Level Playing Field

One of the disturbing aspects of the current political discussions in Wisconsin is the blatant disregard for both factual data and a level playing field for all recipients of public money.  Not only are some data applied to some schools but not others, but special rules are being carved out for those schools which fit an ideological goal in direct contrast to the rules being mandated for everyone else.

I was at a meeting of superintendents and state legislators recently when the topic turned to the proposal to expand the school voucher program to nine additional school districts—including nearby Fond du Lac.  That’s when a legislator who is a critic of public schools and an advocate of voucher schools said, “Parents need choices to failing public schools.  Voucher schools provide an option that is better than public schools.  I know because I’ve been in some voucher schools, and those test results (referring to the state standardized WKCE test scores which show voucher schools were no better than public schools) don’t matter because you can’t measure quality on a single test.”

When it was pointed out that public schools are being measured (and criticized) by the results of this same single test, he brushed that aside as irrelevant.  When it was pointed out that the nine districts targeted for voucher expansion were selected based on the results of the single standardized test, he said that wasn’t the point.  In other words, don’t confuse him with the facts.  He knows what he wants, and if the facts don’t support his viewpoint, then he will simply ignore them while making such outrageous statements at the same time.  In sum, he ignores poor test results for voucher schools but uses poor test results for public schools as the reason to bring in voucher schools (which then get no better results).

Then the discussion turned to the requirements of voucher schools versus public schools.  Both are supported by state tax dollars flowing out of the public treasury, but only the public schools have to follow the state statutes regarding education.  There are pages and pages and pages of laws in small print which public schools are required to follow…but the voucher schools are free to ignore these same laws even though they are funded with public money.  When it was pointed out that voucher schools have the ability to do some things that public schools can’t because of these laws, and that public schools could also do better if given the same flexibility, the legislator nodded his approval of the status quo and reminded us that public schools have to follow the laws for public schools.

So here’s the game.  State legislators have been micromanaging our public schools by loading up the statute books with countless laws instead of letting locally elected school boards do their jobs.  Then, the same legislators complain that the public schools which are following the legislators' micromanaging laws aren’t performing well enough—without acknowledging that some of the mandates actually waste time and money which makes them obstacles to good performance.  The solution of these ideological legislators is to send public money to voucher schools but not require the voucher schools to follow any of the micromanaging mandates.  As crazy as it sounds, these legislators then compare the performance of the voucher schools to the public schools—and continue to complain about the public schools even though the public schools are doing exactly what the legislators demanded they do. 

In other words, it’s not a level playing field.  And these legislators know it and want to keep it that way.  The public schools want the same flexibility that the voucher schools receive, but these legislators won’t allow it.  Why not?  Because the public schools are doing as well as the voucher schools even though the public schools are playing with one hand tied behind their backs by following the state laws which the voucher schools don’t have to follow.  Imagine how much better the public schools could do if they had the same flexibility to ignore the micromanaging state laws that the voucher schools have.  (It really makes you wonder why the voucher schools don't do better if they get the money and the flexibility.)

These voucher advocate legislators are afraid of a level playing field for one obvious reason--because the public schools would significantly outperform the voucher schools if the rules were the same for everyone. 

The only way the voucher advocates can win their debate is to tell folks to ignore the test scores as not being a good measure of quality and to let the voucher schools play by their own set of rules while forcing the public schools to abide by rules laden with inefficiencies and ineffective requirements. 

If this happened on the playground at recess, we’d say that one team was obviously cheating.  Perhaps we'd look into bullying since there is a power imbalance being used for personal gain.  And we'd definitely be concerned about unethical behavior in which one side is victimizing the other side.  Like I said, we wouldn't tolerate this type of behavior on our playground--but we have to accept if from some of our state legislature.

Isn’t it sad when some of our state legislators can’t measure up to the standards we teach our third graders?

My Hero

Every so often someone asks the question, “Who is your hero?”  It seems to me that typical answers generally fall into two categories:  1) the respondent’s mother; 2) a famous person.  Those responses make sense to me because I understand the thinking that supports the individual's choice.  However, events over the past few years have led me to a different response.  

