Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Tag

school choice

Is SB1647 (Education Voucher) Now Only For Homeschooling Families? An Analysis.

Often, it takes hours to really read a bill because it’s important to look up associated laws and terms that may not be obvious to the reader. Then it requires reading passages over and over and comparing them to other passages to make sure of context. Truly, to do it right, each bill requires a substantial time investment to read properly. And to think – legislators must read hundreds of bills during just one half  of session alone…

I am not going to paste the entire bill into this post. Please find it here and download the version that was posted March 3rd, labeled, “Senate Floor Version March 2, 2022”.

PLEASE NOTE: ROPE will never be for an education voucher system – only a tax credit system. This analysis simply explains the major issues we’ve found in the bill.

*Page 1: Section 1B: “by directing State Aid for which each child is eligible to the education provider of their choice”. 

Page 16: Section 5 lines 3 and 4 – fund is to contain “appropriations, gifts, grants, donations, and bequests”.  

This is a mixing of public and private funds and certainly not simply “State Aid” making these sentences inconsistent.

*Page 2: Section 2 A3: “OEA means the account in which funds are deposited by the Agency…” 

Page 7: Section 2G1: “The Agency shall notify the State Department of Education and request calculation of the amount of State Aid for which the student is eligible.”

Page8: Section 2 G2: “The State Department of Education on a monthly basis shall transfer to the Agency for deposit into the OEA Revolving Fund”

Page 15: Section 5 creates the Oklahoma Empowerment Account Revolving Fund to which “All monies accruing to the credit of the fund are hereby appropriated and may be budgeted and expended by the office of the Agency (State Treasurer) for the purpose of implementing the provisions of the OEA”. Monies “received by the office of the State Treasurer from appropriations, gifts, grants, donations, and bequests”.

Another apparent inconsistency: The Agency deposits funds, the OSDE transfers funds, “appropriations (State Aid?), gifts, grants, donations, and bequests” are placed in this account. 

*Page 2: Section 2 A4: “Education Service Provider means a person, business, public school district, public charter school, magnet school, institution within the Oklahoma State System of Higher Education or organization that receives payments from a parent directing an OEA…”

Why would the OEA pay a PUBLIC school for any service? Wasn’t the idea for kids to go OUTSIDE the public school? So this bill uses state and private funds to pay public schools? Why? For what function?

*Page 2: Section 2A5: “Eligible student means a resident of this state who is eligible to enroll in a public school in this state…” 

“Eligible student shall not mean a student who is educated pursuant to the other means of education provided for in subsection A of Section 10-105 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes”.

An “eligible student” then is: 1. Any student who can go to public school 2. Whose family income is 300% of free/reduced lunch price and 3. Not educated by “other means”.

*Page 3: Section 2A6: “Empowerment student” is an OEA eligible student. 

 Page 5: Section 2Cb – (parent must sign an agreement upon application for the OEA to):

– b. not enroll eligible student as a full-time student in a public school district, public charter school or magnet school AFTER acceptance of an OEA

– d. not accept a scholarship from the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for Students with Disabilities Program while participating in OEA

Page 5: Section 2D – “Nothing in this act shall be construed to require that an empowerment student be enrolled full time or part time in a private school or a nonpublic online school”.

Let’s review: to be a student ‘eligible’ for the OEA, that student 1. can’t be enrolled in public school 2. can’t be a student in the LNH scholarship 3. isn’t required to be enrolled at a private school 

Granted, 2D is so poorly written it’s hard to make heads or tails of, but if it’s saying that an OEA Empowerment student isn’t required to be in private or non-public online school or public school, or an LNH scholarship student – the ONLY category left would have to be HOMESCHOOL student. I would doubt that’s what’s meant, but that appears to be what was said.

This bill as written, then, creates two types of ‘homeschool students’: those who get state funds and those who “Constitutionally educate” their children and don’t take state funds – but it doesn’t appear to apply to private schools.

This is a HUGE issue. EPIC (public school at home) has already muddied the water in the mind of the public as to what Constitutional “by other means” homeschoolers are (parents pay taxes for public schools and assume all economic responsibility for the raising and education of their children). How in the world would anyone be able to tell which homeschoolers are NOT taking public funds and which ones WERE?  And how would a homeschooler that takes public funds be any different than an EPIC user now? While this may seem like a nothing to most people, once a form of homeschooling is identified by state law and regulated, it will be very easy to regulate the other – it’s precedent. To date, homeschooling in Oklahoma has been so successful and unprecedented because of the “by other means” language in the state Constitution, which has NEVER been defined and therefore very hard to be regulated. 

*Page 3: Section 2A8b: Qualified expenses – “tuition and/or fees for non-public online learning programs”

2A8d: “services contracted for and provided by a public school district…”

Why would the state provide state funds to send an Empowerment Student to an already-funded state school when the idea was to remove the student from a public school? 

*Page 4: Section 2A8k: “tuition, fees, instructional materials, and assessment fees for a curriculum or program offered by a technology center school 

Page 5: Section 2A8m: “tuition and fees for concurrent enrollment at an institution with the Oklahoma State System of Higher Education.

This seems like an open door for fraud. Students in Oklahoma under 18 may attend technology center schools without paying for the service. Universities charge for books and fees, but not tuition for concurrent coursework.

 *Page 7: Section 2F: “Any unused funds remaining in the OEA at the end of the applicable calendar year shall be remitted to the General Revenue Fund.”

Page 8: Section 2H: “An education service provider shall not share, refund or rebate any amount of an OEA with the parent or empowerment student. A refund or rebate for goods or services purchased with an OEA shall be credited to the OEA.”

Why shouldn’t ANY unused or rebated funds return to the OEA? The General Revenue Fund is a ‘slush fund’ that can be used for any reason. Why take money from the state coffers and then not return it to the account from which it was to be distributed in the first place? 

*Page 9: Section 3 C: “participation in the OEA program shall have the same effect as a parental revocation of consent pursuant to 20 U.S.C. Sections 1414(a)(1)(D) and 1414(C) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act”…

It appears that parents who take the voucher may not have their child evaluated for a disability while on the program. I assume because the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship already covers disabled children.

*Page 10: Section 3 F, 1, 2: All of this information from lines 12-23 appear to be creating the Digital Wallet.

ROPE has had major concerns with the Digital Wallet program. We believe it pulls kids into the State Longitudinal Data Base where reams of data are collected and sent to many, many state agencies and it’s a perfect place for implementation of ESG (social credit) scores. 

Superintendent Ryan Walters is not only the state’s Secretary of Education, but he runs an organization called Every Kid Counts OK (ECKO). During the pandemic, Governor Stitt applied for federal CARES ACT funds. Eight million dollars was funneled through ECKO using a digital wallet private vendor called “Class Wallet“, so the program has already been beta tested. Now that they’ve used the program and a private vendor to take payments, it appears the next step is to take the program state wide as the backbone of an educational voucher system.

