News
Testimony of Executive Director before the House Democratic Policy Committee on Vouchers
Vouchers don't solve the problem.
Testimony of Susan Gobreski
Executive Director, Education Voters Institute
February 22, 2011
My name is Susan Gobreski, I am the Director of Education Voters Institute of Pennsylvania, a non-profit organization focused on public education. We are a public interest organization. Thank you for this hearing and your efforts to inquire and air this matter, with thoughtful questions and a willingness to examine the implications of this issue. We oppose vouchers because they are not in the public interest.
“The General Assembly shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient education system to serve the needs of the Commonwealth.” Here is what that means to me, as a mother, a citizen of Pennsylvania and a taxpayer. The people of Pennsylvania have enshrined into our Constitution that it is good for all of us to have a good public education system available to all, not just to some.
We don’t pay for schools as a community because we think everyone with a kid should get a check. We pay for schools because we recognize a couple of crucial facts.
- Our community and our economy – our shared prosperity – are stronger when we are a well educated people. If the United States had closed the international achievement gap between 1983 and 1998 and raised its performance to the level of such nations as Finland and Korea, US GDP in 2008 would have been between $1.3 trillion and $2.3 trillion higher, representing 9 to 16 percent of GDP.1
- People who are better educated are more productive, self sufficient members of our communities – they start businesses and pay taxes, create jobs and some even have time to coach little league. We need to provide an opportunity for everyone out there waiting to learn the skills they need to invent something, to develop it and to build it, to run a business or to get a decent job and support a family.
- We want employers who want to locate here because they will know our workforce is strong and their employees will be happy to live here.
- We pay for schools because we know that it is cost effective in the long run. Increasing the high school completion rate by just 1 percent for all men ages 20-60 would save the U.S. up to $1.4 billion per year in reduced costs from crime.2
We pay for schools, because every child should get an opportunity to learn, regardless of their zipcode, regardless of the tax assessment policies of a community, the size of the houses. We want each child to have that opportunity to learn, to grow and to join the ranks of the productive.
We don’t pay to educate our own child; we pay to live in a place that educates children. It isn’t supposed to be an ATM machine.
Further, it is not the responsibility of the legislature to provide solutions for individuals. It is the responsibility of the legislature to work to ensure the fulfillment of our Constitution and its application to all, which in this case requires that we provide a “thorough and efficient” public education system available in actuality, not just as words on paper. If we do not have one of those – and any support for vouchers implicitly acknowledges that we don’t – then the legislature’s responsibility is to work harder, to delve further, to identify and yes, to allocate more resources, to examine thoroughly what is going wrong and the impact of our decisions.
This proposal has some glaring problems:
- Does accountability follow the money? As taxpayers and as communities, we have attached certain conditions to our money. We do that by electing people to make laws about how our money will be spent. We’ve said there are certain standards for curriculum, assessment, transparency, an open and accountable governing process and things like preventing discrimination. Will all those conditions and protections on our money follow the money? Will there be standards and disclosure?
- As many people here have addressed: it re-allocates money in a way that is unfair and unbalanced.
- It is truly school choice – in the sense that the schools will get to choose the kids, not the other way around.
- There is plenty of substantial research that addresses educational practices that improve student achievement , which is what we SHOULD be focused on. And the research on vouchers isn’t it, and it isn’t promising.
The critical problem with this – the most important thing is that it doesn’t solve the problem. It is a distraction from what we should be doing. And, at best it is a bandaid on a bleeder; at worst it is a willful blind eye to the fact that we have significant opportunity gaps, we know which children we are failing and even worse, we know what would fix it and we won’t do it.
The biggest argument against actually just fixing the problems with public education seem to largely revolve around money. We can’t afford it, right? Yet we have seen that increased investments have caused increased achievement. And, there IS money out there: revenues are on the increase and Pennsylvania has a tremendous natural resource in the Marcellus Shale. We are the only state that doesn’t tax the extraction. It is a resource of the Commonwealth and should be used for that – our common wealth. If we do not use the resources of today to invest in tomorrow, then we are fools. We are also the only state that doesn’t tax smokeless tobacco and one of two that doesn’t tax cigars.
We should be talking about the big picture, so that end, here are some things that I think you should be pursuing instead of this:
- What things should every kid have in their education? Which ones are necessary and how much do they cost?
- What are the challenges faced by rural schools? Urban school? Schools in small cities?
- What changes are needed in the tax and finance system that would reduce the role that zipcode plays in reduced opportunity and access.
