North Texas mothers on opposing sides of school choice issue share their perspectives
Carla Behlen is against the Education Savings Account program, also known as ESAs. She has two children within Coppell ISD, and said public education is more welcoming and the best fit for them.
Greta Alexander supports ESAs. She has a teenage daughter and recently took custody of a granddaughter with learning differences. She dismissed critics of ESAs who claim they will mainly benefit wealthy families already sending their children to private schools; she said she makes $35,000 a year and private education gives her kids a better life.
In an interview with Lacey Beasley, both women talk about the pros and cons of the program and the hope they share for a better education system in Texas.
The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.
Carla Behlen: I think it's setting a priority with funding that says a private school student is worth $10,000 to the state, and a public school student is worth less than $7,000 to the state. I have two kids in middle school, and they are at different middle schools, even within my school district. One, she was built for school. She's, you know, thriving in that environment. It's been really great. The other one was starting to struggle, and we were able to move him to another school that had a deeper fine arts program and a deeper theater program, where he has really just been able to take off and thrive there. If it was not for that school, we would be in a really different place with that kid.
Greta Alexander: Private school was a must because of my own experience at high school, if I could go back that far. I was pregnant at 17, and by the time I graduated, I was pregnant again and I was crying out for help. My mom was a single parent. Two jobs. I had no one at school to talk to either. It was kind of like being in a box, you know? I think that's the difference for me to have somebody that's able to pay more attention. We have some great teachers in public school, but unfortunately, they can't be attentive to everyone when they have 25 or 30 kids in one room.
Lacey Beasley: The average student would receive about $10,000. Do you think that's enough to send a student to private school?
Alexander: The private school that we attend now is $11,000, so I think that that's more than enough.
Behlen: So if it's $11,000, that's great if you happen to have one that's in that range in your backyard. The average one by us is closer to $20,000 to $25,000 a year. That does not include activity fees, uniform fees, getting your kid to and from school.
Alexander: We have this myth that parents that send their kids to private school are rich, and that's not the case. I'm not rich. You know, I'm $35,000 a year, if that, and that's stretching it. It's not just rich people that are trying to send their kids to a private environment. There's parents like me that didn't have an opportunity when we were growing up, and we see a better opportunity for our kids.
Beasley: A lot of private schools are faith based, and there's a little bit of a debate of should taxpayer dollars go to religious schools? Do you want your kids to learn religion in school?
Alexander: Yes. Yes I do.
Behlen: I have a real problem with public dollars going to that. By law, your public schools are not teaching religion and are open to families of all faiths, all backgrounds, all identities, all kids and all disabilities. My husband teaches in a public school and is a Christian. However, that is separate from his from his teaching identity. He is not teaching religion. He's teaching math.
Beasley: Do either of any of your children or grandchildren benefit from special needs services?
Alexander: My granddaughter has a 504 [plan, which provides accommodations for students with learning differences] right now.
Beasley: With her going to private school with the 504 plan, does the school seem accommodating?
Alexander: Yes. They already have kiddos in place right now that they're accommodating with that service, so she's going to be fine.
Beasley: It takes a lot of research on the parent behalf to find, if they do have a child with special needs, they need to research the correct school for them, the best needs for their child if they want a faith-based school. A lot of it falls on the parent to research.
Behlen: I wish, and I hope that the program primarily helps families who would not otherwise be able to go to private school, if that's what they wish. My concern is that most of that money is not going to go that way. I am appreciative that the legislature put a 20% cap on families making over $160,000 accessing it. That cap expires in two years.
Alexander: If we want to really look at what's public schools doing, not all of them, but the ones that are in Fort Worth now. I know everybody's seen the mayor. She's fighting for kids to learn how to read. I know kiddos right now that's getting ready to graduate high school. They can't read, and it breaks my heart. You know, it breaks my heart because they're in a public setting.
