About That Op-ed in the Charlotte Observer By PEFNC – If NC’s Voucher System Is Working, Then Really Prove It

This week the Charlotte Observer carried an op-ed penned by the interim president of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina (PEFNC) Brian Jodice entitled “Public money for private school scholarships is working, and will soon expand dramatically” (https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article215498550.html).

The premise of the piece is celebratory as explained in the first line:

“Thursday marks the anniversary of a major victory in the fight for educational freedom in North Carolina.”

Five years ago, the NCGA opened up the Opportunity Grants or as many would call them vouchers which take public taxpayer money and funnel it to private schools.

If Jodice wants to declare victory for choice, then that is his privilege. Yes, almost 7400 students use the vouchers, but in his claim of victory that is his only real hard piece of evidence to draw upon. That, and the fact that he has an NCGA that is bent on throwing money at vouchers even though they have not been proved overall as effective.

Jodice took over for Darrell Allison who recently joined the American Federation For Children, a school choice advocacy group in Washington D.C. founded by none other than Betsy DeVos. And like Allison, Jodice has to cheer-lead for the PEFNC, even if it means negating the lack of substance about how well the voucher system is doing in North Carolina.

Almost a year ago, Lindsay Wagner wrote a piece for the AJ Fletcher Foundation entitled “Are publicly-funded private school vouchers helping low-income kids? We don’t know” that  showcased one of the primary redundancies purposefully used by funded “school choice” advocates in the quest to make sure that the best way to argue for “freedom in choosing schools” in North Carolina is to control what information parents have in “choosing” educational avenues for their students.

Wagner focused much of her article on the most vocal proponent of the school choice movement in North Carolina at that time – Darrell Allison, the then-leader of PEFNC. She raised a rather glaring inconsistency when it came to whether vouchers were really helping low-income students.

The leader of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina, Darrell Allison, said recently that school vouchers aren’t likely to hurt children from low-income households who use them. But he couldn’t say definitively that the voucher program actually helps these children, either.

Why? Because despite the fact that North Carolina spends millions of taxpayers’ dollars each year on vouchers, we have no meaningful data that can tell us if this is an effective way to help poor students who deserve a high quality education (http://ajf.org/publicly-funded-private-school-vouchers-helping-low-income-kids-dont-know/).

It makes one wonder if Jodice has a better explanation for what Allison could not really explain. Other than money from the NCGA and people who are taking the money, the fact still stands that NC’s voucher program is not regulated and can not be measured.

Last year, Duke University released a rather damning report on the Opportunity Grants in NC. The entire report can be found here:  https://law.duke.edu/childedlaw/School_Vouchers_NC.pdf.

It would be interesting to see if Jodice , who uses the editorial page of what might be the biggest newspaper in the state to tout the voucher system, could refute or explain the following excerpted observations:

  • Approximately 93% of the vouchers have been used to pay tuition at religious schools (3).
  • Based on limited and early data, more than half the students using vouchers are performing below average on nationally-standardized reading, language, and math tests. In contrast, similar public school students in NC are scoring above the national average (3).
  • The North Carolina voucher program is well designed to promote parental choice, especially for parents who prefer religious education for their children. It is poorly designed, however, to promote better academic outcomes for children and is unlikely to do so (3).
  • Previous research on North Carolina private schools in general showed that more than 30% of private schools in North Carolina are highly segregated (more than 90% of students of one race) and 80% enroll more than half of the same race.10 Without data on racial enrollments in voucher schools, it is not clear whether vouchers contribute to school segregation. Because of the overall data on private schools, however, the voucher program may well be contributing to increasing school segregation (7).
  • Of the participating schools, less than 20% were secular schools; more than 80% were religious schools. This does not line up exactly with the percentages of vouchers used at religious schools versus secular schools (93% at religious schools), because several religious schools enrolled large numbers of students (8).
  • The most typical size for a participating school is between 100 and 250 students. However, 33 schools (7%) have ten or fewer students, with another 42 (9%) enrolling 20 or fewer students. Together, that means that nearly a fifth of the schools accepting vouchers have total enrollments of 20 or fewer students (8).
  • Although it is not an “apples-to-apples” comparison, the most recent data shows that comparable students who remained in public schools are scoring better than the voucher students on national tests (12).
  • In comparison to most other states, North Carolina’s general system of oversight of private schools is weak. North Carolina’s limited oversight reflects a policy decision to leave the quality control function primarily to individual families. Under North Carolina law, private schools are permitted to make their own decisions regarding curriculum, graduation requirements, teacher qualifications, number of hours/days of operation, and, for the most part, testing. No accreditation is required of private schools (13).
  • Unlike some laws, the law creating the Opportunity Scholarship Grant Program does not set out its purpose (15).
  • In fact, there is no requirement that the participating private schools meet any threshold of academic quality. Thus, to the extent that the program was established to provide options for better academic outcomes for children, nothing in the program’s design assures or even promotes that outcome (15-16).
  • THE LEGISLATIVE DECISION TO EXEMPT VOUCHER STUDENTS FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE STANDARD STATE END-OF-GRADE TESTS MEANS THAT NO RESEARCHER WILL EVER BE ABLE TO MAKE AN “APPLES-TO-APPLES” COMPARISON BETWEEN PUBLIC SCHOOL AND VOUCHER STUDENTS (18).
  • The North Carolina program allows for participation in the program by children who are not in failing schools and by private schools that do not offer a more academically promising education (19).

