The Soul of a Nation

2011 Excellence in Action National Summit on Education Reform

Matt Gelchion — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:30:57 +0000

The Foundation for Educational Excellence hosted its annual conference in San Francisco last week, drawing approximately 800 attendees from across the country. The “2011 Excellence in Action National Summit on Education Reform” featured keynote addresses by prominent figures in the education reform movement, including Jeb Bush, Sal Khan, and Melinda Gates, and offered strategy sessions on topics such as successfully incorporating digital learning into schools, advocating for parental choice legislation at the state level, and implementing educational reforms that work, as witnessed in Florida.

Video of the keynote addresses can be watched online. For those on their lunch break who are interested in checking out the speeches, Sal Khan’s talk (in particular) offers some really good food for thought.

Parental Choice: Justice, Subsidiarity, and Religious Liberty

TJ D'Agostino — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 04:10:19 +0000

I wanted to throw my hat in the ring in response to Matt’s most recent post, School Choice and Catholic Schools, and a post that he references from Scott Alessi from the U.S. Catholic. Both Matt and Scott make important distinctions about why Catholics support school choice. Scott offers this:

Undoubtedly, Catholic schools do have a lot to gain from voucher systems, but we have to remember that is not the primary reason why Catholics support them. The real issue here is one of justice, that every child deserves equal access to a quality education regardless of their social or economic status. Our agenda isn’t about self-preservation, it is about doing what is best for everyone. That means we want to see all kids get a quality education, no matter what school they attend.

In other words, vouchers are good because they let under-privileged children get out of low-performing schools and attend higher quality schools. It is a matter of equality of opportunity. Undoubtedly this is true and one of the primary reasons to support school choice.

But it suggests that if we could wave a magic wand and just fix the failing urban public schools – the “drop-out factories” as they are sometimes called – then we would not need school choice. Some would advocate for such a course of action, despite the enormous challenges to school turnaround policy and programs and their history of being expensive and ineffective. Yet even if it were a successful strategy and we suddenly transformed drop-out factories into high quality schools, there would still be other compelling reasons for school choice. And Matt points to an important one:

Redressing a wrong (i.e., that some parents have no say in what school their child attends) is always worthwhile and must remain the primary focus.

Matt’s comment suggests that the injustice is not only that hundreds of thousands of low-income minority children are relegated to failing schools, but that their parents are denied the right to exercise a choice in the matter. The reality of the situation is that middle and upper income families have school choice. They can choose to move to a different school district or pay tuition to send their children to a private school. Because of economic constraints, low-income families do not have choice. They are legally forced to send their children to a school that is assigned to them based upon where they live. Now, this injustice is doubly offensive because those schools are often dangerous places that dramatically fail to educate their children. But the very fact that parents are denied a choice is an injustice. Parents deserve to have a voice in where their children send their kids to school. The State is not the primary care-taker of my one-and-a-half-year-old daughter, and the State will not decide where she must go to school when the time comes. My wife and I are her parents, the primary educators and caregivers of our daughter, and we will make this profoundly important decision based upon what we think is best for her. To deny educational choice is not only to deny access to a quality education, it is to deny the dignity of parents as the caregivers of their children. The principle of subsidiarity from Catholic social teaching is the basis from which the Church advocates for leaving this responsibility in the hands of parents, and not denying it based-upon economic background.

Yet even this fails to provide us with the full picture. Charter schools provide real choice and options for parents. They are an important innovation and reform to the American education system, and are one valuable source of choice and educational innovation. However, only supporting a policy of charter schools or public school choice is not enough. To quote Pope Benedict XVI in his 2008 address to Catholic Educators in America:

No child should be denied his or her right to an education in faith, which in turn nurtures the soul of a nation.

