The Double-Edged Sword of President Trump’s
School Choice Efforts Philip Scott, Esq.
President Trump has made some waves in the school choice realm in his short tenure as President. During the campaign, he made a federal school choice program a centerpiece of his education policy. Since his inauguration, he has named school choice advocate Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education and consequently motivated the advocacy efforts of the teacher’s unions to levels not seen in recent memory. Further, during his televised address to Congress in February, he once again highlighted his desire for a federal school choice program and told the story of the impact school choice had in the life of Denisha Merriweather, who was in attendance for the speech. President Trump’s fi rst proposed budget included a $250 million private school choice program and Title I portability for students.1
No one can say whether any of President Trump’s goals for federal school choice will become reality or not. What we can say is this new emphasis on private schools brings with it a spotlight of interest that is both good and bad.
The Good
This is the fi rst time in memory that school choice has been a viable discussion at the federal level. We need to prepare ourselves and our communities to rally together if and when the time comes to support initiatives that may provide parental funding. Conversely, we need to prepare in case appropriate pushback is warranted.
The Bad
Our movement has largely been left to its own devices at the federal and (to a lesser extent) state level. That will change as school choice becomes more signifi cant to legislatures. We’ve assembled some pertinent issues raised during DeVos’s confi rmation hearing before the Senate HELP (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions) Committee.
• Senator Christopher Murphy of Connecticut pressed Mrs. DeVos to pledge to implement government accountability regulations and standards on all programs that take public dollars. Accountability is good, but to what extent will private schools be accountable to government agencies? Christian schools will have a view on this.
• Senator Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire put forward the idea that parents should have the private right to go to court if their child’s education
© 2016 by the Association of Christian Schools International
does not adequately meet the expectations of their special needs child in private schools. Senator Hassan pressed DeVos to pledge that children who take a voucher (government money) to a private school also take with them their same rights they have in public schools under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Though several of the senator’s comments were unclear, it is certainly troubling if private schools must provide the same special need programs as public schools without the full public funding required to do so.
• Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia believes all schools that accept
government funding, including private schools, should follow the same accountability and outcome standards, presumably as public schools currently do. The senator also believes that schools receiving taxpayer funding should be required to meet the standards of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and that private schools receiving government funds should be required to report information on its disciplining of students, as well as instances of harassment and bullying, to the government. In each of these beliefs, he pressed DeVos to agree with him and work toward these ends. How reporting of discipline, harassment, and bullying in Christian schools would be used by the government is cause for additional concern.
These committee hearings are often political horse-and-pony parades full of posturing; what happens behind closed doors can sometimes look a bit different. Regardless, it does provide insight into how the discussion of a national school choice option is being shaped: if you take government dollars, you may be held to the same standards as a public school.2
Questions of what laws apply to Christian education currently and what laws should apply in the future are likely. We should not be surprised if this elevated interest at the federal level builds momentum for state legislatures to take a closer look at Christian education. We might also expect to see compliance policies; cultural norms about sexuality will likely be a topic of such a discussion.
There is great potential as well as elevated risk in bringing a national spotlight to private education. That’s not necessarily a bad thing if this potential can be converted into actual opportunities. However, we as a movement must be engaged in the process, for the time will likely come when we will be called
27.3 | 59
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24
