 28% in 1992 (p.
55). The majority of private schools in Australia are religiously-affiliated.
Interestingly, although Australia's constitution prohibits the establishment
of religion by the state, in language strikingly similar to the U.S. Constitution's
First Amendment, Australian courts have determined that government support
for children's education in religious schools does not violate that prohibition
(pp. 43, 57).
Australia provides support for private schools and private schooling systems — such as the nation's system of Catholic schools — both at the Commonwealth (i.e., the federal) level and at the state levels of government. The amount of aid depends upon the wealth and resources of the private school, with the neediest schools receiving a larger share of the aid. Private schools are categorized according to their wealth and located in one of twelve "bands." Higher bands represent needier schools and lower bands represent wealthier schools. The amount of aid provided by the Commonwealth varies from 12% to 49% of the average per-pupil cost in the public schools; while the amount contributed by the states varies from 20% to 25% of the average public school per-pupil cost (p. 55). "Thus a poor school in a high 'band' whose costs are lower than the public average can come close to total government funding, while a private school charging a high fee and spending more than the average per pupil recoups only a small proportion from government" (p. 56). For the benefit of children from low-income families, many private schools in Australia waive the portion of their fees not covered by government aid — a practice that is particularly prevalent among the nation's Catholic schools, which are noted for enrolling students from all social backgrounds.
The educational choice policy established in 1973 provides aid for recurrent or per-pupil costs. In 1986, however, Australia went a step further and adopted a policy known as the New Schools Policy, "under which new non-government schools will be supported, in terms of capital as well as recurrent funding. Committees in each state and territory make recommendations attempting to reconcile planning and efficiency with choice and diversity" (p. 56). Moreover, some states in Australia (the OECD report mentions New South Wales and Victoria) have implemented policies allowing public schools to become specialized schools or to become self-managing. As a consequence, these public schools have not only made themselves more attractive to parents and students, but they have also developed reputations for expertise in their specialty fields. Cherrybrook Technology High School in New South Wales is a case in point: it has become so successful in its specialty field — modern technology — that it now serves as a center of instruction for other teachers (p. 116-117). Having opened the door to genuine choice in education in 1973, Australia has begun to introduce and permit innovation throughout its education system.
Two public schools in Melbourne may also serve to illustrate the dynamic educational atmosphere created by choice. Mount Waverly Secondary College is known for its rigorous academic instruction and is located in a wealthy suburb (p. 111). Doveton Secondary College, on the other hand, has developed a reputation as "the district's science and technology centre" (p. 113). Doveton is located in a poorer Melbourne neighborhood. Despite their differences in orientation and location, both schools have proved successful in attracting students and feel confident of their ability to compete with private schools. Perhaps most revealingly, both schools maintain inviting policies regarding inspections and visits by parents, and both promote their programs at local primary schools. Of course, private schools — and the families that choose them — have also benefited from Australia's education policies. Maranatha Christian School, located in the same poorer neighborhood of Melbourne as Doveton Secondary College, "distinguishes itself by a stress on high standards of behaviour and Christian teaching" (p. 113). Under choice, its enrollments have grown from 97 students in 1971, when it began operation, to 750 in 1993. The OECD report also notes the sustained success of two Catholic secondary schools for girls in Melbourne. Avila College, located in the wealthier suburb, has an enrollment of 950 (p. 112); while Killester College, in the same poorer neighborhood as Maranatha and Doveton, enrolls 788 girls (pp. 113-114). In order to make themselves attractive to parents, both schools rely on their reputations for providing religious "pastoral care" for their students. Neither school refuses admission to girls from families who cannot afford to pay the modest tuition fees.
DENMARK
Families in Denmark have long enjoyed their country's
well-established educational choice program. The forthright support accorded
educational choice in Denmark is echoed by the Danish Ministry of Education:
"An important feature of the Danish educational system's democratic structure
is the access to a school of your own choice. If the schools offered by
the public education system are not to your liking, you can attend a private
school, of which there are 408 spread throughout the country." ('The Folkeskole,'
the Danish Ministry of Education and Research) In order to make such access
to private schools a reality, the Danish government provides financial
aid equivalent to approximately 72% of the average public school per-pupil
cost for each student enrolled in a private school (p. 145). This policy
allows Danish private schools to charge exceptionally low tuition fees.
For this reason, private schools in Denmark are known as "free schools."
Smaller free schools have always received a larger proportion of aid. This policy helps to compensate for the smaller schools' higher than average costs and it means that free schools can afford to open and sustain themselves in smaller towns and rural areas. Thus, also, are families throughout the country assured of access to free schools. When it became apparent in 1991 that adjustments in the aid proportions were needed, the funding system was easily altered by the Danish government to the satisfaction of all (pp. 145, 146). Under the altered funding system, the government establishes the general level of aid and allows the free schools association to determine precise proportions for distribution. Today, smaller free schools still receive a larger proportion of aid, while free schools with larger enrollments receive what they need to maintain their low fees.