Since federal money was funneled through a private organization, there is no direct oversight set in place for the movement of those funds at the state level. This is not at all a transparent way to handle tax dollars at any level – but then again, creating an entirely new bureaucracy in the State Treasurer’s office isn’t the way to make government smaller, more local and more responsive either.

Early in the session this year, ROPE noticed that Representative Martinez in the House and Senator Quinn in the Senate, both had “Creating the Digital Wallet Program Act” bills. We went to both authors, explained our issues and asked them to please not run the bills. Both actually agreed, yet we were stunned to see Senator Quinn’s on the Senate Ed Committee roster 2/22/22.

That afternoon, I made a phone call to our Secretary of Education, explained our concerns to him and asked that Oklahoma not go down the digital wallet road. Fortunately, Senator Quinn’s bill was pulled from committee and Representative Martinez’ bill was not heard. 

In politics, however, those with an agenda ALWAYS have a fail-safe. It appears SB1647 contains the language that is that fail-safe for this program.

In closing, though I read – and marked up every line of the bill – I didn’t cover every line of the bill here – I just stuck to the issues of greatest concern to us.

Since we have begun lobbying against this particular bill, our group – and me personally – have been the brunt of numerous character assasinations – I’m a liar, I don’t care about others, I’m an elitist, I want kids trapped in failing schools. 

Certainly, this is disheartening and frustrating, but no matter what dissenters say, our stance is defined upon the following three concepts – the same three upon which our organization has stood from the beginning; 

1. Personal Responsibility 

2. Smaller government 

3. Individual Liberty

SB1647 grows government, infringes on the individual liberty of those who have taken the personal responsibility to care for their own children to the point of paying twice (taxes and tuition) and takes responsibility from churches and individuals to help those who need help. The concept is wrong and the bill is poorly written. That’s really about all there is to it.

Jenni White

Education Director, ROPE

1

Is Jeb Bush Behind Oklahoma’s Plan To Insert The Benevolent Hand Of Government Into Homeschooling? It would appear so.

Few ideas for ‘big’ legislation DON’T come as boilerplate ideas from national think tanks. Many times, though they may work in other states, they are not appropriate for Oklahoma, yet legislators bring them into the capitol because of the hand that offered them.

[Position Statement: ROPE firmly supports Parental Choice in Education as personified by charter schools, online learning, homeschooling and private school. We also support tax credits and tax credit scholarships to help families who need assistance with finding the education that is right for their child/children. We do not, however, support vouchers – money provided by the state injected into the private solutions of homeschool and private school.]

During my daily research reading, I recently stumbled onto an article; “Alaska legislators’ education bills include one to give state funds to some students in homeschool and private school“. Here is a paragraph that interested me:

Another bill would provide public funding for students who are homeschooled or in private school. Students would be eligible for $5,930 per year in scholarships if they have disabilities, attend a “low-performing school” or have a parent in the military, among other criteria.

Followed by this:

Gillham said he got the idea for that bill from a summit he attended last November in Florida, held by ExcelInEd, an organization started by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

Here’s the ENORMOUS problem with this: Jeb Bush pushed Common Core throughout the nation and Oklahoma though it was a decided federal takeover of state schools. In fact, Bush’s Common Core Problem was thought to be but one of the reasons Bush fell so far behind former President Trump in the 2016 elections – well that, and his firm position as a member of the Republican establishment – the very team Trump was sent onto the field to beat.

THE JEB BUSH OKLAHOMA LEGACY

Throughout the tenure of former State Superintendent Janet Barresi, Bush was a prominent figure in Oklahoma education ‘reform’. 

In 2013 Bush sent a letter to legislators (while ROPE, other organizations and parents worked hard to push back against the nationalization of state standards under one umbrella), saying:

“There is a lot of misinformation flying around about Common Core State Standards. Below is a roundup of recent articles, opinion pieces and posts by policy advisors, debunking Common Core myths and highlighting voices in the transition to these new standards. You’ll also find quotes from teachers weighing in on Common Core and see how state and business leaders are supporting the higher standards.”

Yes, what in the world do parents know Mr. Bush, when state and business leaders support Common Core? Ever the elitist, Bush has always been about POLICY over PARENTS – wining and dining legislators as he works to help ‘the little people’ he loves so much.

That same year, as a result of FOI requests by In The Public Interest, it was shown that Bush, Chiefs For Change and Governor Fallin’s office essentially colluded to ram Bush-driven policy down the throats of Oklahomans – many of whom were simply parents trying to protect their kids from having to  dumbed-down standards that have now been shown not to have produced any meaningful increase in test scores in the states where the program was adopted. 

During 2014 (though Common Core was repealed from state law that year), while Governor Mary Fallin was head of the National Governor’s Association and Superintendent Baressi was a member of Bush’s organization “Chief’s For Change”, Baressi, a State Board Member and then-Senator-turned-current-candidate-for-State-Treasurer Clark Jolley (a co-author of Oklahoma’s Common Core bill) all attended Bush’s National Summit in Boston. {Incidentally, as an aside, it is a bit interesting that Senator Treat’s SB1647, money is to be dispersed through a department inside the treasury…}

BUSH’S ORGANIZATION EMBRACES LEFTISTS RIGHT, AND WELL, LEFT

Granted, education policy should necessarily be bipartisan in a perfect world, but an organization who invites people like Melinda Gates, former Obama Education Secretary Arne Duncan (who attributed opposition to the Common Core to “white suburban moms” upset that their children weren’t as “brilliant” as they thought they were) and David Coleman (the author of the Common Core pictured below in a slide from one of my videos on Common Core) to speak at their conferences and colludes with states to override the will of parents on education policy, should NOT be in a position of INFLUENCE WITH OKLAHOMA LEGISLATORS.

Unfortunately, it seems as though we’re seeing near repeat of the Common Core battle here this session (2022) over Governor Stitt’s desire to increase school choice by offering vouchers (state money) to PRIVATE EDUCATION SOLUTIONS (home and private schools).

GOVERNOR STITT INVITED JEB BUSH TO SPEAK TO LEGISLATORS ABOUT EDUCATION REFORM

In May of 2021, Governor Stitt invited “his friend” Bush to visit with members of the legislature and others – including Robert Ruiz of Oklahoma’s Choice Matters and Secretary of State Ryan Walters, who is also the Executive Director of an organization called Every Kid Counts – about ‘education reform’. 

Apparently, the feeling is mutual for the Governor’s friend, who touted the Governor’s recent State of The State Address on his ExelInEd website.

Here’s an even more frustrating thing. While visiting the ExelInEd website, I found a piece from late last year which says this:

Look at Oklahoma. The state stands out in the NAPCS analysis for having the largest growth in charter school enrollment by both percentage gains and by absolute number. The number of new charter students in Oklahoma alone accounts for 15 percent of all new charter students in the nation.

