logo
Trump Order Boosts School Choice, But There's Little Evidence Vouchers Lead to Smarter Students, Better Educational Outcomes

Trump Order Boosts School Choice, But There's Little Evidence Vouchers Lead to Smarter Students, Better Educational Outcomes

Yahoo23-02-2025

The school choice movement received a major boost on Jan. 29, 2025, when President Donald Trump issued an executive order supporting families who want to use public money to send their children to private schools.
The far-reaching order aims to redirect federal funds to voucher-type programs. Vouchers typically afford parents the freedom to select nonpublic schools, including faith-based ones, using all or a portion of the public funds set aside to educate their children.
But research shows that as a consequence, this typically drains funding from already cash-strapped public schools.
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
We are professors who focus on education law, with special interests in educational equity and school choice programs. While proponents of school choice claim it leads to academic gains, we don't see much evidence to support this view – but we do see the negative impact they sometimes have on public schools.
The vast majority of children in the U.S. attend traditional public schools. Their share, however, has steadily declined from 87% in 2011 to about 83% in 2021, at least in part due to the growth of school choice programs such as vouchers.
Related
Modern voucher programs expanded significantly during the late 1980s and early 1990s as states, cities and local school boards experimented with ways to allow parents to use public funds to send their kids to nonpublic schools, especially ones that are religiously affiliated.
While some programs were struck down for violating the separation of church and state, others were upheld. Vouchers received a big shot in the arm in 2002, when the Supreme Court ruled in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris that the First Amendment's Establishment Clause permitted states to include faith-based schools in their voucher programs in Cleveland.
Following Zelman, vouchers became a more realistic political option. Even so, access to school choice programs varied greatly by state and was not as dramatic as supporters may have wished. Because the Constitution is silent on education, states largely control school voucher programs.
Currently, 13 states and Washington, D.C., offer one or several school choice programs targeting different types of students. Total U.S. enrollment in such programs surpassed 1 million for the first time in 2024, double what it was in 2020, according to EdChoice, which advocates for school-choice policies.
Voters, however, have taken a dim view of voucher programs. By one count, they've turned down referendums on vouchers 17 times, according to the National Coalition for Public Education, a group that opposes the policy.
Most recently, three states rejected school choice programs in the November 2024 elections. Kentucky voters overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to enshrine school choice into commonwealth law, while Nebraska voters chose to repeal its voucher program. Colorado also rejected a 'right' to school choice, but more narrowly.
At its heart, Trump's executive order would offer discretionary grants and issue guidance to states over using federal funds within this K-12 scholarship program. It also directs the Department of Interior and Department of Defense to make vouchers available to Native American and military families.
In addition, the order directs the Department of Education to provide guidance on how states can better support school choice – though it's unclear exactly what that will mean. It's a task that will be left for Linda McMahon, Trump's nominee for secretary of Education, once she is confirmed.
Trump promoted school choice in his first term as well but failed to win enough congressional support to include it in the federal budget.
The push to give parents more choice over where to send their children is based on the assumption that doing so will provide them with a better education.
In the order, Trump specifically cites disappointing data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress showing that 70% of eighth graders are below proficient in reading, while 72% are below proficient in mathematics.
Voucher advocates point to research that school choice boosts test scores and improves educational attainment.
But other data don't always back up the notion that school choice policies meaningfully improve student outcomes. A 2023 review of the past decade of research on the topic by the Brookings Institution found that the introduction of a voucherlike program actually led to lower academic achievement – similar to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Related
A 2017 review by a Stanford economist Martin Carnoy published by the Economic Policy Institute similarly found little evidence vouchers improve school outcomes. While there were some modest gains in graduation rates, they were outweighed by the risks to funding public school systems.
Indeed, vouchers have been shown to reduce funding to public schools, especially in rural areas, and hurt public education in other ways, such as by making it harder for schools to afford qualified teachers.
Critics of voucher programs also fear that nonpublic schools may discriminate against some students, such as those who are members of the LGBTQ+ community. There are some reports of this already happening in Wisconsin. Unlike legislation governing traditional public schools, state laws regulating voucher programs often do not include comprehensive anti-discrimination provisions.
Related
Criticisms of voucher programs aside, many parents who support them do so based on the hope that their children will have more affordable, high-quality educational options. This was especially true in Zelman, in which the Supreme Court upheld the rights of parents to remove their kids from Cleveland's struggling public schools.
There is little doubt in our minds that in some cases school choice affords some parents in low-performing districts additional options for their children's education.
But in general, the evidence shows that is the exception to vouchers, not the rule. Evidence also suggests most children – whether they're using vouchers to attend nonpublic schools or remain in the public school system – may not always benefit from school choice programs. And when it takes money out of underfunded public school systems, school choice can make things worse for a lot more children than it benefits.
While the poor reading and math scores cited in Trump's executive order suggest that change is needed to help keep America's school and students competitive, this order may not achieve that goal.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Trump's Deployment Of Military in California Is So Controversial
Why Trump's Deployment Of Military in California Is So Controversial