The positively charged diction that Jodice uses in his op-ed doesn’t seem to drown out the cold reality of that study.

Jodice’s reference to the recent NC State study is probably the biggest indicator that what he pins his hope upon to verify the validity of the voucher program is not stable at all. And it should not be worthy of praise because he deliberately misspeaks what the conclusion of that study was.

He said,

Early academic evaluation is encouraging. In June, independent researchers from NC State University released findings from the first-ever academic analysis of the program, revealing “large, positive impacts” on student achievement associated with using a scholarship. Follow-up studies are needed, but this early report card represents very good news.

Even the people who conducted the study cautioned against drawing conclusions. This is from  WUNC – http://www.wunc.org/post/researchers-say-nc-voucher-program-needs-closer-look-they-can-give#stream/0.

study

That sample they used? Over half were from established Catholic schools in NC which represent in reality a very small percentage of the voucher recipient pool. In fact, that study has been attacked so much from non-academics that it begs to ask why it was done in the first place. That’s how many holes it has.

Yes, there will be students who are successful who use the vouchers. The student that Jodice highlights is one of them. But while the student may be successful does not mean that the program is successful because measuring the effects of the voucher system in comparison to traditional public schools is impossible.

It’s meant that way.

NC’s voucher system is by far the least regulated in the country. Back to the Duke report:

Duke study

That’s very telling. The lack of measurables in NC’s voucher program allows for Jodice to make claims that while sparkling carry no real substance.

Just like his op-ed.

 

About That NC State Study on NC’s Voucher Program – It’s Paid For Propaganda

A June 2nd report in the News & Observer by Ned Barnett entitled “Three out of four N.C. voucher schools fail on curriculum” highlighted the findings of the NC Chapter of the League of Women Voters on the state’s voucher program.

It states,

Fundamentalist Christian schools are receiving most of the money from North Carolina’s 4-year-old school voucher program, but they’re not providing anything close to the “sound basic education” the state Constitution promises to North Carolina’s children, according to a new report from the League of Women Voters.

The League said in announcing its findings that “77 percent of private schools receiving vouchers are using curricula that do not comply with state standards, leaving many students unprepared for college-level coursework or careers in certain fields” (http://amp.newsobserver.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/ned-barnett/article212352824.html?__twitter_impression=true).

That’s not flattering. Couple that with the less than flattering report done by Duke University’s Children’s Law Center called SCHOOL VOUCHERS IN NORTH CAROLINA : THE FIRST THREE YEARS. That report can be found here: https://law.duke.edu/childedlaw/School_Vouchers_NC.pdf.