My hero is what has been dubbed “The Greatest Generation.”  These are the men and women, like my father who will celebrate his 93^rd birthday later this year, who grew up during the Depression, served during World War II, built America into an economic powerhouse in the 1950’s and 1960’s, and sacrificed continually by putting the needs of their country, community, and family ahead of their own.  Now dying at the rate of approximately 800 per day, these heroes did something very, very special—they left things better (much better!) than they found them.  The prosperity and freedoms we enjoy today are largely due to the unselfish efforts of The Greatest Generation.

This really hit home with the latest issue of Time magazine which has a cover story about the Millennial Generation, those teenagers and 20-somethings who were born between 1980 and 2000, or thereabouts.  By sheer numbers this is the largest American generation ever, but that’s not the focus of the story.  The title says it all: “The Me Me Me Generation.”  This, of course, is a takeoff on the parents of most Millennials, Baby Boomers like me, who have been called “The Me Generation.”  The article goes on to show numerous ways in which the Millennials are hyper-focused on themselves as a result of the way they were raised by self-absorbed Boomers and the ever-present technology which allows constant posting, updating, and communicating about themselves. 

We always hear about the pendulum swinging, and it would seem that the selfless Greatest Generation has now given way to the self-absorbed Millennials Generation.  Although Howe and Strauss (read Generations) theorized that the Millennials will embody the same spirit for our country during a future turning point time of crisis as the Greatest Generation did in the 1940’s, it’s a bit difficult for me to imagine that now.  Still, that’s not what is most striking to me.  What has been coming into clearer focus for me, rather, is the way in which the pendulum swung during the two generations after the Greatest Generation.  Namely, what did the Silent Generation and the Boomer Generation do…or not do?

This past week I taped my monthly podcast, SupeTalk, which explored this topic of heroics by the Greatest Generation and what has happened since.  (See it at: http://bit.ly/SupeTalk)

As I said, much of the prosperity we enjoy is a direct benefit which was built and financed by the Greatest Generation as they made America what it is today.  But what have our subsequent generations done on their watch?  In Wisconsin we hear a lot about how vital good roads are to commerce and our economy.  Most of the roads and bridges we drive on each day were built by the Greatest Generation.  Yet, according to the Council of State Governments, nearly half of America's highways and major roads are in less than good condition.  And 71,000 bridges are structurally deficient, as demonstrated by the major bridge collapse in Minneapolis a few years ago.

When we read reports with those types of frightening information, we like to think that it’s because the big, bureaucratic state and federal governments are irresponsible and wasting our money.  However, it turns out that our local situation is just as frightening.  According to city officials, Ripon currently has a budget for road construction which allows an upgrade/reconstruction of a city street every 82 years!  And although this is obviously unsustainable and a train wreck in progress, some folks around here still complain continuously about the need to lower taxes.  It would seem they won’t be happy until we have a 100-year cycle for upgrading our roads…which are built to last 25 years.

One of the major writers of the Greatest Generation probably summed it up best.  Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. said, “Everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do maintenance.”  The Greatest Generation built and built and built, and we have been deferring, deferring, deferring maintenance to keep our basic infrastructure in good working order. 

Let’s talk about education.  $542 billion dollars.  That the pricetag the federal General Accounting Office in Washington recently said it would take to get America’s K-12 school buildings updated and modernized in order to prepare students for success in the 21^st century.  That's half a trillion dollars...just to get to where we should be in 2013.

While the Greatest Generation sacrificed because they saw a future in which America is standing tall, the two generations which followed have insisted on decreasing taxes ever lower so they could spend more on themselves and their toys and games.  (Do you think the growth of the storage unit industry and the new standard of a three-car garage are mere coincidences?)

Let’s take Ripon for an example.  Our current middle school building was constructed in 1939 as a new Depression-era high school to replace the 1913 building (which still stands today as an apartment building).  Upon returning from war, the Greatest Generation decided that the Depression-era school was not sufficient for the community they envisioned, so they built a new “modern” high school in 1963 (which is still our high school building).

