From the Editorial Board

Abstract

School vouchers and other programs that allow public funds be funneled private schools--sometimes called tax credits or opportunity scholarships--are part of national conversation on school reform. Recently, Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, former education secretary under George H. W. Bush, introduced legislation that would use a portion of federal education funds create scholarships for low-income so they could an accredited school of their parents' choosing. According a story in The Chattanoogan (2014), Scholarships for Kids Act would reallocate $24 billion in public school funds create 11 million scholarships of $2,100 each for K-12 living in poverty. In an article in The New York Times, Alexander explained that the simplest way for [federal funds support low-income students] is just pin them blouse or shirt of a child and let it follow child school they attend (Rich, 2014, para. 3). Alexander likened his proposal other federal assistance programs, namely Pell grants and GI Bill, although he acknowledged that vouchers have not been widely accepted at K-12 level. Voucher programs vary from state state. Currently only Washington, D.C. has a federally funded school voucher program, but 16 states have adopted some form of publicly funded school choice vouchers. On February 17, 2014 North Carolina Superior Court Judge Robert Hobgood granted a preliminary injunction against state's Opportunity Scholarships program, ruling it unconstitutional. North Carolina's state constitution dictates that resources allocated public education shall be faithfully appropriated and used exclusively for establishing and maintaining a uniform system of free public (Article IX, Section 6), thereby prohibiting use of public funds for private institutions. The Louisiana Supreme Court reached a similar conclusion in May 2013, ruling that statewide voucher plan violated Louisiana's state constitution. A resolution amend Alaska's constitution allow use of public monies for private schools was pulled from a floor vote in March 2014, while Tennessee, Florida, and Arizona have all introduced bills during current legislative session expand existing voucher programs. Proponents of vouchers see them as a means secure educational equity and access for low-income students, as well as those currently attending failing schools. Voucher programs provide crucial options children who too often are forced failing (Alliance for School Choice, n.d., para. 4). In some states, vouchers allow with special needs, in addition those from low-income families, private schools as a means attain improved educational opportunity. Additionally, voucher proponents believe that increasing parent choice will encourage traditional public schools improve conditions in order maintain competitiveness (Sugarman, 2013). Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal sent out an automated phone message publicizing Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) in order to apprise parents of a unique program (Fisher, 2014, para. 7), stating that he works ensure that students are provided with excellent education opportunities (Fischer, 2014, para. 9). Opponents of vouchers claim that such programs divert funds from public schools and frequently benefit private interests (National School Boards Association, n.d.), and they are concerned that using public funds support parochial schools violates separation of church and state. Additionally, lack of accountability for private schools draws criticism, since most are not subject requisite standardized testing in public schools (Strauss, 2014). Florida's proposed voucher expansion bill was pulled by its sponsor after state senate declared that private schools utilizing vouchers would be required administer state tests their (Kennedy, 2014). …