Budget Crunch Can Lead To School Choice Decisions
There is not much of a pent-up demand for school choice from parents, not yet anyway.
And the philosophical incongruity between a democratic state’s insistence on an educated citizenry and its practice of at the same time providing that education doesn’t bother many. Might seem like state indoctrination, but distaste for that is not there, yet.
No, it’s neither demand nor philosophy that’s informing top-level discussions about education choice. It’s the utilitarian argument, cost-savings, that’s coming to the fore.
Take the most radical retreat yet — from compulsory state provision to simple funding the consumer with oversight — Nevada.
The universal Nevada Education Savings Account plan is slated for a full start in 2016. The registrations for the program are already in full gear.
What was the trajectory?
See Wall Street Journal — Nevada Places a Bet on School Choice — http://www.wsj.com/articles/nevada-places-a-bet-on-school-choice-1434319588
The budget crunch was huge in Nevada. Immigration was putting a squeeze on the enormous need for portables, trailers and modular construction for new school spaces. Lurking in the background was the example of the already successful education funding structure called Education Savings Accounts — operating in Arizona, Florida, Tennessee and Mississippi.
The beauty of the Nevada plan is that it invites innovation. The unbundling of services is a breakthrough — parents can shop for tutors and services from the community. Roll-over of funds unused can be applied to subsequent years or even college. Etc.
Budget crunches serve as a wake-up call, don’t they? BC’s per pupil allotment is $7,390 (with partial funding of independent schools) while Ontario’s is $12,299 (no public funding of independents).