Building a new school costs money, and that means taxes.  But the Greatest Generation just sucked it in and sacrificed a little more.  The local school tax rate in 1964 was $21.72 per thousand dollars of property value.  Adjusted for inflation, that would be a school tax rate of $163.09 per thousand dollars of property value in 2013.  What’s our actual 2013 school tax rate?  It’s $11.22 per thousand dollars of property value…and some people think it’s too high.

Look at it this way.  If Ripon’s Greatest Generation taxed themselves at the same rate in 1964 that we are currently taxing ourselves, they would have had a school tax rate of $1.49 per thousand instead of $21.72.  Now imagine what that would have meant for today’s adults who were educated in Ripon’s schools.  Our kids would be attending dilapidated schools that would be on the verge of condemnation.

Trying to compare tax rates across decades can be confusing, so the non-partisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance (WisTax) indicates that the property tax burden is best measured over time as a percentage of personal income.  This shows how much of our disposal income is being eaten up by government for such things as schools and roads, and it also shows how much of an investment we are making in our society for future generations.

And this is where the Greatest Generation really shows its heroics.  Throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s, Wisconsin’s Greatest Generation was paying in the range of 4.5-6.0% of their personal income for local property taxes.  By comparison, during the past twenty years Wisconsin residents have been paying around 4% of their personal income in local property taxes.  In fact, during the boom years of the 1990’s, when it was an opportune time to do maintenance on the investment given to us by the Greatest Generation, Wisconsin’s average property tax payment was approximately 3.7% of personal income.

Imagine our world if the Silent Generation and the Boomer Generation had continued to invest in our communities like the Greatest Generation had done.  Instead, however, these subsequent generations have lived off the investments of the Greatest Generation and have not paid it forward.  And even though these subsequent generations have spent more money on themselves than any previous generation, they still complain that they are taxed too much…despite non-partisan data which show lower tax rates and crumbling schools and roads all around us.

This is not a call for a new school building or fewer potholes in Ripon.  Rather, it is a tribute to the heroic sacrifices of the Greatest Generation who did what was necessary to build a future by contributing to the greater good.  Isn’t that a better legacy than “kicking the can down the road” which is what’s been happening for decades on the local scene?  This mantra of lowering taxes, which in turn means providing less education for our children at a time when global competition requires more education for success, is a recipe for disaster.  Spending today instead of investing for tomorrow is a losing game plan and one that the Greatest Generation would never follow.

So, when someone asks who my hero is I’ll be responding, “The Greatest Generation because they stood for the public good—on the battlefield, in their communities, and at tax time.”  Thank you, Dad, for paying it forward and being such a great role model for how to sacrifice a little now in order to build a society with more opportunities for future generations. You, and all your generation, are my hero...and we sure could use some of those heroics these days from those who followed.

Just Ignore Me

What a week it’s been!  In a good way.  Very busy…yes.  Perhaps even a bit hectic at times.  But such kindness and  joy.  In a good way.  Let me explain.

If it’s May, that means two things in my life…crabgrass and concerts.  Each year dealing with the lawn is relegated to being my weekend job during the month of May since many week nights are filled with school events, especially concerts by our middle and high school vocal music and instrumental music departments.

This week included two band concerts.  I just came home from the middle school band concert which demonstrated how amazingly skilled students can become from sixth to seventh to eighth grade.  Wow!  And the Jazz Band was awesome.  Personally, I was totally surprised and especially touched by having the evening’s last song dedicated to me for my retirement.  An eighth grader donned a fedora to imitate Frank Sinatra and sang “Fly Me to the Moon” with all the Sinatra moves as the band played all the jazz flourishes.  It was so cool.  No wonder I go to all the concerts.

A few days ago I was honored when the band director extended an invitation to me on behalf of her students to be a guest conductor for the high school band’s last concert of the year in recognition of my approaching retirement and support of the music program all these years.  I was a bit nervous considering my lack of musical ability—heck, I can’t keep beat to a polka!  The band director assured me that the John Phillip Sousa march they would be performing (“King Cotton March”) would be perfect for me.  I’ve never been able to say no to a Sousa march, much less a high school music program, so I agreed to stop by on the day of the concert for rehearsal.

