Obama's Voucher Decision Troubling

This Washington Post piece lays out Secretary Education Arne Duncan's decision to end the Washington D.C. voucher program.

EDUCATION SECRETARY Arne Duncan has decided not to admit any new students
to the D.C. voucher program, which allows low-income children to attend private schools. The abrupt decision -- made a week after 200 families had been told that their children were being awarded scholarships for the coming fall -- comes despite a new study showing some initial good results for students in the program and before the Senate has had a chance to hold promised hearings. For all the talk about putting children first, it's clear that the special interests that have long opposed vouchers are getting their way.

Officials who manage the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program sent letters this week to parents notifying them that the scholarships of up to $7,500, were being
rescinded because of the decision by the Education Department. Citing the political uncertainty surrounding vouchers, a spokesperson for Mr. Duncan told us that it is not in the best interest of students and their parents to enroll them in a program that may end a year from now. Congress conditioned funding beyond the 2009-10 school year on reauthorization by Congress and approval by the D.C. Council. By presuming the program dead -- and make no mistake, that's the insidious effect of his bar on new enrollment -- Mr. Duncan makes it even more difficult for the program to get the fair hearing it deserves.

The decision is troubling for several reasons. First, as the article cites, there is evidence that the voucher program was improving education. This should surprise no one. Any program that expands school choice and increases competition leads directly to better education. The voucher program allows low income families vouchers to allow their kids to attend private schools. Giving them these vouchers allows parents access to more schools. Furthermore, the extra layer of competition forces public schools to increase their own performance in a way that their monopoly does NOT.

Of course, private schools employ teachers not in the teacher's unions, and so this is one of the many school choice programs opposed by the teacher's union. As I have pointed out, Arne Duncan has a history of taking on the teacher's union when CEO of the Chicago Public Schools. So, this action which is a clear lay down to the unions is more than troubling.

President Obama has an aggressive and sweeping education policy and there is much of it that I like. If it is to be successful, the administration would have to take on the teacher's union directly on several issues including merit pay, and the expansion of charter schools. There is a lot in President Obama's educational agenda that the teacher's union doesn't like. In order for him to succeed, he will soon enough have to take them on directly. If the administration laid down so weakly on the relatively unimportant issue of D.C. school vouchers, it doesn't bode well for the rest of his agenda.

President Obama Makes Broad Educational Strokes

Today, President Obama laid out his educational platform.

After weeks of pleasing Democrats by overturning policies set by the previous administration, President Barack Obama Tuesday for the first time confronted a powerful constituency in his own party: teachers’ unions.

Obama proposed spending additional money on effective teachers in up to 150 additional school districts, fulfilling a campaign promise that once earned him boos from members of the National Education Association.

“Good teachers will be rewarded with more money for improved student achievement, and asked to accept more responsibilities for lifting up their schools,” he said in a wide-ranging education speech before a meeting of the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Washington.

Obama’s embrace of merit pay won’t go over well among a group that often provides key funding and foot soldiers for Democratic campaigns.

Obama has laid out a lot of broad strokes and many of them I agree with. I am in great favor of merit pay. To me though, merit pay suffers from what Yogi Berra once referred to

in theory there's no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is

I agree with merit pay in theory. In practice though, I am weary of its application. How do we ensure that merit pay is applied in something that resembles fairness? How will merit pay be applied when comparing a teacher teaching in the inner city compared to one teaching in a posh suburb? So far, President Obama has not given any such specifics.

President Obama also made his intention to back the increase of charter schools. This is another policy that I support. That said, I believe that we shouldn't favor one alternative school over another. I would be much more in favor of expanding the D.C. voucher program to the entire nation than simply expanding charter schools. Vouchers give parents a choice, whatever they want. Expanding charter schools merely expands one alternative.

On the other hand, President Obama has also announced a major expansion of federal spending on education. This is a very dangerous endeavor. So far, it is unclear how all of this will be spent. Will it be spent to build more classrooms and increase salaries for teachers, or will it be spent to increase bureaucracy? Once again, President Obama has not been specific about how it will be spent.

Make no mistake, in this speech President Obama absolutely laid down a marker. He is ready to take on the teacher's union. All those that cynically claim that President Obama never bucks his party much acknowledge that he plans on taking on a major constituency on this issue. True, it's only one speech, but in his Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, he has an individual with scars of taking on the teacher's union.

So far, President Obama has my support on his education policy, however he's going to need to fill in the blanks soon, or he will have a lot of good ideas with no practical way of implementing them.