Public school choice is being
called a lot of things. The concept of choice is not new, having been available
on a limited basis to those families able to live in or move to a desirable
school district, send their children to private schools, or negotiate for interdistrict
transfers. Magnet and alternative schools have provided another option. Still
another choice is that made by 25 to 50 percent of students nationwide to stop
attending any school. But the idea of giving parents nearly total freedom in
selecting their children's public schools is new.
Whatever else it may be, choice is hot, choice is controversial, and a number of states are keeping a close watch on Minnesota where choice activity began in 1985. Now, more than 20 states are considering or already have passed legislation to expand public school choice (Education Commission of the States (ECS), 1989).
Public school choice can take many forms. A program of choice can be available within school districts or across district boundaries; it can include some schools within a district or all schools. Choice can provide a "second chance" for students who have been unsuccessful in traditional settings; it can provide postsecondary enrollment options permitting students to be enrolled part-time at both their high school and a postsecondary institution or even full-time at a postsecondary facility (ECS, 1989).
Proponents say choice should be considered only a part of a total school improvement effort; opponents charge it's a politically expedient move to force consolidation. Those in favor of choice claim it results in higher test scores, fewer dropouts, more involved and satisfied parents. Critics maintain there is no proof of school improvement; there is danger of resegregation; and the gap between the affluent and the poor will only widen.
Raywid says three beliefs form the pillars of the choice idea: 1) no one best school exists for everyone; 2) deliberate school diversification is important to accommodating all students and enabling them to succeed; and 3) students will accomplish more and perform better in learning environments they have chosen than in those to which they simply have been assigned (in Nathan, 1989).
Joe Nathan, senior fellow at the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, believes carefully controlled competition can stimulate the education profession. Addressing the Illinois State Board of Education on February 16, 1989, Nathan outlined the following components critical to an effective public school choice program:
Critics of choice plans include the American Association of Schools Administrators (AASA). Responding to the May 31 issue of Leadership News to U.S. Education Secretary Lauro Cavazo's support for choice, AASA Executive Director Richard Miller said "The secretary's approach would do the least for those who have the least." The article further stated that in March AASA's Delegate Assembly rejected a proposed change to the association's resolutions that would have encouraged school choice within the restrictions of school board policies and state and federal laws.
Designs for Change, a Chicago-based group, analyzed choice program implementation in New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Boston in a two-year research study. Donald Moore, the group's executive director, was a participant in a recent national invitational conference in Minnesota on choice. At that conference, he reported that in the school systems studied, choice became a new method of sorting students. He said students considered most at risk of school failure had very limited opportunity to participate in popular options high schools and programs and were disproportionately concentrated in schools where fellow students were minority, low-income, and had a variety of learning problems.
From ensuring educational equity, to managing funding and transportation systems, to getting information out to the communities, decision makers have much to consider regarding public school choice. The implications and ramifications of choice programs are many, yet policymakers really have only one initial issue to address: will a choice program help the overall process of improving their schools?