It then goes on to say this: 

When families face huge challenges they don’t wait for solutions. Again, look at the homeschool numbers from the US Census Bureau. Families didn’t wait for policymakers to adjust the boundaries or enrollment caps in 2020. They created their own path forward. Such policies as arbitrary enrollment caps and exclusive school boundaries carry a heavy irony. By protecting a system that limits flexibility and mobility, policymakers encourage families to create their own solutions outside the system, thereby endangering the very system they are trying to protect.

WHAT? Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but it sounds to me like this policy article from ExelInEd basically says that LEGISLATORS SHOULDN’T WANT FAMILIES CREATING THEIR OWN EDUCATIONAL SOLUTIONS OUTSIDE THE SYSTEM because it endangers the choice systems they’re trying to create!?

WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?

So, let’s think on this. If the government infuses money into PRIVATE education solutions, the entire enterprise ceases to be private – homeschoolers (and private-schoolers alike) who ‘use’ state-provided money for homeschooling will – at a minimum – be pulled into the state data collection system when there’s likely NO DATA ON THEM IN THE SYSTEM PREVIOUSLY. 

Gosh – to put the old tin foil hat on here – if the state’s elitists do away with ALL private education solutions by inserting the hand of government to the point where all students become part of the system like they began with Common Core – how close are we to the Great Reset and One World Government?

Yes, that was a leap, but let’s look at some facts:

  • Jeb Bush is a member of the BIG GOVERNMENT Bush “Legacy”. His father gave us Agenda 21 and his brother gave us The Patriot Act (government surveillance means nothing if you’re not doing anything wrong).
  • Bush has always stood firmly on the side of government-backed national standards (ie; Common Core). Just internet search “Jeb Bush and Common Core”. You’ll find pages and pages with the same theme.
  • Jeb Bush has a 10-year legacy with Michael Bloomberg, owner of Bloomberg media which is a partner in the World Economic Forum – the organization peddling the Great Reset.
  • And then there’s this: “The 3rd largest FEC fine in history was just levied and it’s against someone you might not expect. The Jeb Bush Super PAC that eventually morphed into a prominent Never Trump effort, “Right to Rise,” has been caught red-handed accepting an illegal $1.3M donation from a Chinese corporation.”

Truly, why in the world would anyone in Oklahoma government billing themselves as a conservative hear a word Jeb Bush has to say? 

What does it say that Oklahoma legislators and elected officials seem to have such a love affair with this man? 

Why would Oklahoma Republicans put ‘blinders’ on and go along with ANY bills/laws/ideas simply because ‘Republicans’ say it’s a great idea – especially without researching first? 

Hopefully, these questions are really good wake up questions for us all to ask ourselves NOW.

0

Governor Stitt’s State of The State – Public Education – Where We Can And Can’t Agree

I would like to say this as an opener to this piece: This is not a rebuke of Governor Stitt – there are many things our Governor has done of which we all approve – but there is a sincere lack of agreement in the area of ‘School Choice’ that needs to be addressed. I am not criticizing to criticize, but to make points I think EVERYONE – especially Republicans – should think about before blind acceptance of the concept of state-sponsored ‘school choice’ through yet another voucher system.

Here is the transcribed version of Governor Stitt’s State of The State Address. I am only addressing the part of his speech regarding government education.

This is the section in which the Governor addressed Government Education – I have bolded the sections with which we take exception – 

I have bolded and italicized the popular ‘buzz words’ used to create emotion around the topic of ‘school choice’ –

My comments are enclosed in parentheses.

(1.) We provided record funding for all public schools, including charter and rural schools. 

These initial investments were good first steps for Oklahoma’s education turnaround, but there’s much more to do. 

(1a.) Just 15% of Oklahoma high school graduates are ready for college in English, math, reading and science — less than one out of five. We can do better than 47th in the nation when it comes to our kids 

(Democrats say this every time they want more funding for schools). 

We’ve tiptoed around the edges for far too long. It’s clear the status quo isn’t working. We need to take bold steps. It will take courage, and it will take a desire to make a generational impact. This is our moment! 

(There is always an emergency that requires government to act – Nancy Pelosi perfected this concept with ObamaCare.)

(2.) We know education is not one-size-fits-all, and I pledge to support any legislation that gives parents more school choice, because in Oklahoma, we need to fund students, not systems!  ProTem Treat filed a bill called the Oklahoma Empowerment Act. It makes sure that money follows the student, and it would make us a national leader in school choice. 

(Oklahomans were told this about the Lyndsey Nicole Henry Scholarship and our creation of charter schools, yet, we are STILL not apparently a ‘national leader in school choice’. When will that come? How many times will we be told this very thing? 

Let me be clear: Oklahoma has a lot of great schools, but the results don’t lie. We need new ideas, more options, and higher standards for our kids 

(Again, how many ‘new’ ideas are there? The more the government micromanages, the worse schools get because of the layers and layers of laws and rules).

This is just common sense. 

(I’m missing the common sense part I guess.)

(3) We have a duty to make sure nothing stands in the way of an Oklahoma student achieving their full potential. There are roadblocks – literally. State law creates artificial barriers for school districts that don’t put our students first. 

(Wasn’t this supposed to be solved that with last session’s bill to allow students to transfer to any school – even though the school to which the student would transfer has ways around taking them – all the way back to HB1017? No unintended consequences even today from that bill that just HAD to be passed to ‘fix’ Oklahoma 🙄.)

Our school transportation formula is outdated and broken. We desperately need to modernize it. 

(What does ‘modernize’ mean? It is a word without definition in the government setting. Here, the word ‘modernize’ can only mean spending more money and/or ‘growing government’. Taxpayers should REQUIRE definitions for terms attached to their tax dollars.)  

(4) Another roadblock in our current system keeps some of the best teachers out of the classroom. Right now, some talented teachers choose to leave the classroom to make more money as an administrator. Oklahoma students can’t be the best without the best teachers. That’s why I’m proposing matching funds so that our best teachers can make six figure salaries and stay in the classroom. 

(What criteria will make a ‘best’ teacher? Will that require creation of a commission or other new expansion of government? Republican Governors have said this ad Infinium, yet the only thing developed to ‘grade’ teachers was Obama’s ‘Teacher/Leader Effectiveness’ program instituted by former State Superintendent Janet Barresi now shown to be a failure in every state in which it was implemented.*)

It’s the right thing to do for our teachers and for our kids! 

(How do we know? What metrics are used to make this statement? Every year, Oklahoma continues and doubles-down on failed systems – stacking up laws and programs government schools should follow – yet we still languish at the ‘bottom’ of the NAEP – National Assessment of Educational Progress. This comment means absolutely nothing if not backed up by some kind of plan that doesn’t involve more failed government interventionist policies.)

Another way to support Oklahoma educators is to protect their paychecks from union bosses. The same unions that have pushed critical race theory and school closures intimidate new teachers into handing over part of their salaries. Liberal unions want to keep a stranglehold on their cut of teacher pay. Enough is enough! Every other profession lets you opt-in to health insurance and other benefits at work every year. Unions should be opt-in, not opt-out! 