Duke study

That Duke report summarized the following:

  • Approximately 93% of the vouchers have been used to pay tuition at religious schools (3).
  • Of the participating schools, less than 20% were secular schools; more than 80% were religious schools.
  • The most typical size for a participating school is between 100 and 250 students. However, 33 schools (7%) have ten or fewer students, with another 42 (9%) enrolling 20 or fewer students. Together, that means that nearly a fifth of the schools accepting vouchers have total enrollments of 20 or fewer students (8).
  • Although it is not an “apples-to-apples” comparison, the most recent data shows that comparable students who remained in public schools are scoring better than the voucher students on national tests (12).
  • In comparison to most other states, North Carolina’s general system of oversight of private schools is weak. (13).

Then today, NC State released another evaluation of the Opportunity Grants Program. It is entitled ““An Impact Analysis of North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarship Program on Student Achievement.” A link to the report can be found on EdNC.org (https://www.ednc.org/2018/06/04/researchers-release-an-impact-analysis-of-north-carolinas-opportunity-scholarship-program-on-student-achievement/).

It states that there are “large positive impacts associated with voucher usage in North Carolina.”

Hard to put these two recent reports next to each other and not have some questions. One says that the curriculum taught by most voucher recipient schools do not even compare with the state curriculum. The other says that the vouchers have created positive impacts in student test scores.

There may be some who will argue that together these reports prove a Biblical-based curriculum is best for students and for test scores. But that is hard to fathom because there are some aspects of the NC State Study that do not hold enough weight to be scientifically sound.

When reading about the recruitment of the students to be used in the study, the researchers relied heavily on the Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina (PEFNC). From page 11 of the report:

ncstate1

That reads “the bulk of recruitment support was ultimately provided” by PEFNC. To say that PEFNC has an extreme bias as to needing to show a positive spin on vouchers is an understatement – a giant understatement.

Relying on PEFNC to provide a scientifically sounding random sample to use in the study is not a very sound move. Consider last summer’s report by Lindsey Wagner, then of the AJ Fletcher Foundation.

Entitled “Are publicly-funded private school vouchers helping low-income kids? We don’t know”, Wagner’s piece showcases one of the primary redundancies purposefully used by funded “school choice” advocates like PEFNC. Her article focused much on the most vocal proponent of the school choice movement in North Carolina – Darrell Allison, then the leader of PEFNC (Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina).

To say that he is still one of the most influential non-law maker on educational reform in the state is not a stretch; his recent appointment to the UNC Board of Governors and his ability to lobby lawmakers in Raleigh certainly gives him more clout than most pro-public school legislators on West Jones Street.

Wagner raised a rather glaring inconsistency when it comes to whether vouchers are really helping low-income students.

The leader of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina, Darrell Allison, said recently that school vouchers aren’t likely to hurt children from low-income households who use them. But he couldn’t say definitively that the voucher program actually helps these children, either (http://ajf.org/publicly-funded-private-school-vouchers-helping-low-income-kids-dont-know/).

On February 15th, 2018 Darrell Allison was chosen to assume a leadership position with AFC, the Betsy DeVos – founded school choice advocacy group in Washington D.C. known as the American Federation For Children. Allison is also on the board of Achievement for All Children (AAC) which now has been hired to oversee the Innovation School District for North Carolina.

PEFNC needs this study to work for them – IN THE WORST WAY. Too much is at stake.

Go back to the original data table from the beginning of this post.

Duke study

It seems very difficult to even “quantify” the effectiveness of the NC voucher system when the oversight of it from the state level is so porous. Therefore, allowing a group like PEFNC to control what can be quantified in this study skews the results.

Yes, the study does mention that there is more to be investigated, but why publish this when that is the case? Besides the students “recruited” for this study do not even represent a random sample. Ann Doss Helms from the Charlotte Observer reported on the NC State Study. She stated,

Just over half of the voucher schools that participated in the study were Catholic, while only 10 percent of all schools receiving North Carolina vouchers are Catholic (http://amp.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/education/article211941074.html?__twitter_impression=true).

Over half of the students “recruited” by PEFNC were from a select number of schools that represent less than 10 percent of voucher schools.

That’s not random. That’s excessively controlled.

Established schools in the North Carolina diocese have been proven to be very competitive academically. But do not think that a private school does not have the ability to pretest a potential student to see if he/she can handle the rigors of a strong curriculum. Those pretests are the part of many admission requirements.

Public schools take in all students. Private schools do not. Competitive private schools that have a history of excellence do not have to accept just any student.