- Holding hearings on what works in education. Educate yourselves about facts related to the following:
- If people want more money for schools, what do they want it for? What do they think it will buy? Do we think those things are worthwhile?
- What are the schools that are doing poorly lacking? What are the facility, staffing and materials needed to get them up to acceptable standards? What are the barriers to getting those things?
- What are the schools that are doing well doing?
- What are the best practices in improving professional development for teachers and instructional leaders? Is there a role the state legislature or the executive branch could play to improve teaching, professional development and retention policies?
- Cost efficiencies: What are practices that schools and school boards have used to save money and how can we promote adoption of those practices?
- Since the benefits of early education and high quality pre-k are so clearly established, what is the path to expand access in Pennsylvania? Should we have a 10 year target for a fully available early education system in Pennsylvania?
- How can we align our educational goals and outcomes to workforce development to better attract jobs and strengthen productivity and quality?
People like to point out that money isn’t the only solution to the problems that we have in education. I agree. But I also know that you get what you pay for, and that while money doesn’t solve all problems, it does solve ones in which the key barrier is cost. It is an important point.
Reference has been made to a burning building, so there is a parable I’d like to share.
A person is walking along a river and sees a baby floating in the river, naturally she jumps in and saves the baby. Another one comes along, and again she saves the baby. More babies are coming. A man passing by sees what is happening and jumps in and helps start pulling babies out of the river. The babies are coming faster – and they are working as hard as they can – and they can save a lot of them, but some get past them. More people jump in to help, but the babies keep coming. Eventually, yet another person comes along, and yells out offering to help. The people in the water cry out “No! Somebody has to go up stream and figure out why all these babies are ending up in the water and do something to stop it!
In that story—that is you. It is true that someone has to help the babies in the river now. I’d say those are the teachers and after school programs, and maybe social workers and such. But, SOMEONE in the story HAS TO STOP THE BABIES FROM ENDING UP IN THE RIVER – and that is… you, members of the legislature, our government. You carry the responsibility for providing a “thorough and efficient” education system that is available to every child in this state, not just to some and not just for throwing out individual life rafts. If there are babies in the river at all, it is on you.
You might find that job daunting and complicated, and even difficult and fraught with politics. However, that is the job. You might have to look people in the eye and say things that people don’t want to hear, such as some things cost money and we have to meet our responsibilities. In our house, the electric bill went up this year. It costs more money than it used to: we don’t like it, we’d rather spend our money on other things, but that is the cost of that particular thing, so we decided to continue paying our bill and keep the electricity on in our house, because it is what we need to do to maintain a certain quality of life. That is the way it is.
Education truly is our common wealth – if we focus our efforts on giving every kid a decent education, in a facility that is acceptable and safe, with tools and materials that are relevant, and adults that are both supported in their job and accountable to it, we will be a stronger Pennsylvania.
McKinsey.com/The Economic Impact of the Achievement Gap in America’s Schools. Rep. Social Sector Office, Apr. 2009. Web. 2 June 2010. p. 1
2 Levin, Henry M., and William H. Kilpatrick, comps. The Social Costs of Inadequate Education. Publication. Campaign for Educational Equity, 2005. Teachers College Symposium on Educational Equity. TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 24-26 Oct. 2005. Web. 30 Mar. 2010.
Measuring Gaps in Education Needs and Conditions for the 144 Schools Targeted by SB 1
All but 15 of the 144 schools rank among the poorest 200 school districts in PA, based on community aid ratio.
All but 23 of the 144 schools rank among the poorest 101 districts in PA, based on community aid ratio.
*** All but 5 of the 144 schools rank among the 100 districts with the highest percentage of students in poverty.
** All but 9 of the 144 schools rank among the 50 districts with the highest percentage of students in poverty.
All but 22 of the 144 schools rank among the 100 districts with the highest percentage of English language learners.
All but 27 of the 144 schools rank among the 50 districts with the highest percentage of English language learners.
All but 15 of the 144 schools are located in districts with a community cost of living higher than average in PA, up to 13 percent higher.
** All but 3 of the 144 schools rank among the 210 districts with the highest property taxes in PA.
46 of the 144 schools have an equalized millage rate (property tax) between 20.3 and 40.3.
**All but 13 of the 144 schools have an adequacy shortfall in funding as calculated by the 2010-11 state budget.
** All but 19 of the 144 schools have an adequacy shortfall greater than $2,100 per student and $52,500 per classroom of 25 students.
** The average adequacy shortfall for all 144 schools is $3,739 per student and $93,468 per classroom of 25 students.
Source: From Education Law Center.