Parental commitment to and involvement with free schools is viewed as an integral component of their success. The Danish policy requires that free schools charge some tuition fees, albeit very low fees, in order to ensure that parents have a financial stake in — and thus a high degree of commitment to — the school they choose for their children (p. 145). Additionally, as a means of assuring direct parental control of free schools, each one "must be governed by a board elected by parents" (p. 145).
The most significant feature of parental control under any educational choice program, however, is the option to withdraw children from a poorly-performing school and send them to a preferred one. This parental capacity, in turn, directly encourages the schools to perform up to parents' expectations. The experience of the Albertslund Lilleskole (or 'little school') illustrates the point nicely (p. 147). The Albertslund was founded as a free school near Copenhagen. Designed to appeal to parents with left-leaning political beliefs, the school offered a liberal pedagogy with little in the way of traditional curriculum and class-room discipline. As parents became increasingly concerned about student performance at the school, however, enrollments began to decline. Eventually, Albertslund reformed its curriculum, offering more instruction in basic academic subjects. The school also replaced the original policy of parental involvement through service on various school committees with a new policy of encouraging direct parental participation in the class-rooms. The result: Albertslund Lilleskole's "rolls rose from 60 to 150" (p. 147).
Denmark's respect for parental choice has resulted in free schools that are genuinely free of any government interference (p. 145). It has also led to a flourishing of a great variety of free schools. "They include independent rural schools, academically-oriented lower secondary schools, some religious schools, progressive free schools, Rudolf Steiner [i.e., Waldorf] schools, German minority schools and immigrant schools such as Muslim schools" (p. 146). The Danish educational choice program has also brought improvements to the public schooling system, known as the "folkeskole" or system of folk schools. Public "schools are starting to replicate the model of parental involvement developed in free schools. In 1989, school boards with a majority of parent members were established at all folk schools, and increasing decentralisation to these boards is foreseen. Parents are also gradually obtaining a freer choice of folk school within their municipality" (p. 147).
THE NETHERLANDS
Comprehensive choice in education was established as
the central education policy of the Netherlands in 1917. It has remained
as such to this day. Private schools in the Netherlands are available to
all regardless of income because public and private schools are financed
"on a completely equal basis" (p. 67). The extent to which the Dutch avail
themselves of the educational opportunities offered by this policy is reflected
in the high proportion of private school enrollments: more than 2/3 of
all Dutch students attend private schools (p. 68). School choice in the
Netherlands enjoys strong political and popular support, as one would expect,
and it has, quite naturally, yielded a rich diversity of educational alternatives
reflecting the nation's religious and cultural pluralism. Educational choice
in the Netherlands is not limited to the private sector, however: "The
Dutch belief in the right to choose schools is reflected also in liberal
rules for choice within the public sector" (p. 69). Ordinarily, parents
are able to choose from among any of the public schools located in their
municipality, although some larger cities confine public school choice
to smaller, sub-municipal districts.
To qualify for funding, private schools must maintain minimum levels of enrollment established by the Dutch government (pp. 23, 31, 68). In practice, this means that existing private schools must strive to remain sufficiently attractive to parents to sustain their required minimum enrollment, at the risk of losing their funding. It means, also, that educators seeking to found a new school must demonstrate that the school would fulfill a genuine demand on the part of parents. Minimum enrollment levels, quite sensibly, vary greatly from municipality to municipality, depending on the size of the local school-age population. Moreover, enrollment requirements are eased when school closures would threaten educational diversity in a given locality. This policy not only illustrates the Dutch commitment to assuring access to a variety of schools, it also serves the very practical goal of making "the choice of more than one school a reality in many small communities..." (p. 31).
The OECD report observes that in response to parental preferences and choices, Dutch schools tend in the direction of "educational conservatism" with a focus on "fundamental values" (p. 36). This, of course, is not surprising, since, as the report points out, parents are generally reluctant to submit their children to educational experimentation. One can easily imagine the dire fate of educational fads in a country with genuine parental choice such as the Netherlands. But the OECD report also notes that in the Netherlands schools offering solid alternative pedagogical approaches — such as Montessori and Waldorf — "are growing rapidly" (p. 29).
Perhaps the most striking feature about education in the Netherlands is the prevalence of religious schools. In 1990, a remarkable 63% of all primary school students and 64% of all secondary school students attended religiously-affiliated schools representing a wide range of denominations (p. 68). The tremendous popularity of religious schools cannot be attributed to perceptions of academic superiority. For in the Netherlands under genuine choice in education, unlike conditions in the United States, the public schools are not commonly believed to offer inferior academic instruction, even in larger urban areas (p. 70). Indeed, in the Dutch city of Haarlem, the most academically prestigious school is a public secondary school (p. 95).