(ABSOLUTELY, but why – after years of lip service to this idea – has it NOT BEEN DONE?)

1. WHY DOES THE LEGISLATURE CONTINUE TO FUND FAILING PUBLIC SCHOOLS? 

Seriously. Our Governor appears proud of all the funding poured into government schools but then directly follows that statement with DATA indicating that the majority of Oklahoma students are NOT READY FOR COLLEGE.

The obvious takeaway here then, is that the State Legislature is filled with people who either don’t see connections (more money doesn’t equal results) or are sadly politically weak-kneed and refuse to buck the bullies that run the Leftist indoctrination centers we call ‘public’ schools. If there was enough political will in our state capitol, the State School Grade Card (created because of strings to federal government funding) would be used to determine failing schools and some kind of monetary sanction would be determined and prescribed until the school improved the way they educate the pupils entrusted them, despite the kicking, screaming and fit throwing from the public school ed bullies, instead of growing government or transferring the process of taxpayer accountability for failing public schools to parents accepting state funds. Now THAT would be accountability!

2. PUBLIC OPTIONS BECOME POLITICAL FOOTBALLS. 

If you know education isn’t a one-size-fits-all endeavor, why make all private solutions (private and homeschools) public ones by infusing them with taxpayer dollars?

Doesn’t that create yet another extension of an already-broken system? 

One major talking point for the bill has been, “This is voluntary, no one has to take the money” yet Senator Greg Treat, during his defense of SB1647 in the Senate Education Committee (where the bill only passed 8-7 with Treat and Majority Floor leader McCortney’s extra-committee voting) said numerous times that ‘state’ (government) money necessarily has to come with strings and that we couldn’t be worried about what might happen in the future. Hmmm…isn’t that why we have SO MANY LAWS with UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES?

Oklahoma’s Lindsey Nicole Henry’s (LNH) voucher scholarship (signed in 2011) has been adjudicated in court NUMEROUS times because it became a political football for the Left to use against the Right to sabotage the program. 

Most recently, former Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter issued an opinion regarding an attempt to force private schools taking students on LNH scholarships to add ‘sex’ to their state-required discrimination policy.

Oklahoma Council for Public Affairs writes: 

However, several years after the passage of the LNH law—after State Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister became head of the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE)—officials at OSDE rewrote the regulations governing the LNH program to also bar discrimination based on sexual orientation and religious affiliation. Those revisions were then approved by the State Board of Education, which at that time consisted of Hofmeister and members appointed by then-Gov. Mary Fallin.

The revised regulations effectively required private religious schools that adhere to traditional Christian teachings to nonetheless hire atheists and abandon student code-of-conduct requirements regarding sexuality and marriage if they accepted LNH students.

In November 2020, the revised OSDE regulations led the State Board of Education—by that time consisting mostly of Gov. Kevin Stitt appointees who were not involved in the earlier revision process—to initially reject the application of one private Christian school that sought to serve LNH students.

So, if a REPUBLICAN-appointed board is going to apply Obama-orginated Title IX guidance to LNH-required anti-discrimination law (42 U.S.C. section 2000d), and a subsequent REPUBLICAN-appointed board acted on that change, what would happen under a DEMOCRAT Governor-appointed board?

Though AG Hunter’s opinion states that the State Board “lacked the statutory authority to impose additional requirements on participating schools” (among others) and Hofmeister said of the decision that the Board would “move forward in accordance with the opinion“, an opinion has only advisory effect – another Board may see things another way.

This goes for federal law as well. In 2016, the heads of the Department of Justice and the US Department of Education Office For Civil Rights sent a Dear Colleague letter to all state schools that they were adding transgender rights to Title IX law. Let’s not quibble about the fact that these Dear Colleague letters mean little to nothing, because states and schools have a history of following them like Supreme Court decisions. During his presidency, Trump rescinded this ‘guidance’ only to have Biden reinstate it not long after his inauguration. This introduced HUGE amounts of confusion into a system already generally overregulated and confused.

Other than being classified as extremists – which has virtually always been the case with citizens who buck existing systems and authoritarians – homeschooling in Oklahoma is conducted according to the Constitution with ZERO state administration of any kind, creating ZERO room for politicization such as this.

3. NO. GOVERNMENT CAN’T COVER ALL THE BASES IT WOULD TAKE TO MAKE SURE A STUDENT REACHES THEIR FULL POTENTIAL.

I understand the sentiment – I do. No one wants a ‘child left behind‘ but the amount of red tape we got when the Federal government tried to achieve that goal could circle the earth twice.

What ends up happening with this kind of thinking is not that the bottom gets elevated, but the top gets drug down. It’s like the ‘even the playing field’ idea – it’s a socialist notion. 

You can’t continually take from others with more and give it to those who have less because eventually you have a society with no middle class (a CLASS-LESS society), which is what’s happening now.

If parents themselves won’t step up and take control over their child’s education, you can’t legislate or incentivize them to do so. I’ve written about this numerous, numerous times from the perspective of an education policy researcher and that of a former teacher. 

We need to stop this kind of ‘equity’ thinking and concentrate on helping the majority of kids while letting non-profits and those who wish to volunteer their time (and there are lots of those thank goodness!) to help those that are – for whatever reason – not in a position to help themselves.

4. TEACHERS LEAVE THE CLASSROOM FOR A LOT OF REASONS, BUT MOSTLY BECAUSE ADMINISTRATORS WON’T ADMINISTRATE

How is government going to fix that? Administrators are already supposed to administrate, yet there are at least two bills I’ve seen in the legislature this year adding yet another law to Title 70 TO MAKE ADMINISTRATORS DO THEIR JOBS. How can adding yet another law fix that?

My contention has always been that the Conservative option is always the best – our state should stop writing school law, repeal a lot of existing school law and GET OUT OF THE WAY OF COMMUNITY CONTROL! 

Why do you suppose charters aren’t working the way they were at the beginning of the charter movement? We legislated them to death too! I worked for a charter school that was GREAT when it started only to watch it get worse and worse every year to the point that it was no different than the neighborhood school.

In fact, I left teaching for MANY of the reasons given in this blog (none of which was money-related). Essentially, I had no control over my classroom anymore via ineffective administration, over testing and overbearing parents. 

INSTEAD OF STATE-SPONSORED VOUCHERS, LET’S:

1. Cut Bureaucracy Don’t Add To It – as ROPE showed with Common Core, Turning Around Failing Schools,  and all the other pillars of Obama’s Education Reform system – BUREAUCRACY DOESN’T WORK, it simply impedes the process. 

Instead of ADDING laws, REPEAL laws relating to government education. Webs of laws entangle and confuse those they are meant to control. 

Republicans talk endlessly about ‘local control’ but rarely REMOVE state laws and mandates to allow schools to function according to community needs as addressed by local school boards. Could this be part of the reason parents finally quit participating in the process until recently? 