Bloomberg

time16 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Why Trump's Deployment Of Military in California Is So Controversial

President Donald Trump ordered the California National Guard on June 7 to dispatch at least 2,000 soldiers to the Los Angeles area as thousands of people demonstrating against immigration raids clashed with security forces. After vandalism and violence broke out, the Pentagon escalated the federal response by also mobilizing 700 active-duty Marines. The president said on his Truth Social platform that federal agencies were to take 'all such action necessary' to stop what he called 'migrant riots.' The rare move by a president to mobilize military forces to quell domestic unrest was quickly condemned as unnecessary and counterproductive by local authorities, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Governor Gavin Newsom.

CNN Correspondent Detained By LAPD, Camera Crew Arrested
CNN Correspondent Detained By LAPD, Camera Crew Arrested

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

CNN Correspondent Detained By LAPD, Camera Crew Arrested

CNN National Correspondent Jason Carroll, who has been reporting on the unrest in Los Angeles for the past few days, found himself a part of the story tonight when he was detained and briefly questioned by Police in Los Angeles. During a live shot, Carroll is heard telling police his name and then seen being walked away with his hands behind his back. More from Deadline Jon Stewart Weighs In On L.A. Protests, Says Trump Is Escalating To Distract From Elon Musk's Epstein Accusation: "Petty And Petulant Man-Babies" Trump Sending Marines To L.A. To Respond To ICE Protests; POTUS Also Plans To Deploy Additional 2,000 Guard Troops, Gavin Newsom Says - Update BET Awards Set To Go On Amid LA Protests Against Immigration Raids A police officer is then heard saying, 'We're letting you go. You can't come back. If you come back, you will be arrested.' Carroll is heard to say, 'Ok.' You can see the scene below. CNN later reported that, while Carroll was released, two members of his camera crew were arrested. Carroll described the scene to Laura Coates back in the studio: 'I was walking over to the officer, tried to explain who I was, who I was with. He said, I'd like you to turn around. I turned around, I put my hands behind my back. They did not put me in zip ties, but they did grab both my hands as I was escorted over to the side, they said, you are being detained.' Carroll is not the first member of the press to get caught between police and protesters. On Sunday, Lauren Tomasi, the U.S. correspondent for Australia's 9News, appeared to be shot by a rubber bullet while reporting on the immigration protests. Nick Stern, a British news photographer, reportedly needed emergency surgery over the weekend after sustaining a leg wound during the clashes. A coalition of 27 press and civil liberties advocacy groups wrote to U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem today 'to express alarm that federal officers may have violated the First Amendment rights of journalists covering recent protests and unrest related to immigration enforcement in the Los Angeles area.' The coalition, led by the Los Angeles Press Club, First Amendment Coalition and Freedom of the Press Foundation, further wrote that 'The press plays an essential role in our democracy as the public's eyes and ears. The timely reporting of breaking news is necessary to provide the public with complete information, especially about controversial events. 'A number of reports suggest that federal officers have indiscriminately used force or deployed munitions such as tear gas or pepper balls that caused significant injuries to journalists. In some cases, federal officers appear to have deliberately targeted journalists who were doing nothing more than their job covering the news.' The LA Press Club referred to at least 24 'documented' instances of journalists being targeted by law enforcement while covering the protests in Los Angeles between June 6-8, and multiple media workers report having been shot by police with less-than-lethal munitions. Those journalists included Southern California News Group's Ryanne Mena, freelance journalists Anthony Cabassa and Sean Beckner-Carmitchel, The Southlander's Ben Camacho, British photojournalist Nick Stern, and LA Taco's Lexis Olivier-Ray. City News Service contributed to this report. Best of Deadline Sean 'Diddy' Combs Sex-Trafficking Trial Updates: Cassie Ventura's Testimony, $10M Hotel Settlement, Drugs, Violence, & The Feds A Full Timeline Of Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends With Us' Feud In Court, Online & In The Media Where To Watch All The 'John Wick' Movies: Streamers That Have All Four Films