When I arrived at the high school auditorium for rehearsal, I noticed that about half the chairs were empty.  Those were the chairs for the “zero hour” section of band when kids who want to be in the band but can’t fit it into their schedule come before school for a full class period each day.  The two band classes never play together until they are on the stage together for a concert.  You’d never know it from how good they sound playing as one band.  It’s a testament to the band director and her students, that’s for sure.

So the band director taught me how to approach the podium, take a position on the podium, and begin the song with a baton in my hand.  I flapped my arms and the band played.  It took about two-and-a-half minutes and then the music abruptly stopped.  That's because they had reached the end of the march.  The band director explained how she wanted some parts a little softer and others a little louder and for them to try it one more time.  I did the podium routine all over, the kids played for 2.5 minutes, and then the music suddenly stopped.  A few reminders about taking bows, and the rehearsal was over for me.

The high school band concert that night was delightful.  From the opening Jazz Ensemble pieces to the group selections from the recent solo/ensemble contest to complex concert band pieces, it was a showcase of talent and serious dedication by committed music students.  Then, after recognition of the seniors, there was only one song remaining on the program—the “King Cotton March.”

I was called up to the stage from my front row seat where I customarily sit while taking photographs.  I approached the podium as rehearsed, picked up the baton…and improvised.  Before starting the song, I decided to give a little pep talk to the 100+ band members awaiting my signal to begin.  Leaning in over the conductor's music stand (and careful not to go so far as to tumble into the flute section), I explained to the students, “Remember that I don’t know what I’m doing.  So just ignore me, and play like you usually do.”  Laughter.  Relaxation.  We were ready.  And the baton went into action. 

The two-and-a-half minutes flew by in a millisecond.  The students did just what I had hoped--they ignored me and played as the band director had prepared them.  Before I knew it, the music had stopped.  That, I realized, was my cue to stop waving my arms.  Within a few beats my baton stopped.  Applause.  Bows all around.  And a warm feeling in my heart.

So many thanks to these two band directors and their amazing students.  They really went out of their way to do something special for this retiring superintendent.  And, in return, I successfully avoided poking anyone’s eye out with the baton.  Life is good…as only music can make it so.  Now, the weekend is approaching so it’s time to work on that crabgrass.

WASDA Victory Lap

The Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators, the statewide association for superintendents (and an affiliate of the national school superintendents association, AASA), held its annual spring education conference this past week for three days in Green Bay, Wisconsin.  In addition to the many sectionals and nationally known keynote speakers, WASDA also held its annual recognition banquet which featured those of us who are retiring in just a couple months.  It was a very informative and enjoyable conference, and an opportunity to say goodbye to colleague from around the state.

As explained to me a few years ago by a retiring colleague, attending your last superintendent’s conference is our profession’s version of your victory lap…Your motor is still going, the crowds are cheering, but the race is over.

So, there I was in Green Bay enjoying my victory lap.  Although I participated on a panel for two sectional sessions which showcased new teacher compensation plans, I spent most of my time in the audience listening to a variety of presenters speaking about a variety of topics.  Here are some of the highlights from my victory lap.

Dr. Pedro Noguera reminded us, “Education must be rooted in ethical behavior or we will have well-trained educators acting in unsavory ways.”

He also warned us, “We will not succeed by using fear of failure as motivation via punitive accountability measures.  Instead, we should be motivating by using hope, knowing that through education we can change the world and do wonderful things.”

A colleague noted, “Why is it that an educator who retires and then finds another public sector position is accused of ‘double dipping’ while a private sector retiree who finds another private sector position is seen as a shining example of free enterprise?”

Alan Borsuk, journalist and education observer, reaffirmed what we’ve known all along even though priorities have became misplaced in recent years.  He said that focusing on doing the right things as educators (e.g., the “music” of a school) is more important than focusing on doing things right (e.g., the “muscle” of a school).  Accountability is important, but don’t forget why we have schools and what has made American schools so successful in educating youth for our multi-faceted society.