In fact, it could be argued successfully that part of the reason school boards stopped addressing (or listening to) the needs of parents is that parent desires are often stymied or take a back seat to the need (or drive) to receive funding by following state and federal laws – the latter of which are not even Constitutional. As Republicans say they believe – but rarely follow – THE LESS GOVERNMENT the MORE INNOVATION, POSSIBILITY and OPPORTUNITY.

2. Provide tax credits for parents wanting to use other systems – Instead of taking money from parents and then ‘giving’ it back to them with strings created by the need for the state to be accountable to the money it gives parents – simply DON’T TAKE IT FROM PARENTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. 

This seems up front enough but then the argument becomes – “what about parents who don’t pay into the system”?

To take from others to give to those without is REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH – something, again, Republicans are ostensibly not for. It used to be that the poor were cared for by churches and communities – have churches shrunk because they have nothing to do now that the state does all their work for them? 

Once the government got involved – thank you very much LBJ and your “war on poverty” – (More than 100 million people, or one-third of Americans, received some type of welfare aid, at an average cost of $9,000 per recipient. If converted into cash, this spending was five times what was needed to eliminate all poverty in the U.S.) the number of those in poverty skyrocketed because there was no reason to remove oneself from their impoverished circumstances if the government was simply going to ‘help’ you by giving you money.

3. Provide tax credit scholarships for taxpayers wanting a tax deduction and parents wishing to apply for a scholarship. Oklahoma has the Lyndsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for children with disabilities to attend schools other than their failing neighborhood school. Why not create another tax deduction scholarship for those who would like to pay in to ‘sponsor’ needy students?

4. Stop Funding Failing Schools – truly, what difference does it make if you take the money from the school to follow the kid when government schools STILL have no incentive to get better? Eventually – even with the benevolent hand of government guiding us – you’re eventually going to RUN OUT OF SCHOOLS TO RUN TO! 

————————————

*The evaluation, Improving Teaching Effectiveness: Final Report (587 pages, PDF), found that while the sites succeeded in implementing new measures of effectiveness and used them to inform a range of personnel decisions, the initiative did not lead to an overall improvement in student achievement or graduation rates. Although interim evaluations as of 2013-14 had found small improvements in grades 3 through 8 reading scores at some schools, the final report concludes that, as of the spring of 2015, the initiative had had no significant impact on students’ reading or math outcomes. https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/gates-teacher-effectiveness-initiative-fell-short-study-finds

0

Oklahoma Conservative PAC Arguments For “Money Follows The Kid” (Voucher) ‘School Choice’ Option Are Wrong-Headed and NOT CONSERVATIVE

Being a conservative is often a lonely position. Asking people to take responsibility for THEMSELVES to prevent government intervention is not an easy sell in a world where all the creature comforts of human existence are but a moment away. After being attacked personally by OCPAC for an opinion Reclaim Oklahoma Parent Empowerment corporately holds, a rebuttal is in order.

In full disclosure, several members of ROPE met with OCPAC President Bob Linn February 8th to discuss our concerns with SB1647, during which time Mr. Linn admitted he had not read the bill. 

Let’s be very clear: NO, ROPE does not support the movement of tax dollars (government money – vouchers) to private or homeschools. 

Here are the ways ROPE SUPPORTS PARENT EDUCATIONAL CHOICE:

  1. Individual and family tax credits for home or private school. Oklahoma doesn’t have this option currently, but there are several bills in the legislature this year to do so – SB1471 – and several modifications to increase the EOES (below)
  2. Tax credit scholarships created by private individuals and corporations that make a donation to a scholarship set up for families in need to use for a tax credit (Oklahoma already has the Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship program that fits this bill.) The EOES supports both students in failing schools AND low income families.
  3. Money following the child throughout the public (government) school system from failing schools (open transfers)
  4. Creation of charter and other ‘extra’-public schools of which Oklahoma now has 30 (OSDE charter school report)

Here is the email sent by OCPAC on Valentine’s day 2022, to which I respond using quotes from the email. 

“The passage of SB1647 is a must and will give authority to the parent to direct their child’s education.”

This is incorrect. Oklahoma parents have more authority to direct their child’s education than many other states. Parents in Oklahoma can: 

  1. constitutionally home school their children in any way they please
  2. send their children to an Oklahoma private school – many of which provide scholarships for needy families on their own (Casady, Heritage Hall, Oklahoma Christian School, Holland Hall, etc.)
  3. send their children to a public online charter school like EPIC, which provides tax dollars to parents who would like to school their children at home using EPIC’s curriculum
  4. send their children to a brick and mortar charter school (link above)
  5. begin saving their money in a state-sponsored 529 program when their children are born to use for either college or a private K12 school
  6. use the EOES mentioned above to attend a private school
  7. transfer to another public school – if allowed by the school to which the transfer would be made
  8. use the Lindsey Nicole Henry scholarship (voucher) for students with disabilities to attend a private school 

“Education dollars are fiduciary funds”

The term ‘fiduciary’ comes from the word ‘trust’. A ‘fiduciary’ responsibility imposes a restriction that money given (or taken) is used in good faith and in the best interest of the owner of the money. That’s all that means. 

The government has no money it doesn’t forcibly take from citizens (people who don’t pay their taxes go to jail or lose their property), so all ‘government’ dollars are tax dollars, taken from the people. Yes, government has a fiduciary responsibility for those funds, but how many times have those been overlooked and money spent wastefully and fraudulently? Who is NOT familiar with wasteful government spending? Tom Coburn was.

Bob uses Social Security as an example. This is a sad example of ‘fiduciary’ funds. Though I’ve paid into the SS system, it has been raided over and over by government overreach to the point that few of us my age will have funds to use for retirement. What happened to the government’s ‘fiduciary’ responsibility there? Clue: GOVERNMENT DOESN’T CARE ABOUT ‘FIDUCIARY’ RESPONSIBILITY or public schools wouldn’t be the problem they are now. If government cared, they would have appreciated their fiduciary responsibility and made schools responsible for not educating students all along.

TJ Schmidt, an attorney with Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), does not agree with Bob’s assessment and says that, because all money comes from taxpayers, any government money taken from citizens but then given back – as in to home or privately school children (voucher) – comes with the need to make those funds ACCOUNTABLE to taxpayers. 

Here is a PERFECT example from Arizona, a state where government money is given to homeschooling families. CLUTCHING PEARLS…how could it be that a government audit found $700,000 abused by ‘homeschooling’ parents? 

When citizens are ‘incentivized’ to use government money to do something they don’t have the personal responsibility to do on their own, there will be fraud – it’s simply human nature. 

In fact, my contention is that parents who want to homeschool do so to ESCAPE government entrapment and don’t want ANY government involvement. Parents who want government money to school at home use a system like EPIC where government money pays for curricula to be used at home. Data from Arizona indicates I’m correct.