Rachel Maddow Says the ‘Interesting Question' About Trump Is ‘What the Country Lets Him Get Away With'
Rachel Maddow Says the ‘Interesting Question' About Trump Is ‘What the Country Lets Him Get Away With'

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Rachel Maddow Says the ‘Interesting Question' About Trump Is ‘What the Country Lets Him Get Away With'

Rachel Maddow belittled Donald Trump on Monday night whilechatting with her MSNBC colleague Lawrence O'Donnell, declaring that Trump's latest 'dictator' actions have made him 'very boring.' Not that she argued the current situation isn't serious, only that Trump is acting like, as she joked, a blonde copy of the extremely corrupt former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. But Maddow also clarified that the 'really interesting question' about all of this is 'what the country lets him get away with. The comment came up at the start of 'The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell,' as the duo discussed how Trump's current actions — calling in the national guard over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom to quell lawful protests — are the exact opposite of what he said he could legally do in 2020 during the George Floyd protests. At that time, Trump said it would be unlawful for him to do so without a request of a state governor. 'I mean the difference,' Maddow said, is that 'he's decided that he's throwing it all out. You know, 'dictator on day from day one,' and you know, going to terminate parts of the Constitution. And he's decided that he doesn't matter what Congress does, and it doesn't matter what the courts do, that he's just the strong man he's going to be.' 'He's decided to throw out all the rules,' Maddow continued. 'The thing that that has done, as far as I'm concerned, is make him very boring, because it's like it's all on the table. We know exactly what he's doing. We know exactly what his intentions are. He's blonde Berlusconi. This is, I mean, he's just trying to do the same thing all the other strongmen and would be dictators do all over the country. I think the really interesting question is, what the country lets him get away with, and we're seeing a really interesting test of that right now, all over the country, especially this week.' Later in the discussion, Maddow argued that the issue isn't that Trump has changed his mind over what he can and cannot legally do, it's that 'we can probably intuit that what he's being told is, 'yeah, it's illegal, therefore, go do it.' I think that the more laws he breaks, the more blatantly unconstitutional things he both proposes and tries, I think the more they think power accrues to him, because he's less constrained by things that don't actually stop him.' 'And so ultimately, I mean, the courts are pushing him back. Congress, to a certain extent, is pushing him back a little bit, although I think a little bit more than they're giving credit for, but mostly it's people pushing him back. He's deeply, deeply, deeply unpopular and underwater on every issue, and he is absolutely panicked by the protests against him, to the point where he's already playing the biggest cards that he's gotten. He's not even six months into this term. I just think, I think we're getting the test really early, and I think that he's failing.' Maddow later noted that Trump's rhetoric and response to the protests is vastly out of proportion with the scope of them, but 'even if these protests were 100 times the size that they are, there still wouldn't be an operational reason to bring in active duty troops or federalized National Guard. I mean, it's just, it's not, it's not that sort of thing. This is obviously not operationally necessitated, right, in terms of the security of the city. He's doing this because he's panicking and thinks that he looks weak, and therefore he has to do something that seems strong.' 'And so we will have tanks destroying the streets of Washington this Saturday, and we will have National Guardsmen and active duty US Marines standing around Los Angeles, wondering what their what this has to do with their military careers. And it's all because he has no freaking idea how to deal with this politically. And he's absolutely panicking about the, I think, trenchant and joyful and sustainable opposition against him.' Maddow added. Watch the whole conversation below: The post Rachel Maddow Says the 'Interesting Question' About Trump Is 'What the Country Lets Him Get Away With'| Video appeared first on TheWrap.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store