Behlen: I agree. Let's fix it.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
27-07-2025
- New York Post
Schools must make classrooms sane again — and ditch ‘restorative justice'
For nearly a decade, New York City placed ideology over evidence in its approach to school discipline. Restorative Justice, imposed for the sake of racial 'equity,' was supposed to strengthen school culture — but instead it removed the boundaries kids need to learn and thrive. That left too many classrooms without clear expectations, consistent follow-through or real consequences, with students told to discuss or meditate on unruly school behavior rather than receiving detention, suspension or loss of privileges. Advertisement My recent Manhattan Institute report shows how NYC spent nearly $100 million on RJ programs in less than a decade — yet classroom disruptions, police interventions and absenteeism only worsened. Eliminating meaningful consequences set school administrators and teachers adrift, forced to react to emergencies instead of preventing them. Structure in a classroom means clear routines, like when to listen or when it's time to work — with posted rules explaining what students should do and what happens when rules are broken, enforced by consistent adult follow-through. Advertisement Clarity and consistency, not abstract ideals, create safe and orderly classrooms. Extensive research confirms this commonsense concept. But with RJ, teachers must manage disruptions through scripted conversations, asking students to reflect on their feelings rather than issuing consequences. They've had to 'build relationships,' not set rules and enforce expectations — so expectations disappeared from our schools. Schools can't function without structure. Every student deserves a safe, orderly classroom, and teachers need tools to achieve this. Advertisement But RJ didn't supplement school discipline; it replaced it, leaving schools without tools to manage behavior. And the students who need structure most are the ones most harmed. Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! As the city approaches another mayoral election, voters should be asking: Who's willing to rebuild our schools' structure? Advertisement Who's willing to say that kids need boundaries, not just conversations? Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani has endorsed more of the same. 'As mayor,' he told Chalkbeat, 'I will focus on . . . restorative-justice models, which allow our students to remain in schools, learn from mistakes, grow conflict resolution skills and improve academic outcomes.' As the largest school system in the country, NYC sets a tone for the rest of the nation. Today that tone is one of failure and discouragement. Restorative justice has done enough damage. It's time for our schools to reestablish rules, order and accountability. First, we must set clear expectations and consequences across all schools, empowering principals and teachers to intervene when students jeopardize learning or safety — without waiting for central office approval. Teachers need that backup if we want them to give our kids consistency. Teachers also need training in evidence-based behavioral strategies, such as encouraging appropriate behavior, de-escalating disruptions and following through with reliable consequences. Let's redirect funding away from RJ to give teachers those tools. Advertisement Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters To restore public trust, we need regular audits using measurable outcomes — reductions in repeat offenses, fewer emergency calls and increases in uninterrupted instructional time, for example — and to make the results public. Within the city's classrooms, daily structure is a must. Students can't learn in chaotic environments. Classrooms need clear routines, posted behavior expectations and consistent follow-through when rules are broken. Advertisement Finally, we must recognize that Title 1 schools, which serve the city's neediest and most vulnerable children, have been hit hardest by the breakdown of discipline. They should be first in line for training and resources to restore order and protect student learning. The collapse of order in our schools is a nationwide issue, as President Donald Trump recognizes: His April executive order directed the federal Education Department to promote behavior-based discipline measures. The order instructs federal agencies to roll back past guidance discouraging suspensions and reprimands over racial-equity concerns — guidance that spurred the rise of RJ in the city and elsewhere. Advertisement As Trump's order makes clear, imposing consequences isn't about punishment. It's about creating predictable environments in which students understand expectations and know adults will follow through. It's about striking a balance between compassion and clarity, and recognizing that boundaries are a form of care. New Yorkers should make school discipline a priority as they consider their vote for mayor. Advertisement Until the city rebuilds a system where all students can learn in calm, focused classrooms, children who need the most support will continue to receive the least. Restoring disciplinary structure gives every student a better chance to succeed — and New York City should lead the way. Jennifer Weber is the cofounder and co-owner of KIT Educational Consulting.
Axios
21-07-2025
- Axios
New federal voucher law could add to Arizona school choice programs
Arizona, home to some of the nation's broadest school choice systems, could see even more through a new federal program created this month as part of President Trump's "big beautiful bill," if the state chooses to opt in. Why it matters: The law creates the first federal school voucher program, known as Qualified Elementary and Secondary Education Scholarships. How it works: People can contribute up to $1,700 annually to a scholarship-granting organization (SGO) and receive a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit in return. Those organizations use the money to award scholarships for expenses like private school tuition, books, equipment, tutoring and other services. Eligibility is limited to students whose families earn up to 300% of the area median income. Zoom in: The program bears resemblances to two school choice programs in Arizona. Under the tuition tax credit program, people can contribute money to School Tuition Organizations (STO) to provide scholarships for private school tuition. The Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program gives funding, which can be used for tuition, equipment, tutoring and other educational expenses, to students who aren't enrolled in public schools. Between the lines: The American Federation for Children (AFC), a national school choice advocacy group, touted that in states with preexisting private school choice options, federal scholarships "can be stacked … increasing purchasing power for parents and helping more students." State law prohibits students from using ESAs and STO money concurrently. Yes, but: It's unclear whether the federal program will be available to Arizona students, given a provision that requires states to opt in. The law requires states to annually provide the feds a list of qualified SGOs. Those decisions will be left to the governor or whichever "individual, agency or entity" state law designates to make determinations regarding federal tax benefits. In Arizona, the Department of Revenue would likely decide, leaving it to the governor's administration, Arizona Department of Education spokesperson Doug Nick told Axios. The intrigue: A spokesperson for Gov. Katie Hobbs did not respond to Axios' questions about whether Arizona would opt into the program. Hobbs has been a vocal critic of ESA program, which she and other Democrats argue siphon money from public schools and are unaccountable to taxpayers. What's next: The federal program doesn't go into effect until 2027. The fine print: Unlike ESAs, federal vouchers have income-based restrictions, so not all Arizona recipients would be eligible for both. What they're saying: "For a generation, our movement has fought to give all families, especially lower-income families, the freedom to choose the best K-12 education … and now President Trump has signed into law the single biggest advancement of that goal," AFC CEO Tommy Schultz said in a statement on the group's website.