Arizona has the Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (much like SB1647) allowing state money to go to numerous types of schooling including private or homeschooling. Please note several things:

  • parents funding private school OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS were the happiest of all
  • though polling shows 29% of Arizonans would use private school and 14% homeschool, the actual numbers are MUCH LESS – 6% and 2% of Arizonans actually use the GOVERNMENT programs respectively and Arizona was one of the earliest adopters of ‘school choice’ programs

In fact, EdChoice tells us that 23% of Arizona’s students are eligible for vouchers and tax credit programs and 100% of students are eligible for a tax credit scholarship, but ONLY 7% OF ALL ARIZONANS USE ALL PROGRAMS TOGETHER and that’s the best record in the nation! 

No data had been collected on the Lindsey Nicole Henry voucher for children with disabilities for 10 years, until last year, providing no previous accountability to taxpayers for the program.

Data for 2021 indicate that after a 31 million dollar investment over the 10 years, only 1,135 students took advantage of the program in 2021 and of those that reported their status (112), only 32% (36) were economically disadvantaged.

“We have denied an equal playing field” to children sentenced to a failing neighborhood school

How have we done that? I just cited 8 ways parents can direct the education of their children and showed that, when offered, most parents don’t take advantage of voucher programs or tax credit scholarships. 

But beyond that, since when did a ‘conservative’ talking point become ‘equaling the playing field’? 

I searched the term ‘equaling the playing field’ and found this slide show about how COMMON CORE equaled the playing field for all kids. Now that’s great! But, as we said it would for YEARS, Common Core – making every child have the same curricula across the US – FAILED SPECTACULARLY, never amounting to any kind of positive change on student achievement of any kind.

CONSERVATIVES DO NOT USE GOVERNMENT TO ‘EQUAL PLAYING FIELDS’, we want the government to stay in its own lane and allow PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND THE MARKET TO CREATE CHOICE.

“Those who oppose educational choice where money follows the child display an arrogant and callous disposition to the less fortunate”

Gosh, I guess, people like Ben Carson, whose single mother worked three jobs to allow Ben and his brother a great education and Mark Robinson (Lt. Gov. of North Carolina) whose family was dirt poor but made sure he and his siblings were well educated have it all wrong. Government should have come in and incentivized their transformation – because government ALWAYS produces programs that work. 

I find it sad that a Christian Conservative, would – essentially – call those who want LESS government and more personal responsibility ‘arrogant and callous’. 

In Matthew 26:11, Jesus tells us that the poor will always be with us. 

Leviticus 23:22 quotes the Lord as saying, “When you harvest the crops of your land, do not harvest the grain along the edges of your fields, and do not pick up what the harvesters drop. Leave it for the poor and the foreigners living among you.” 

In other words, INDIVIDUALS, left part of the harvest for the poor to harvest themselves. The Romans taxed the Jews horribly, but their religion told them it was THEIR responsibility to help the poor. 

As PragerU said in a recent Instagram post, “Jesus advises us to be of “generous spirit” – to show kindness, to assist the widow and the orphan. But he clearly means this to be our responsibility.”

Conservatives are those who promote LESS GOVERNMENT, PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, PRIVATE COMPETITION and INDIVIDUAL GIVING.

“More than that, they also fail to understand that no parent should see their educational dollars forced into the government’s failed model of education.”

Nope, we get it – we just want it done THE RIGHT WAY – via tax credit and tax credit scholarship. Both would remove money from public education, but do so BEFORE the money is taken by the government in the first place. 

Here’s something Bob doesn’t apparently understand – the legislature appropriates education dollars. Why don’t we ALL advocate that, instead of giving more and more tax dollars to FAILING government education, the legislature use the grade card the State developed to get ESSA funds, to pull funding from failing schools?

Bob acts as though schools just fail by themselves. It’s a cascade of failure from appropriations and over-regulation by the state and federal governments, through parents who have let school boards run amok by trusting they were doing the right thing and never checking up. 

Bob complains that government schools are unGodly and parents shouldn’t have to leave their children in that situation.

OF COURSE THEY ARE! THEY ARE PROPPED UP BY SECULAR GOVERNMENT MONEY! Do you honestly think that sending government money into home and private schools WON’T PRODUCE THE SAME RESULTS? It absolutely will. Right now, the only thing staving off an atheistic society are Christian home and private schools. Why do you want to compromise the two things that are working under complete parent control? That makes absolutely no sense! 

In fact, schools that participate in the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship – including private Christian schools – are required to comply with the antidiscrimination provisions of 42 U.S.C., Section 2000d, which the Biden Department of Justice has used to force schools into transgender bathroom policies and anti-discrimination policies protecting transgender athletes. I’ll just leave that there.

Why not instead work with churches to create programs like microschools, learning pods or to provide daily tutoring, or even create a school specifically for those below the poverty line? The Biden Justice Department can’t force policy there. Again, why does GOVERNMENT have all the answers? Don’t conservatives think the private sector has those?

In closing, Bob calling me “a bit callous, heartless and cold” for wanting the private sector to do their job instead of allowing government to do that is a bit social justice warrior for me – especially in the face of Conservative principles. Government doesn’t provide choices, the private market does and the more government ‘does’ the less churches and the private market do.

Note this: in 2021, homeschooling and private schools grew and Oklahoma public schooling LOST STUDENTS thanks to parents deciding to homeschool and leave government schools ON THEIR OWN POWER.

Just recently I posted a meme to our social media about how single-parent families could homeschool and was inundated with OTHER ideas as well:

  • coming together to co-house and afford housing to homeschool
  • working from home and schooling when able in their schedule
  • church-created homeschool coops for single parents
  • teaming up with other families to create a coop so that each day the parents rotate so one is in charge of the children every day
  • teaming up to hire a tutor to teach all the children each day
  • homeschool families bringing in children of single parents to school with their own kids (I did this with the child of a single friend. She just became a part of the family and she graduated with my own!)

These are AWESOME ideas that parents came up with all on their own without the ‘benevolent’ hand of the government ‘helping’ them.

CONSERVATIVES, STOP TRYING TO USE GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS WE LET GOVERNMENT CREATE IN THE FIRST PLACE. The only ways to help students out right now (other than making the legislature responsible for their funding of failing schools) is to provide individual family tax credits for home and private schooling and tax credit scholarships for the same. This would help parents and ‘punish’ failing schools without government strings while allowing the free market to work.

5

Government Take-Over in Invented Emergencies (SB1647 – The Oklahoma Empowerment Account Program)

Guest Post by Emily Hladik (Bio below)

SB 1647 creates the Oklahoma Empowerment Account Program under an emergency declaration. As an Oklahoma homeschool mom, I oppose this legislation.