In response to a question about the ingredients of successful schools, Borsuk said, “High performing schools and districts have clarity of purpose and are all charged up to do what needs to be done with confidence that they will succeed.”

Borsuk also observed from his experience, “What the public and staff want from a Superintendent is ‘inspiration’ that evokes the feeling that we are going in the right direction.  Much of what the Superintendent is responsible for are the intangibles which build confidence and credibility in public education.”

Finally, Borsuk commented on the changing state of the newspaper business which used to carry a lot of education news which kept citizens better informed about what was occurring in their public schools, “In 2006, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel had 7 full-time education reporters, so there were education stories in the newspaper most every day.  It now has 1 full-time education reporter, so there is less education news in the newspaper which means schools have to work harder to get the word out and people know less and therefore trust less about public schools.”

Several colleagues were discussing the proposed voucher expansion plan introduced by Governor Walker.  A unique aspect of the plan for taxpayers supporting private/religious school vouchers which is different than taxpayer support of open enrollment students or charter school students is that although private/religious school voucher students get their money from their local school district, they are never counted in the school district’s annual count.  That means school districts must give up money for voucher students that the school districts never received in the first place.  In every other situation, students whose education is funded by public money are counted in the statewide count for determining enrollment, funding, and budget limits for local school districts.  It would be like a parent not increasing a child’s allowance but telling the child to pay for the lunch of classmates anyway.

The conference concluded with a keynote by Steve Knagg, a retired school public relations officer from Texas who now sits on a school board.  He lamented how some of the basic structure of society has made the job of educating today’s kids much more difficult.  “I grew up when we used to have a thing called supper.  It looks to me like most of you can remember back when supper existed.  That’s when a family sat down together at the end of a day to eat a meal together and share their day’s experiences.  My understanding is that the Smithsonian now has an exhibit on explaining what supper is since it is now extinct.”

Knagg warned against Superintendent burnout, “We have the mistaken notion that if we only work harder—later in the day and on weekends—we’ll get caught up.  But the truth is that in today’s world it is impossible to get caught up because everything is changing so fast.  All that will happen with longer and longer hours is you’ll be eaten up.”

As for the superintendency not being for the timid, Knagg said, “If you’re not getting flak, then you’re not over your target.  If you’re doing your job right, then some folks won’t be happy with you—so stop trying to please everyone and do what’s best for kids.”

The conference ended with this pronouncement from Knagg, “I’m smiling because I did something that has eternal value.  Like you, I worked every day to improve the life of kids.  And it doesn’t get any better than that.”

The Long Goodbye

It’s old news that I’m retiring at the end of this school year.  Even though I’ve been superintendent for my school district for more than twice the national average of superintendent tenure, and even though nine years is longer than the President of the United States and the governors of many states may serve, it is still beyond my comprehension that time has flown by so quickly (even though some days it seemed to stand still).  Having announced my retirement in December, I’ve been living two lives ever since—one still quite busy as the superintendent and one observing the surrealistic scene of the entire retirement and hiring process.  A few years ago a colleague told me about his retirement experience, and I must admit that I’m having a very similar experience.  It is really a story of a long goodbye, told in three stages.

Due to the need for enough time to find a successor superintendent, my contract is a rather typical Wisconsin contract that requires a retirement decision in December.  Thus, my long goodbye began before the Holiday festivities, before the end of the semester, before the budgeting process for next year, and before the school board elections.  In other words, lots of critical things happen when you’re a lame duck.

The first stage of the retirement process, as my colleague told me, is that the phone never stops ringing and your email inbox is continually overflowing.  Everyone is contacting you to compliment you and to congratulate you.  As my colleague said, “If I had heard one-quarter of the nice things said about me before I announced my retirement, it probably would have bolstered me enough so that I wouldn’t have retired.”  This stage lasts about a month.

