Question

In the United States, the public role in education is enormous. In some countries, education is provided primarily by private entities. Why does the government in the United States play such a large role in education? Is education a public good? Should governments offer education alternatives, like school vouchers to attend private schools of parents’ choosing? If many school budgets are already strained, how might vouchers exacerbate inequality? Justify your position.

Answer 1

As for the role of the federal government, education is not addressed specifically in the Constitution, but there is a historical precedent of intervention of the central government. In 1787, the Northwest Ordinance was adopted by the Continental Congress, the central government of the United States between 1776 and 1787, which became the governing document of Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and part of Minnesota.

ESEA doubled the amount of federal spending onK-12 education, sought to shift the relationship between states and the central government in the academic arena, advocated for equal treatment for students regardless of where they live, and tried to improve reading and math skills for poor children. ESEA was introduced in an attempt to bridge a clear gap between poor children and wealthy children. ESEA Title I, often frequently referenced inK-12 education policy, is a significant part of the legislation which allocated federal funding to low-income districts.

ESEA is still the official U.S. policy. Nevertheless, periodic reauthorization has been mandated by the statute, which has led to significant changes since 1965. One of the most well-known re-authorizations was the 2001 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of President George W. Bush. By 2014, NCLB called for 100% math and reading skills nationally and extended the role of standardized testing to assess student achievement. Race to the Top was developed under President Barack Obama, forcing states to compete for federal grants through a point system that rewarded certain academic initiatives and achievements. It resulted in national improvements in the assessment of teachers, putting much greater emphasis on test results. Obama signed into law in 2015 the Every Student Success Act (ESSA). This is ESEA's new reauthorization and transfers some federal power to states over education, including accountability requirements and quality standards for teachers.

Higher education is not a mere benefit for the public. Obviously, those who do not pay can be removed. What people calling education a public good mean is that there are beneficial externalities— not all of the students ' benefits. When more people go to school, society profits. Those with a college education receive more than others, but not all of their benefits reflect their higher earnings. Those employed for them earn higher wages due to the labor force's added flexibility, creativity, and efficiency. Those with a college education appear to be more committed people, helping those around them with their volunteering and other activities. There are more new products and services that we can all enjoy thanks to college graduates ' contributions.

Private school voucher programs operate in 29 states and the District of Columbia, and they have seen a rise in enrollment from about 70,000 students in 2010 to over 450,000 in the school year 2017-18. Such services were often developed with limited scope to support low-income students, low-accountability students in colleges, or students with different disability categories. Nevertheless, over time, private school voucher programs have grown as advocates of vouchers and policymakers have sought to relax programmatic constraints.

The country's largest private school voucher program, the FTC, enrolls more than 105,000 students across the nation. The FTC provides companies a dollar-for-dollar state tax credit on qualifying contributions to non-profits offering private school scholarships. Originally, the program was limited to providing scholarships for families within or under 200% of the federal poverty line, but over time, the cap was increased to include families up to 260% of the poverty line.

Even when school choice programs target disadvantaged students, low-income families may be limited from participating when scholarship funds do not meet full tuition costs or transportation is not provided. However, it has long been established that selecting programs tend to benefit the most beneficial subset of eligible students as they require access to knowledge about opportunities.