While I believe the state of Oklahoma’s public education is in a state of emergency, this legislation attempts to expand publicly funded education without addressing the actual issues with existing public education. Private schools and homeschooling families that participate in this government expansion will do so at the price of their own autonomy and constitutional freedom. This bill is being promoted as a silver-bullet solution, touted as not growing government and heralded as a champion of protecting private schools and homeschooling in Oklahoma—absurdities.

Supporters of this legislation claim the Oklahoma Empowerment Act (OEA) is the solution to the ills of public education. 

It names an “Agency” to be created within the OK Department of Treasury and allows for private contracting of services (see Page 3 and Page 10). The “Agency”, remember that’s the Department of Treasury, will be in charge of creating and approving applicants and setting standards for educational vendors and determining qualified expenses for parents. 

Not the OK State Department of Education, not the parents (their choice is limited to the approved vendors list), but the Treasury Department (or the contractor they hire). 

You don’t ‘cure’ public education simply by re-assigning it to a new bureaucracy.

In fact, the only mention of the Department of Education comes on Page 8; their part is to report the cost per student enrolled in the OEA program to the Treasury Department. If the Department of Education can’t provide quality education via public schools, charter schools, and virtual schools, why would the Department of Treasury do any better at picking curriculum, programs, and schools to be participants in the OEA scheme?

The OEA is being labeled as an alternative to failed pubic education and promises on Page 15 that the program will not to expand the regulatory authority of the state beyond the means necessary to enforce requirements in the act. Geez, I wonder if it will be as limited and narrow as the US Congress’ use of the necessary and proper clause. From the text of SB 1647, there’s actually much expansion of the regulatory authority of the state already planned.

First, there’s a prohibition on “educational services providers” from sharing empowerment funds with parents (see Page 9). So parents can use funds to pay for a math tutor, but not themselves if they are teaching their children math? Each school and family that participates in the program will be subject to an audit. 

Next, the state will approve educational service providers (see Page 9-10), so will homeschool families that want to participate have to be approved? What are the standards and when will those be available for review? What is the process to challenge rulings? 

Finally, there will be random annual audits of 10% of OEA accounts, with cases of suspected fraud being referred to the Attorney General (see Page 11-12).

What protections are there for small private schools and parents from bureaucrats, armed with the power to audit and intimidate? What’s the oversight on the audits? And that’s just the “necessary to enforce” regulation authority that’s been disclosed, can you imagine how much more this program will grow government?

Supporters of this bill have made the outlandish claim that this government program actual protects private education and homeschooling. According to these “experts,” government intervention will increase the rights and freedoms of private businesses and individuals. It’s inconceivable, but if it wasn’t for this illogical headline I may have missed this conversation altogether. 

I’ve homeschooled in several states, most of which have illiberal requirements. 

For example, in Virginia homeschooling families must notify the state of their intent to homeschool. I had to verbally notify the school and filed a letter with the school district of my intent to homeschool my children. 

In South Carolina homeschooling families are required to join associations that certify academic progress is being made to the state. I don’t know the history of these states’ homeschool laws, but I do know only Oklahoma has the constitutional right to homeschool. It is a major reason we choose to live in Oklahoma. 

If 2020 has taught me anything, it’s to fight for what I believe in and never trust politicians who push radical agendas through invented emergencies.

Here’s the link to SB 1647 Oklahoma Empowerment Act . I encourage you to read it for yourself and tell your legislator to oppose this government power grab and FIX the publicly funded education system that already exists!

Bio, Emily Hladik:

I am a homeschool mom, creator of www.GreatAmericanStudies.com, and co-founder of Enid Freedom Fighters. I have a M.Ed., have been an adjunct instructor of history and political science, and married to my U.S. Marine (Ret.) husband for over 20 years.

1

The Problems With “School Choice”

Every legislative session in Oklahoma, the topic of “School Choice” rears its head. People become “School Choice” advocates because they believe the concept will put parents back in the driver’s seat for their children’s education. But what does the term “School Choice” actually mean?

EdChoice, an organization that has been touting “School Choice” for many years, provides this definition: 

School choice allows public education funds to follow students to the schools or services that best fit their needs —whether that’s to a public school, private school, charter school, home school or any other learning environment families choose.

This makes sense to me. School Choice has to be about MONEY. It can’t be about a choice of schools, because Oklahoma has a near smorgasbord of choices to provide parents for schooling their children. Let’s look at them:

  • Here in Oklahoma, our Constitution makes it clear that parents have the absolute right to direct the education of their children through homeschooling. Homeschooling is an educational choice.
  • Oklahoma has 1784 public schools. Last session (2021) SB783 was passed. This law allows parents to be able to transfer their child/children among public schools instead of them being assigned to a school according to their zip code. Transfer amounts to a choice.
  • Here in Oklahoma, we have a thriving private school network of 96 schools. Parents who are able and would like to do so, may CHOOSE to send their child/children to a private school. 
  • Oklahoma also has a thriving Charter school network – some brick and mortar – and others virtual. Parents can choose whether or not to send their child/children to either type of charter school.

So, it seems it would be hard to be an Oklahoma parent who then argues you don’t have much of a choice as to where you sent your child to school. Yes, not all parents can afford to homeschool or put their child/children in private school, yet that doesn’t negate these as valid choices and many parents work hard to scrimp and save in order to keep their children home or send them to a private school.

Fortunately, Oklahoma has a HUGE NUMBER OF SCHOOL CHOICES available to parents, so why do we continually talk about “School Choice”?

Returning to EdChoice’s definition, because legislators feel that parents should be able to send their children to ANY school they want, something that can only happen if tax dollars are appropriated to people who can’t afford to send their child/children to private school or keep them home for homeschool.

Herein lies the problem. Once money leaves the hand of a citizen as a tax, it becomes property of the government who receives the tax. Now, it’s the government’s job to make sure that tax dollar is accounted for transparently. 

Let’s say that Oklahoma gives parents part or all of the money it would have spent to educate their child and says, “Here, you can use this any way you’d like to educate your child.”

The thrilled parents then take that money to a private school and enroll their child. Unfortunately, the private school that receives the funds is now accountable to the state to make sure that money is spent properly. 

In order to do that, the state now has the ability to ask the private school to perform certain tasks to assure them of the way in which that money is spent and suddenly, the private school now has strings from State government it never had before. How many strings can a private school have to the government for state money before it’s no longer really a private school? At what point does the State government get to tell the private school what kind of curricula they may offer, or regulate the type of teachers they want to hire because, well, accountability of taxpayer funds?

Unfortunately, there’s more. Oklahoma has never fully repealed Blaine Amendment language from our Constitution. The Blain Amendment is a failed federal law created in the late 1800’s proposed to ostensibly prevent Catholic schools by denying them access to public funds. Though the federal law failed, many states added similar language to their Constitution, as did Oklahoma.

It would be an extremely difficult task to take funds designated as public, give them to parents and allow them to finance a child’s private school education – especially at a private religious school.