The second stage of the retirement process is the reverse.  Total silence.  Your phone stops ringing.  Your email inbox is dormant and covered with spider webs.  All of a sudden you find yourself able to get so much more done because your day is not being constantly interrupted into 2-minute segments by those who contact you for one reason or another.  Even your junk email shrinks—and how they find out is really beyond me.  It’s kind of nice to have some peace and quiet to get things done, but there’s so much more to do in order to wrap things up before you leave that I find I’m putting in more hours than ever before.  Dinner before 8:00 PM is becoming a special event.  As my colleague said, “You find out how fast the world moves on and how quickly you become irrelevant.”  This stage lasts about two months.

The third stage of the retirement process is the pardon stage.  As soon as your successor is named, you become not only irrelevant, but you almost feel like a usurper.  Your successor is now the superintendent, even though technically you have about 90 days to go.  Your successor is receiving all the attention while getting up to speed.  You are the interloper, still hanging around.  Except for one thing—the pardons.  Instead of phone calls and emails, now the personal visits begin.  Everyone, it seems, has a favor to ask of you before you leave.  Would you approve this?  Would you erase that?  Would you announce this?  Would you agree to that?  The list is long, and the appeals are compelling.  This is their last chance before being required to make the same request from the new superintendent.  And, I remember well the long list of folks who came in to see me with requests during the summer months when I was first hired.  The favor-seekers realize that a new superintendent is more likely to say, “I’m not familiar enough with that, so let me look into it,” whereas a departing superintendent might say, “Oh, what the heck…why not?”  And so, the line winds its way to my office.  As my colleague said, “It’s discouraging to see such desperation from so many people you worked with for so many years.”  Since I still have two months to go, I’m not sure how long this stage lasts, but I’m told it persists until the last day.

When you think about it, a typical employee gives two weeks notice when departing.  Agreeing to stay an entire month is exceptional and considered an indicator of a special arrangement for a smooth transition.  A departing president or governor, with all that those jobs entail, has about two months to wrap things up after an election before the successor moves into the office.  Yet, a superintendent has six months for their long goodbye due to the nature of the hiring cycle.  It frequently seems a bit redundant, but stability and a smooth transition call for such an extended lame duck period.  So, in the end, it’s best to keep a positive outlook and try to enjoy your long goodbye as much as possible…because soon the phone calls, emails, and visits will stop entirely.  And that is stage four—but it will be a few months until I know enough from experience so that I can say more about it.

So there you have it.  It’s been a roller coaster of emotions since December.  From fretting and seesawing about a retirement decision to basking in the glow of compliments to toiling in the deafening silence of irrelevance to feeling out of step in the ongoing pardoning parade.  And one-third of the ride is still to come, so who knows what twists and turns are in store for me?  Rollercoasters…I never really liked ‘em.

Using Beta Report Cards for High Stakes Decisions

Should the "beta" version of the state's report cards for schools issued by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction be used for high stakes decisions such as determining if voucher schools should be expanded to school districts that have low scores on the first year of report cards?  Read the op-ed column by Miles Turner, executive director of the Wisconsin Association of School Administrators for the inside story that you won't hear elsewhere.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/no-d-or-f-schools-in-wisconsin-7r9jkha-203481341.html

Voucher Schools

Voucher schools have been on my mind.  That’s probably because of the debate that is raging (at least in educational circles) across Wisconsin due to Governor Walker’s budget proposal which is to expand the voucher school program that is currently restricted to Milwaukee and Racine.  While the Milwaukee program is twenty years old, the Racine program dates back just two years to the governor’s last biennial budget.  The new proposal is to expand the voucher school program to nine additional communities across Wisconsin. 

While that limited expansion is far less than the statewide expansion which was expected and is being advocated for by voucher proponents, the issue has drawn considerable comment in the recent hearings being held around the state by the legislature’s Joint Finance Committee.  In a nutshell, voucher supporters have been turning out in large numbers—often bringing their children and other students with them.  On the other side, school superintendents, school board members, business managers, and a variety of other school administrators have been testifying about their many concerns with voucher schools. 

So, let me take this opportunity to tell you about a few of my concerns with the Governor’s proposal to expand the voucher school program.