It is not just equality of educational opportunity and recognizing the dignity of parents and giving them due responsibility for their children’s education. Fundamentally, authentic parental choice is a matter of religious liberty. Without authentic parental choice that is open to all forms of schooling, including faith-based and private schools, there is still an injustice that Catholics must oppose. If we opened charter schools and public school choice and turned around all of the failing urban public schools, poor children would still be denied the opportunity to have their souls nurtured through a faith-based education. It is the noble aim of the U.S. Constitution to protect the religious liberty of the people. For many parents, providing an education infused with faith, a moral foundation, alignment with the values taught in the home, and a sense of broader meaning in knowledge and life, is of fundamental importance and is a way of exercising religious conviction. We must protect this free-exercise of religious conviction, for parents but fundamentally for children. To do anything less is to deny some children the right to an education in faith.

These are the reasons that the Church and Catholics support parental choice, and why many thoughtful and civic minded Americans support it too.

School Choice and Catholic Schools

Matt Gelchion — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 13:51:54 +0000

The Indiana Choice Scholarship Program has received quite a bit of attention these past few weeks, and with good reason. National experts indicate that it marks the most successful first year implementation in the history of the parental choice movement. One aspect of the voucher program that has drawn attention of late is the high number of students enrolling in religious schools, particularly Catholic schools. Although details on the final numbers are still a little murky, roughly 2,500 students in Indiana will attend a Catholic school this year on a Choice Scholarship. For supporters of school choice, the level of participation in such a short time frame demonstrates an undeniable success. For supporters of Catholic schools, the increase in enrollment comes as welcome news at a time when many Catholic schools are closing. And for individuals who fall into both categories – proponents of school choice and advocates for Catholic schools – there is a temptation to link the two interests, identifying school choice as a panacea that can “save Catholic schools.” As Scott Alessi’s post rightfully notes, though, it is important that our priorities are in line.

School choice is not merely a means to an end for Catholic schools. School choice in and of itself represents an opportunity to address a social injustice, as more families are empowered with the opportunity to send their children to the school they desire. Those who believe in the value of a Catholic education are certainly right in hoping that more parents would then choose to send their kids to a Catholic school. Nevertheless, school choice is worthy of support even if not a single family chose to enroll their children in Catholic schools. Redressing a wrong (i.e., that some parents have no say in what school their child attends) is always worthwhile and must remain the primary focus. That Catholic schools will have more students is an encouraging, but secondary, consequence.

Catholic Education Matters

Matt Gelchion — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 17:21:48 +0000

I have this image in my head of high schoolers holding a spirited debate – students participating in a game of verbal ping pong, exchanging their arguments back and forth across the classroom. Then, one student eloquently and passionately captures his side’s position, which causes a hush throughout the room. After a few seconds of silence, someone else chimes in, “Yeah…what he said.”

I relay this image because we all, I think, experience moments when someone else beautifully captures a belief that we hold, even if we struggle to articulate it. There are certain stories, movies, homilies, phrases, etc. that resonate with us at times we are not able to predict and for reasons that we cannot fully explain. It is for this reason, I believe, that some people keep journals of their favorite quotes. And (perhaps a more relevant example) it is why people will occasionally make their Facebook statuses a favorite quote or choose to link to a youtube video or an article. Well, that is essentially my feeling on this article: Catholic Education Matters. The author of this piece, Matt Emerson, describes his preparations for the coming school year and the importance of Catholic education in a way that truly struck a chord with me. For that reason, I would simply offer my suggestion, particularly for those directly connected to Catholic schools, to go read the article…

Yeah…what he said.

Indiana Choice Scholarship Program Upheld

Matt Gelchion — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 14:18:08 +0000

Marion Superior Court Judge Michael Keele issued his ruling Monday afternoon to deny a temporary injunction that would have halted Indiana’s recently enacted Choice Scholarship Program. The program provides vouchers to families who meet income eligibility guidelines and wish to transfer their child from a public to private school. Opponents of the Choice Scholarship Program claimed that the legislation violates Indiana’s state constitution, contending that the state would effectively be providing public money to religious institutions. In his ruling, Judge Keele noted that the public funds are directed to religious schools only upon the “private individual choices of parents.” Because the eligible families are the agents in determining where the vouchers are used – whether at religious or non-religious private schools – the judge held that the law is “religion-neutral.”