In part, the success of religious schools in the Netherlands can be explained by their willingness to respond and adapt to changing social circumstances (p. 69). For example, many Catholic schools in bigger cities (the OECD report mentions the Hague and Rotterdam) readily admit large numbers of non-Catholic students — a practice which is also common among urban Catholic schools in the United States. But the commitment of religious educators to providing educational opportunities to urban school-children of all faiths cannot alone account for the widespread popularity of religious schools in the Netherlands. The OECD report offers a more telling explanation: "The most frequent reason seems to be choice of their [the religious schools'] ethos, which is sometimes perceived to be more in keeping with a family's values than the secular system" (p. 28). Given a real choice, as in the Netherlands, most parents will choose to send their children to a school that reflects their values. Even among families that do not belong to the denomination represented by a religious school, many nonetheless prefer such a school for their children. Another aspect of a school's ethos is its attitude toward its students, which is often believed to be of a distinctive quality in religious schools. By way of illustration, Catholic schools in the Netherlands, as in Australia, are generally thought "to offer a familial atmosphere in which the character and development of the individual is given attention" (p. 28). A "familial atmosphere" would obviously be an attractive feature of a school for many parents, as well as a significant factor in the academic success of many students.
SWEDEN
Of the four countries discussed here, Sweden's adoption
of parental choice in education is the most recent and, in some ways, the
most dramatic. By the early 1980s, independent alternatives to the public
schooling system in Sweden had been all but entirely eclipsed. Private
school enrollments at the time accounted for a mere 0.6% of the total (p.
82). Swedish parents, however, had grown increasingly dissatisfied with
the "monochrome" character of the public schools as well as with an "unresponsive"
attitude on the part of school officials (pp. 32, 79, 84). Largely in response
to this widespread dissatisfaction, the Swedish government undertook a
number of reform measures in the early 1990s designed to increase educational
options, both within the public school system and between public and private
schools.
Perhaps the most significant of these measures is a 1992 law establishing an education grant program for students attending private schools. The March, 1992, Government Bill on Freedom of Choice and Independent Schools declares, "The right and opportunity to choose a school and education for one's children is important in a free society." It adds, "The goal is to achieve the greatest possible freedom for children and parents to choose their school." Beyond the "vital principle" of freedom of educational choice, the bill describes some of the additional anticipated benefits of choice in education: "a greater sensitivity to the wishes of students and parents on the part of schools"; the growth of "a multiplicity of educational options and pedagogical methods"; the improvement of all schools through the "stimulus" of choice; and the creation of "incentives for cost efficiency." Although the bill and the school choice program it established are only two years old, the evidence of choice's beneficial effects has begun to build in Sweden.
Under the 1992 law, grants are provided to private schools based on their enrollments. The grants are worth "at least 85 per cent of the cost of educating a pupil in the local municipal system, multiplied by the number of pupils in the school" (p. 80). These education grants have enabled private schools in Sweden to reduce substantially or, what is more frequent, to waive altogether their tuition fees. During the 1992-'93 school year, 90% of private schools participating in the program charged "no fees at all" (p. 80). As a result, in the program's first year, private school enrollments jumped 20% (p. 80). Keeping pace with the new-born demand for independent alternatives, the number of private schools in Sweden has grown rapidly — indeed, the number doubled in the first year of choice, according to Swedish officials (p. 80; see also Educational Freedom Report #7). Montessori and Waldorf schools have been quite popular with Swedish parents, and under choice their number is rising. The supply of religious schools, representing a variety of denominations, has increased greatly under Sweden's educational choice grant program. The OECD report notes especially the growing popularity of "schools of an Evangelical Christian character" (p. 83). A third type of private school that has begun to appear in Sweden with increasing frequency is known as an "ordinary" school (p. 83). Ordinary schools are independent community-based schools organized by parents and educators, often in response to decisions by municipal officials to close an existing school or to decline to open an additional public school. Clearly, school choice has prompted many Swedes to take a more active role — and in some cases a decisive role — in the education of their children. And just as clearly, choice has encouraged a multiplicity of educational options and methods to flourish, as the program intended, and shows that, under choice, educational supply is not static but dynamic.
Along with the 1992 program giving Swedes real opportunities to select private schools, policies have been adopted to increase diversity and choices within the public school system. Although rules vary from municipality to municipality, many now allow parents to choose from among local public schools, "with money following pupils..." (p. 79). While most Swedes continue to enroll their children in the nearest public school, "the power of choice... has started to change their relationship with that school" (p. 84). Schools have begun to open themselves to inspection by parents, and "[public school] principals in Stockholm say they are putting increasing stress on involvement with parents, knowing that they will be the best advertisers to attract more enrolments in the school" (p. 35). One of those principals observed, "It is of great value for a school to be examined," and another acknowledges that "competition improves the quality" of schools (p. 110).
THE EVIDENCE IS CLEAR
And so it is in more natural educational arenas, unencumbered
by EFM, where parents have choice without financial penalty. We hope these
snapshots encourage Report readers to study these nations' examples
more thoroughly. Then, "Go and do likewise" — in 50 states, many of which
are highly analogous to the nations here discussed.n
View
a different issue of the Freedom Report
Return to Blum Center
Home Page
|
The Blum Center grants full permission for all of its documents to be copied, in part or in whole, to extend the reach of the Center's messages and information. We appreciate it when our readers keep us apprised of state and national developments in the area of school choice, particularly legislative developments. Any Blum Center documents not available on our web page may be obtained by contacting us by telephone, fax, or mail. Virgil C. Blum Center for Parental Freedom in Education |
 |