We’ve all seen the mess that has been created by Epic Charter School’s administrative arm – Epic Youth Services. If state funds are given to parents to use for expenses related to the homeschooling of their children, how could the state not expect parents to account for every dime of state money provided them? They certainly would have every right to do so, yet now a homeschooling parent could find themselves in the unenviable situation of having to report to the state on behalf of their homeschool. 

What if the state doesn’t ‘like’ a type of curricula a parent chooses, or the type of activity a child prefers? What happens to the autonomy of the homeschooling parent in that case?

Granted, it seems like a stretch – and legislators would be sure to say that would never happen – but who in the world would have ever thought that in the last two years the government would force people to wear masks, take vaccines and shut down businesses? Hopefully, if we’ve learned anything else from the pandemic, we’ve learned that governments are less about individual rights and more about power and control.

And what about taking public money and giving it to parents to allow their children to homeschool or attend private school? What about the families who scrimp and save to provide these options for their children? Isn’t that the state creating an equity program?

TRULY, THERE SEEMS TO BE NO WAY FOR THE STATE TO ALLOW PARENTS TO HAVE STATE MONEY TO FINANCE THEIR CHILD’S EDUCATION. The only way to do anything of the sort is some form of TAX CREDIT:

1. Allow parents to keep the money they WOULD HAVE given to the state in taxes for public education. This way, the money is only ever the parents – it never becomes the property of state government. Parents can use that money to help finance a private education, or homeschool their child/children.

2. Allow parents who are unable to finance their child’s private or homeschool to apply for ‘scholarship’ funds placed into an account by people who want to donate to the scholarship. Oklahoma already has the Oklahoma Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship, that can simply be broadened.

3. Parents should begin planning for their child’s education early on and make after-tax deposits into the State 529 Plan.  Though ostensibly a college savings program, funds may be deducted to pay for homeschool or private school expenses as well.

Unfortunately, like with so many things, there is no free lunch in education. It’s important to understand the issues surrounding “School Choice” and not merely carry the flag of “School Choice”.  Private schools do not need any further state regulation and homeschoolers want absolutely no interference from government in their schools. Let’s be VERY CAREFUL then, when we discuss the term “School Choice” and keep government sequestered in its own lane.

1

What Families Do With School Choice

I’ve written for School Reform News at Heartland Foundation for several years now. In 2013 I wrote this article for SRN. This blog seems like a really great place to post this, as I think it will encourage all kinds of parents who might be interested in making an educational difference for their child/children.

——————–

Madison, Wisconsin mother Mary Keaveny has enrolled her five children in three different kinds of schools.

The children, ages two to 16, all began learning at home, even the two with dyslexia. Clint, schooled at home until eighth grade, just finished his freshman year at a nearby Catholic school that offers a classical education.

“Clint is a really smart kid, way beyond my ability to school at this point,” Mary said. “He needs to debate and argue, and it’s hard to do that at home.”

Mary knew Clint was in the right place when “we got the greatest letter from one of his teachers, who said he wrote the most beautiful essay for his final.”

Mary is one of thousands across the country who are shepherding their children through a rapidly expanding field of K-12 education options that allow parents to fit education to each child’s changing needs.

Sports and Dyslexia
Thirteen-year-old Ryan Keaveny loves sports. Though always active in various leagues, befriending kids his age was a challenge because Ryan was homeschooled until 2012.

“Playmates would get scarce in the fall as they all went back to their public school sports teams,” Mary said. When the Keavenys moved in 2012, they found a small Catholic school right around the corner.

“Ryan has only 11 [total students] in his class,” Mary reports, “which is great because he now has friends and a teacher who can give him really individualized instruction to help with his dyslexia.”

Dyslexia and Online Learning
Mary has homeschooled Kevin, 10, and Megan, 8, who struggles with severe dyslexia and could barely read.

The family’s recent move, combined with new expenses, Megan’s dyslexia, and the ever-present needs of a two-year-old found Mary needing some accountability for Kevin and Megan.

She found the Hayward Center for Individualized Learning (HACIL) Virtual Charter School, a nonprofit online school chartered through the Wisconsin Department of Education. Because Wisconsin practices public-school open -enrollment, Mary receives a transfer credit of $800 per child to attend HACIL. This can help pay for internet service, books, and even enrichment classes.

Though Hayward is five hours from her home, Mary only has to make the trip when she wants to check out books from HACIL’s library and to present the kids for state testing—a requirement of program enrollment.

“I can homeschool again this year because of the support provided by HACIL,” Mary said, happily.

Pervading Beliefs
Lindsey Hodson of Middletown, Virginia, uses a mix of Montessori, Catholic, and home schools to satisfy the educational needs of her four small children.

“We don’t want our kids riding school a bus—we don’t like the lack of supervision. As Catholics, it’s hard to attend a school that doesn’t follow the liturgical calendar, and we like the fact that Catholic school classrooms all contain a crucifix and kids can pray and say the Pledge of Allegiance,” Lindsey said. “Catholic schools also maintain an ongoing sibling discount, which encourages procreation. They are very open to life.”

Catholic education has not fitted every one of her kids, Lindsey says. Because dyslexia has challenged her husband, Lindsey wants to closely supervise her children’s reading instruction. As with her first child, who starts second grade in fall 2013, she plans to teach her children to read before their first grade.

The Hodsons’ five-year-old son spent a year in Montessori school and will attend one day a week this fall because he learns differently than their other three.

“I need to work on getting this kid to be more of a self-starter like the others,” Lindsey explains.

Crying at School
Lauren Marshall had never considered an alternative to public school until her son, Dillon, came home from school crying one day. Dillon has ADHD and reading difficulties.

“I never thought of myself as an advocate for my kids,” the Tulsa, Oklahoma mother said. “I’d drop them off at school, go to work, and think they were fine.”

Laura took the next day off work to follow Dillon through third grade at his public elementary school. She was horrified to witness him climb under his desk and finally leave his classroom altogether.

Lauren quickly quit her job to educate Dillon and his younger brother, David, using curricula a teacher friend suggested. During the next several months, Dillon was also diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and dyslexia.

Online School to Voucher School
After two years at home, Dillon had improved significantly. Then, Lauren found K12 Online Schools. She loved the format but couldn’t afford the tuition. When K12 became available through the newly formed Oklahoma Virtual Learning Academy (OCVA) charter school several years later, she immediately enrolled both boys. For six weeks, her school district refused to allow her kids to transfer, but it ultimately relented.

After three years in OCVA, Lauren found Oklahoma’s Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship program for children with disabilities. That allowed Dillon to start ninth grade at Tulsa’s coveted Town and Country School specifically for children with Asperger’s.

The preparation David received through homeschooling helped him gain seventh-grade entry into Tulsa’s George Washington Carver Middle School, a magnet school where students earn attendance through high academic achievement. Otherwise, David would attend Nathan Hale Junior High, which received an “F” on the state’s annual academic report card.

Lauren is convinced: “If more parents understood the need to be involved, real changes in education could be made.”

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