This ruling is a huge (even if anticipated) victory for school choice supporters throughout Indiana, particularly for the families who have been empowered with greater choice. By the time the application deadline for a Choice Scholarship passes, more than 3,000 students will be enrolled in the program.

Families Take Advantage of Choice Scholarship

Matt Gelchion — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:57:45 +0000

This school year marks the first opportunity for parents who meet income eligibility levels to apply for an Indiana Choice Scholarship for their children. According to a WNDU story, more than 1,300 students had been accepted into the Indiana Choice Scholarship Program by the end of last week. The article reports that roughly 470 of the students will attend Catholic schools in the Fort Wayne South Bend diocese (that number is now, at the time of this writing, up to 550). To read the full WNDU story, click here: Vouchers spark 40% enrollment increase at Our Lady.

To some, 1,300 hundred students may not seem like a high number, given that the statewide limit on Choice Scholarships is 7,500 this year. (The cap for next year is 15,000, and there is no cap in future years.) In actuality, this number marks an undeniable success. The rules and regulations for the voucher legislation were not released until the second week of July, families and schools a brief window to begin the application process. Changing schools no doubt requires some level of adjustment for not only the students but the families as well. In many cases, families were making the decision of whether to apply for a Choice Scholarship at a time of year when school enrollment has normally already been long decided. One can reasonably assume that the uncertainty surrounding this new process may have caused some families to delay the decision until next year; this has in fact been observed in other states in the first year following enactment of choice legislation. While the cap of 7,500 may not have been reached, that more than 1,300 students’ families have taken advantage of greater choice is a cause for celebration.

You Can’t Take It With You

Matt Gelchion — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 21:04:05 +0000

Increased educational costs and a struggling economy have contributed to the financial challenges that Catholic schools face. In light of these obstacles, it is uplifting to hear about Catholic school advocates who invest money in the future of Catholic education – especially when they will not even have the chance to see the fruit that their contribution will bear.

Alicia Sullivan of Dover, New Hampshire, decided to donate the wealth that she and her two sisters, Ruth and Mary Melanie Sullivan, had accumulated to benefit two local Catholic schools. Upon Alicia Sullivan’s death, $500,000 was designated to be split between St. Mary Academy and St. Thomas Aquinas High School. To read the complete story, click here.

What Does It Mean to be a Catholic School?

Matt Gelchion — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 16:07:31 +0000

What does it mean to be a Catholic school? A few weeks ago the New Jersey Assembly advanced a bill that should cause pause for supporters of Catholic schools to evaluate the implications of their responses. The bill (A2806) would allow hundreds of high-performing private and parochial schools in failing districts to convert to charter schools as long as they remove religious teachings and symbolism from curricula and facilities. The author of this news report wrote that the bill had support from lawmakers and Gov. Chris Christie, but that it was “opposed by the Catholic [C]hurch, an organization the bill stands to help.” He concluded that the bill, if enacted, would help the Catholic Church because “[d]eclining enrollment has led the state’s parochial schools to close in record numbers over the past decade, and the bill aims to alleviate that shortage. Many families that pull students from parochial schools do so because they can no longer afford the tuition.” His rationale is that if tuition is no longer a barrier, more students will be in these schools, which will lead to greater resources for the schools, and therefore the Catholic schools stand to benefit. What’s the issue then? Well, everything really…particularly that the identity of these Catholic schools would be fundamentally undermined. I’m fearful that others – including supporters of Catholic education – would find this logic appealing. And it is for those who already value a Catholic school education that this message is directed. I am “preaching to the believers” in this case.