The Hill
16-07-2025
- The Hill
Trump's challenge to Democrats on school choice: Put up or shut up
On Independence Day, President Trump signed into law the biggest expansion of universal private school choice in American history. In its reporting, the New York Times inexplicably characterized a last-minute amendment limiting Education Savings Accounts only to states that opt-in as a ' win for Democrats and teachers' unions,' because blue states would presumably choose not to participate. Although American Federation of Teachers president and recently resigned DNC member Randi Weingarten may view the denial of school choice to blue state parents as a 'win,' I doubt working class voters would agree. In fact, that 'win' represents a political landmine for Democrats. I am skeptical about the wisdom of Trump's Education Savings Accounts plan, but I must admit that I am only typing this sentence because of a scholarship I received to attend a private school many years ago. When I was 16, my alcoholic father committed suicide. I vividly remember going to school the first day after my dad's funeral feeling overwhelmed, numb and embarrassed. And I remember how my teachers made me feel safe and seen in a way that altered the trajectory of my life. My younger brother wasn't so lucky. He went to a different school when our dad died and joined a gang after dropping out. I have seen firsthand the impact of education dancing on the razor's edge of a child's life. That's why I do what I do. So I respect leaders like Democrats for Education Reform chief Jorge Elorza, who are driving the voucher debate. But I have a healthy skepticism about the public policy implications of scaling a wild-west national Education Savings Account plan with few regulatory guardrails to ensure educational quality — not to mention separation of church and state red flags or my belief in the promise of public education. Policy concerns aside, voters now face a stark color-coded national split-screen. In red states, you get free money for the school of your choice. In blue states, you get what you get and you don't get upset. Listening to teachers union leaders like Weingarten and her allies, you'd think charter schools were created in an underground right-wing laboratory as part of a secret plot to ' privatize ' public education. In fact charter schools were originally proposed in 1988 by her own American Federation of Teachers predecessor Al Shanker. I worked in the White House for President Bill Clinton, who proudly ran on charter schools when only one existed in America. President Barack Obama later scaled high-quality charters as part of his bold Race to the Top agenda. Charters are public schools, which means they are free and secular, cannot have admission requirements, and have strict regulatory controls on educational quality. That doesn't sound like a Republican plot to destroy public education to me. I am a longtime public school parent. My daughters have attended our great neighborhood Los Angeles Unified School District school, as well as multiple high-quality public charters. But we literally had to win a lottery to get into their charter schools. That's because California caps charter growth, since many charters are not unionized, as a Democratic Party favor to teachers unions. Amongst progressive issues outside education that Weingarten and I agree upon is that Trump is a threat to democracy. That's exactly why the time is now for a Democratic moonshot to translate 'high-quality public schools' from a soundbite into a civil right. In debating this abundance moonshot, the onus is on Democrats like me who are skeptical about Education Savings Accounts to articulate a compelling alternative that can win back working class voters. Weingarten, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have rightly championed universal preschool, free community college and student loan relief. But the entire K-12 experience of a child is conveniently missing from that agenda. In addition to scaling high-quality public school choice, our moonshot must span preschool to post-secondary, pivot from 'equity' to 'quality,' and put parents — not party interests — at the center. This begins with eliminating school attendance boundaries that trap children in failing schools; expanding high-quality career and technical education; universal tutoring for the COVID generation; endorsement of science of reading; and finishing the job of Brown v. Board of Education by codifying high-quality public schools as a civil right for all children in America. The good news for my party is that Democrats have a strong bench of national leaders with a record of challenging party orthodoxy. That was a feature — not a bug — of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama's success as the only two-term Democratic presidents since Franklin Roosevelt. The bad news is that while Democrats have dithered for a decade under Biden, Harris and Weingarten, Republicans have been formulating a bold vision for American education with obvious appeal for the same working class voters Democrats need to win back. The ball is decidedly now in our court. Democratic leaders must volley with a viable vision that speaks to the urgent needs of working-class parents — not just to do the right thing for kids, but also to win back power. For the sake of American democracy, Democrats must not concede education Independence Day to Trump.