First, it’s a bait and switch scheme.  I continue to find it interesting that state law prohibits bait and switch tactics, but some of the legislature’s members endorse this illegal strategy for promoting their own proposals when their proposals won’t stand the scrutiny of the facts.  For example, the stated premise of voucher schools was to level the playing field for poor, minority children who are stuck in under-performing neighborhood schools in Milwaukee.  The vouchers, as their supporters proclaimed, would give poor children the tuition payments to attend private/religious schools that middle-class children’s parents could afford.  At this point the income eligibility guidelines have been expanded so that a family of four with a household income of $70,000 is entitled to a voucher.  In other words, this is no longer a program aimed at helping poor kids escape sub-standard public schools; the voucher program is now an entitlement through which middle-class parents can now get the government to pay for their kid’s private/religious school tuition.

Don’t believe it?  The Governor’s expansion proposal is Exhibit A.  School districts with at least two schools which scored “below expectations” in the first year of the state’s school report cards would be part of the expanded voucher program.  Proponents will claim that children attending those under-performing schools will receive an opportunity to leave the school with a voucher to a private/religious school.  While that may be true, the expansion proposal actually allows ALL students in the affected school districts to apply for vouchers—even middle-class students attending schools that are meeting or exceeding the state’s expectations according to the state’s own reports.  In other words, this isn’t about helping poor kids in sub-standard schools; that is just a pretense in the bait and switch scheme to open up the entire school district so everyone can receive a voucher to attend a private/religious school.  And the proposal to expand voucher schools to nine additional communities is, by voucher proponents’ own words, just the foot in the door to expanding the program to the entire state so that every parents—regardless of income—can have the taxpayers pay for their child’s private/religious school tuition.

Second, despite all the hype by voucher proponents, there is no evidence that voucher schools provide a better education than public schools.  The original claim was that poor kids needed an opportunity to attend successful schools rather than the “failing public schools” they were attending.  After years and years of study and analysis by the state’s independent researcher collecting student achievement data, no significant difference in student achievement can be found between voucher and public schools.  The same is true of voucher programs in Washington, D.C., and other states.  Simply put, voucher schools are not any better than public schools.  So, what’s the rationale for vouchers if the quality is no better?

Without missing a beat, voucher proponents have changed their chant from “better schools” to “parental choice.”  If you can’t claim that you have a superior product, then change your tune.  This is disingenuous to the max.  The concept of “choice” conveniently side-steps the entire issue of public versus private/religious schools like the elephant sitting in the middle of the living room.  With the state’s open enrollment program, parents already have a choice to send their child to any public school in the state.  Besides, in many school districts the parents already have the right to choose among the public schools in the school district such as is the case in Milwaukee.  This means that parents already have choice among school districts and even among public schools.  But public school choice is not what the voucher advocates want; they want everyone else to pay for their choice to send their child to a private/religious school.  You could call that a new entitlement.  It used to be called mooching off the public trough.  Think about it—choice, entitlement, public trough—politics sure do make strange bedfellows.

Third, let’s follow the money.  The expansion of voucher schools will pull $73 million from public school funding.  This is after the 5.5% cut that public schools have had to endure the past two years and the subsequent flat budget at the 5.5% cut level being proposed for the next two years as part of the Governor’s budget.  The $73 million being pulled from public schools to fund vouchers to private/religious schools is in addition to the $144 million already being sent to Milwaukee’s voucher schools.  In other words, we can’t afford to adequately fund a single public school system across Wisconsin, and the proposed solution is to create another publicly funded system that will now pay for tuition to private/religious school enrollment which was previously paid for by parents.  If we can’t pay for one publicly funded system, then how will we be able to fund two publicly funded systems?

Furthermore, an analysis of costs in Milwaukee and Racine prove that funding voucher schools actually increases property taxes in those communities.  Oddly enough, the very politicians who are demanding lower property taxes and property tax relief are supporting the voucher school expansion proposal which will raise property taxes in the affected cities.  While it is nothing new for politicians to speak from both sides of their mouths, it is interesting to note that the voucher proponents are deceiving the public by still talking about reducing taxes while pursuing the voucher expansion in a blatant lie which will result, no doubt, in blaming other factors for the tax increases once the voucher schools are operational.