At the core of a Catholic school’s mission is educating the entire person. If a Catholic school is effective at fulfilling its mission, students will not only undergo a transformation in their ability to think critically, write succinctly, and speak articulately, but they will also have spent time discerning their vocations (i.e., where their God-given talents meet the world’s needs) and exploring their faith in a meaningful way. Just as we acknowledge that students’ minds should be educated, so too should their hearts. Equipping students with the prerequisite analytical skills to effect societal change is not the only element of effective teaching. Exposing students to the ills that plague society and moving their hearts to unceasingly yearn for justice is another crucial aspect. Could we even ask for a better context to do so than in that of the Christian faith – one whose central figure is a man who not only dwelled among the poor and downtrodden but emphasized that we are judged by our treatment of these groups? Advocates of Catholic schools desire students to depart, much like the disciples on the road to Emmaus, with their hearts set on fire. The hope, then, is that they will use this fire kindling within them to go forth, do good, and set the world aflame. How then could it possibly be in the best interest of these schools to prohibit discussion of the Holy Spirit’s presence working in their midst? For those who really value the integral role that Catholic schools can play, increasing enrollment at the sake of sacrificing identity cannot even be considered a trade-off. It’s an admission of defeat, conceding that Catholic schools are not worth fighting for.

Some contend that lessons in character-building can still be taught without explicitly using religion as the vehicle. The religious symbols – the crucifixes in the classrooms, the statue of Mary in the hallway, the quotes from Scripture painted on the walls – do not confer knowledge. Plus, the same teachers will be teaching in the same building in the same classrooms. Surely the schools can find a way to have the same success, right? Unfortunately, the schools’ culture would be so radically changed that the schools would no longer resemble what they once did, schools with conditions that enabled them to achieve their institutional missions. This realization is absolutely crucial for true Catholic school advocates. How can a “charter” Catholic school serve the same function as an actual Catholic school if the person whose life (and death…and resurrection) is the sole reason for the existence of the school cannot be discussed? Imagine if a public school, like say Henry Harris in Bayonne, New Jersey, was entirely forbidden from mentioning Henry Harris. That would be ludicrous. It’s the same thing with truly Catholic schools…except that if Henry Harris didn’t live, that school would still exist just with a different name. If Jesus didn’t live, that Catholic school would not be there.

From August 2009-May 2011, I taught at Resurrection Catholic School in Pascagoula, Mississippi. If I were to ask students to name a few of the sources of greatest growth for them during the past school year, undoubtedly a high number would cite their class retreats as one of those causes. For some others, weekly prayer group meetings were another source of individual and collective growth. I know how important they were because students would regularly tell me. And this isn’t unique to a small school along the Gulf Coast. It was the exact same way when I was a high school student at St. Peter’s Prep in Jersey City, New Jersey.

Catholic schools are going away; sadly, there is no disputing this fact. Legislation that makes it easier for these schools to disappear needs to be vociferously opposed by supporters of Catholic education. If a person holds the conviction that Catholic schools serve the common good, passive acceptance of Catholic schools’ demise is simply unacceptable. In the end, it is a matter of whether or not people are willing to commit to sustaining a school system that provides concrete opportunities for the entire person to be educated.

Response to Rep. Bob Turner

Matt Gelchion — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:13:28 +0000

Three weeks ago, Wisconsin Representative Bob Turner (D-Racine) submitted a Letter to the Editor describing his opposition to expanding the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP). To someone unfamiliar with school choice, this letter could be confusing or, even worse, misleading. He does note that “parental involvement is the key to our students’ educational achievement,” a statement with which few would argue. Curiously, he opposes vouchers, even though a district’s participation in a voucher program would necessarily increase parental involvement. Turner argues against the MPCP because “the standards for participating voucher schools are minimal. They may employ teachers with no training and only a GED, and administrators without a high school or college degree.” If the schools are so bad – filled with incompetent and unqualified teachers and administrators – no parents with the ability to choose their children’s schools, as vouchers would give them, would send their children there, so what’s to fear? Opposition to the voucher program on these grounds reflects a complete lack of confidence in parents’ ability to make the right choice on behalf of their children. No one has a greater interest in holding schools accountable than parents. Rep. Turner claims that parental involvement is the key to success, yet he doesn’t want them to have the opportunity to decide where their children go to school.