To allow the PEFNC to heavily facilitate the “recruitment” of students to use in the study suggests too much of a leap of faith in another biased organization’s ability to be totally objective.

It’s just not scientifically valid. But look who funded the study.

ncstate2

The Walton Family Foundation.

And the Walton Family Foundation is not financing a study unless the study says what the Walton Foundation wants it to say.

They are not alone.

ncstate3

When one adds the Walton Foundation, Art Pope, and PEFNC together, the sum is not scientific integrity and objectivity.

It’s propaganda.

The Absolute Hypocrisy of Rob Bryan and the NC Innovative School District

In 2016, then Rep. Rob Bryan and the House Committee on Education, pushed through a bill that would establish an ASD (Achievement School District) in North Carolina allowing the control of some of the state’s low-performing schools to be outsourced to out-of-state entities.

That ASD was renamed the Innovative School District (ISD) in 2017 in an attempt to “relabel” it under a more favorable light.

After a rather contentious selection process that saw communities galvanize to keep their “under-preforming” schools from being put into the ISD, one school was then selected and marked to be taken over by an outside entity – Southside Ashpole Elementary School in Robeson County.

southside_ashpole_elementary

This week, Dr. Eric Hall, the superintendent of the ISD, formally presented to the NC State Board of Education his recommendation for an operator for Southside Ashpole.

From Alex Granados of EdNC.org on April 4th,

Innovative School District (ISD) Superintendent Eric Hall received a less-than-enthusiastic response from some State Board of Education members today when he presented his recommendation for an inaugural ISD school operator. 

Under the Innovative School District, five schools will be selected to be taken over by operators which could include for-profit charter or education management organizations. The schools will no longer be run by their traditional school districts during the five years they are under ISD authority. 

Southside Ashpole will be the first school and is slated to operate under the ISD starting this coming fall. However, having an operator in place before is a crucial first step before that can happen. 

Hall’s recommendation, Charlotte-based Achievement for All Children(AAC) includes former Rep. Rob Bryan, R-Mecklenburg, on its leadership team. Bryan was the lawmaker who spearheaded the legislation that became the Innovative School District (https://www.ednc.org/2018/04/04/innovative-school-district-operator-selection-hits-possible-roadblock/ ). 

Rob Bryan is part of AAC.

AAC is contracted to TeamCFA. Who is TeamCFA?

Per Lynn Bonner and T. Keung Hui of the News & Observer last October:

A company tied to a wealthy Libertarian donor who helped pass a state law allowing takeover of low-performing North Carolina schools is trying to win approval to operate those schools.

Achievement For All Children was among the groups who applied for state approval to run struggling schools that will be chosen for the Innovative School District. Achievement For All Children is heavily connected to Oregon resident John Bryan, who is a generous contributor to political campaigns and school-choice causes in North Carolina.

The company was formed in February and registered by Tony Helton, the chief executive officer of TeamCFA, a charter network that Bryan founded. The board of directors for Achievement for All Children includes former Rep. Rob Bryan, a Republican from Mecklenburg County who introduced the bill creating the new district, and Darrell Allison, who heads the pro-school choice group Parents For Educational Freedom in North Carolina (http://amp.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article178169451.html) .

Rob Bryan created a bill in 2015-2016 and with the help of a loaded committee became willing to siphon money to charter schools run by out-of-state private entities for which he now works and may potentially profit from.

That is a pile of manure of the most putrid stench.

To further add to the incestuous nature of the proposal by Achievement for All Children, it includes on its board of directors Darrell Allison of PEFNC who is about to work for the high-profile American Federation of Children, founded by Betsy DeVos. He is the megaphone for “school choice” advocates in the state and a strong proponent of the Opportunity Grants.

If this becomes a reality, Allison will literally be taking money away from public education through multiple avenues: vouchers for private schools and money to finance an ISD district that will be paying his company to run a school that is probably unwilling to be taken over. And Allison, like Bryan has cloaked himself with ambiguity: Bryan hasn’t spoken to the press yet and when Allison speaks he seems to not be clear. Consider this post on the use of vouchers – https://caffeinatedrage.com/2017/07/31/a-third-person-open-letter-to-darrell-allison-and-the-pefnc-why-hide-behind-the-ambiguity/.