Fourth, let’s talk about public and private.  We know that public schools are publicly funded for the common good of our democratic society.  To hold these schools accountable for the public funds they receive, public schools must follow numerous state laws and regulations, including state standardized testing and annual state report cards which summarize how well each public school is doing in various measures such as student learning, growth in learning, attendance, and graduation.  Private/religious schools have not traditionally used public funds so they have no such accountability measures.  For politicians who are usually quite vigorous in their support of accountability measures, it is curious that these politicians are just as vehement in not having private/religious schools abide by the same or similar accountability measures. 

The state’s taxpayers were paying for the tuition of 83% of the students enrolled in Milwaukee’s voucher schools in the most recent year for which we have data (2010-11).  One-quarter of Milwaukee’s voucher schools actually had 99% of their students participating in the voucher program.  In other words, these schools exist only because of public funding.  Take away the public funding, and these schools no longer exist.  So the question is, “When is a private school whose very existence depends on public funding actually a public school?”  And if it is a publicly funded school, then why wouldn’t it have to follow the accountability measures for public schools?  Perhaps it is because there have been voucher schools which have taken the money and closed on their students in mid-year, or because there have been voucher school operators whose lifestyle has been supported by public funding rather than the student’s schooling, or maybe it is just because voucher supporters don’t want the mediocre student achievement results to be publicized and compared against public schools.

Fifth, my final point is the absurd claim spouted by voucher school proponents that their schools give much needed competition to the public schools—and that competition makes the state’s public schools better.  Not only is there no evidence of this preposterous claim, it is just foolish.  Think of it this way.  As a superintendent, there’s nothing that I want more than for my schools to improve.  If I use the strategy of the voucher school proponents, I can reach my goal by providing more competition for our school district’s public schools.  In order to get such competition I should take money from our school district’s budget and give it to our neighboring school district to improve their schools.  Since parents have choice through the state’s open enrollment program, this competition would spur my school district’s schools to become better.  In other words, rather than invest more in my own community’s public schools, the voucher proponents would suggest that I should invest part of our school district budget in someone else’s schools as an improvement strategy for our schools.  As I said at the outset, it is absurd…but that’s one of the talking points of the voucher proponents.

There you have it, my top five concerns about the proposal to expand the voucher school program in Wisconsin.  And I didn’t even get into the issue of using public money to advance a religion and fund religious indoctrination.  Under the expansion proposal, each of us will be paying taxes to fund religious education.  While the end-run around the Constitution may pass legal muster in a technical sense, it goes against a major principle upon which our nation was first settled and eventually founded.  Ironically, such technical end-runs are immoral and unethical—but the religious organizations that benefit from this end-run are supportive of such immoral and unethical technical subjugation of the law of our land.  But don’t get me started on that since I promised just five concerns even though there are many more.

Time will tell what will happen.  We know that the voucher proponents are well-funded by out-of-state supporters who wish to tilt Wisconsin into their camp.  The dismantling of public education, the reallocation of billions of dollars of public funding to private hands, and taxpayer funding of religious education seem to dominate their agenda.  The fact that Wisconsin’s public school teacher ranks would be decimated by the rise of publicly funded private/religious schools is probably just the cherry on top of this specially prepared treat for the voucher proponents.

A final note on this topic.  A colleague recently remarked that expansion of voucher schools was reminiscent of another political initiative that began in Milwaukee in 1976 when desegregation busing was introduced to give disadvantaged students better opportunities.  Not only did desegregation busing cost huge amounts of money, it destroyed the concept of neighborhood schools and plunged Milwaukee’s schools into a death spiral from which they have never recovered.  My colleague contends that a study lists nearly two dozen other strategies that have proven more successful, and he warns us that we will likely look back in several decades at voucher schools and the negative and unintended consequences that they will bring on our educational system the same way we now look back at desegregation busing in Milwaukee.  Hindsight is always 20/20, but it would be nice for a change to have some foresight when it comes to structuring educational opportunity.