In explaining another reason for his opposition, Turner claims, “The current pending state budget bill, 2011-13 Senate Bill 27, will expand the Milwaukee parental choice program to all school districts in Milwaukee County. This will have the effect of more affluent families taking advantage of this program so that their children can attend a school that hand picks the best students possible and limits, or does not accept, any special needs students.” (Emphasis is my own.) This statement is particularly troubling, as it 1) inaccurately characterizes access to vouchers and 2) misleads people into thinking that the wealthy and not the intended beneficiaries of vouchers, namely poor families, will benefit most. In actuality, for families to take advantage of the program, they have to qualify for a voucher; to qualify for a voucher, a family must fall below a certain income level. Even with the income eligibility raised to 300% of the Federal Poverty Level (~ $68,000 for a family of four), affluent families – ones who by definition have an abundance of money, goods, property, etc. – will simply not qualify. A family income of $68,000 a year is nothing to scoff at, but it should not be confused with affluence. Many more families than before will directly benefit from the expansion of the voucher program…just not affluent ones.

He also calls into question the success of voucher programs, boldly claiming that “the results of the testing [Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination] showed that voucher students scored the same or worse as students attending a Milwaukee public school.” With no reference to where he obtained this information, one has reason to be skeptical. (Side note: critiquing the efficacy of a voucher program simply by comparing all voucher students to students attending a Milwaukee public school is misguided and does not account for other factors at play. Students who take advantage of vouchers are more likely to come from disadvantaged backgrounds, and therefore they would be expected to initially score at lower levels than public school students – a group that would include both disadvantaged students and ones who come from families of greater means.) As it turns out, research conducted by John Witte and Patrick Wolfe demonstrates that – after looking at carefully matched sets of students in the choice program and in Milwaukee public schools – the MPCP has been successful. Among the findings were the following:

Competitive pressure from the voucher program has produced modest achievement gains in MPS
The three-year achievement gains of choice students have been comparable to those of our matched sample of MPS students
High school students in the choice program both graduate and enroll in four-year colleges at a higher rate than do similar students in MPS

The claims that voucher programs are not producing academic benefits are simply not accurate.

Lastly, Rep. Turner writes, “With the Racine Unified School District receiving the second largest projected budget cut in the state, over $11 million in school aid and over $40 million in revenue reduction, we cannot allow additional voucher schools to be started in Racine.” He makes the not-so-subtle suggestion (given his intentional bolding of the figures) that the voucher program will cost the state money at a time when money is already hard to come by. As it turns out, the Milwaukee Choice Program saved the state of Wisconsin an estimated $52 million in Fiscal Year 2001. If anything, given the financial benefits Wisconsin could receive, the numbers Turner provides offer economic justification to an issue where the moral justification (giving disadvantaged children increased access to more schools) already suffices.

Give Us a Try — You’ll Like What You See

Matt Gelchion — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:07:03 +0000

Some people claim that the best things in life are free. For families in Otsego, Michigan, who value Catholic education, this saying may take on new meaning. Starting next school year, Saint Margaret Catholic School will offer new families the opportunity to enroll their children tuition-free for the first nine weeks.

Magazine subscriptions, gym memberships, and new software, among a wide array of other materials and services, are all usually associated with free trials. Perhaps a similar approach for Catholic schools will find the same success. For an education system whose greatest challenge is getting students to fill the seats, giving families an incentive to at least see if Catholic schools are right for their children –and experience the benefits of such – may just prove to be an ingenious strategy.