Utah is one of the few states where the idea of a tuition tax credit is still a politically robust issue. In most states the idea of educational choice through tuition tax credits has been rejected. Nonetheless, with continued support from the Milton Friedman Foundation and conservative think tanks from other states, the battle to radically reform the organization of public schools goes on in Utah.
I am willing to believe that those who promote the Carson Smith Scholarship Act care deeply about the welfare of special-education students, but they care more about the promotion of educational choice and privatized schools.
The effort to introduce tuition tax credits has not succeeded in this state to date, so vouchers for special-education students serves as a good alternative for starting choice reforms, and now these reformers want to open the vouchers up to all schools and children - even home schoolers. The Carson Smith Scholarship Act is a means to that end and should be recognized as such.
However, the editorial debate in last Sunday's paper did little to clarify this political dynamic. Royce Van Tassell, executive director of Education Excellence Utah, portrays himself as the white knight defending the "thousands of desperate parents" jamming his phone lines with calls for help. Kim Burningham, chairman of the State Board of Education, portrays himself as the efficient bureaucrat, backed by "experts in special education, school finance and school law," who understands best how to administer such a technical program.
But aside from their respective points of view, it is unclear what purpose their columns served. Administrative rules are not, after all, issues that burn in the hearts of most NASCAR dads.
What does burn, however, is the image of a righteous reformer struggling with a technical bureaucrat over the welfare of school children. In this regard, I thought Burningham's response to Van Tassell was inadequate.
Missing are any of the great ideas that motivate a debate about how to reform and improve public education. Present is the image of a technocrat with few, if any, ideas, but loads of authority and pretense.
Tuition tax credits are said to promote liberty and freedom but it remains unclear exactly how choice in the marketplace will lead to improved educational opportunities for children. A considerable amount of choice exists within public schools and it is not clear how creating more choice in the markets will resolve the curricular, instructional, motivational and support issues needed to significantly improve student learning.
Markets are not necessarily the best way to organize complex processes like schooling that require coordination over a 12-year period. Indeed, the promotion of market-based education through legislation like the Carson Smith "Scholarship" Act is largely an untested theory, one that plays with the welfare and future of all children, not just a few.
Royce Van Tassell, his organization's name suggests, represents excellence. Who is Royce Van Tassell, anyway, and more important, how did he become the spokesperson for "educational excellence"?
I suggest that if he would spend more time in the classroom, rather than rubbing elbows with the legislative big boys, then he would probably be surprised by what educational excellence truly looks like. I suggest it is best defined in the eyes of children, the discipline of our teachers and the continued support of parents as well as business partners for public education.
Certainly there are weak, if not broken, links in the complex chain of good intentions. But I would rather put my faith in my fellow Americans working with children than in the machinations of ideology and politics.
---
Patrick Galvin is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Policy and Leadership at the University of Utah.