In that post, the work of Lindsay Wagner is referenced and shows how a great journalist can ask the very question that deserves an open answer. It also shows that a “non-answer” screams louder than one that is straightforwardly given.

Rob Bryan’s background in education was outlined on his website while he was in office , http://www.friendsofrob.com/about. It stated,

Raised by a teacher and an engineer, Rob spent his first two years after college participating in the Teach for America program. In a low-income school in inner-city Los Angeles, he saw firsthand the problems created by non-innovative, bureaucratic districts unwilling or unable to change. Red tape and politics prevented teachers, principals, and parents from choosing the creative solutions that would work for their students.

There is a lot of information there. Bryan’s tenure in the classroom, while admirable, was not long at all. Most teachers in NC went through more time training to become a teacher than he spent in the actual classroom. He worked in a poverty-stricken inner-city school, the same kind of schools he helped label as failing with a Jeb Bush style grading system that he helped create. Furthermore, while in office, he actually helped foster an environment that still keeps those poverty-stricken schools under the foot of government by lowering per pupil expenditures and vilifying veteran educators.

He said in that statement, “Red tape and politics prevented teachers, principals, and parents from choosing the creative solutions that would work for their students.” Bryan is exactly right. But if one sees the actions that Bryan as a legislator participated in while crafting the current educational landscape here in NC, one would label him as part of that “red tape and politics.”

Again, that is a pile of manure of the most putrid stench created with hypocrisy.

A Thank You to North Carolina’s Educational Journalists – But Not on Rob Bryan or Darrell Allison’s Behalf

I am sure that former state legislator Rob Bryan and current PEFNC leader Darrell Allison are not very happy with some of the educational journalists in NC who dedicate themselves to uncovering and exposing things hidden which affect so many openly. That is especially true in the world of public education and the “reforms” that have been surreptitiously crafted to purposefully benefit a chosen few.

I am forever grateful to all of these educational journalists. They are helping save a public good.

635898975639098870-576976519_journalism

The News & Observer out of Raleigh has published three separate, yet related articles this week that have been nothing short of superior. The work of Lynn Bonner, Jane Stancill, David Raynor, and T. Keung Hui has shed much needed light on the actions of a greedy minority. They should be thanked and supported.

The three articles are:

“A rich donor’s money backed NC’s charter takeover law, and his school network expands” (http://amp.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article177836091.html).

“Why NC charter schools are richer and whiter” (http://amp.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article178022436.html).

“Group tied to rich donor who backed NC school takeover law now wants to run those schools” (http://amp.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article178169451.html).

With an impending selection of a school or schools to be taken over by the Innovative School District, these three articles highlight the incestuous nature of what is deliberately happening in the world of education reform here in NC, especially the last one listed which profiles a particular group that is proposing to be the charter group that will take over the ISD school(s).

Per Bonner and Hui:

A company tied to a wealthy Libertarian donor who helped pass a state law allowing takeover of low-performing North Carolina schools is trying to win approval to operate those schools.

Achievement For All Children was among the groups who applied for state approval to run struggling schools that will be chosen for the Innovative School District. Achievement For All Children is heavily connected to Oregon resident John Bryan, who is a generous contributor to political campaigns and school-choice causes in North Carolina.

The company was formed in February and registered by Tony Helton, the chief executive officer of TeamCFA, a charter network that Bryan founded. The board of directors for Achievement for All Children includes former Rep. Rob Bryan, a Republican from Mecklenburg County who introduced the bill creating the new district, and Darrell Allison, who heads the pro-school choice group Parents For Educational Freedom in North Carolina.

That’s beyond disturbing. Rob Bryan is the legislator who literally constructed the ISD (then ASD) initiative behind closed doors while representing Mecklenburg County. He has a rich benefactor from Oregon who ironically shares his last name helping him become the very recipient of a governmental contract he established.

Rob Bryan’s background in education was outlined on his  website, http://www.friendsofrob.com/about. It stated,

“Raised by a teacher and an engineer, Rob spent his first two years after college participating in the Teach for America program. In a low-income school in inner-city Los Angeles, he saw firsthand the problems created by non-innovative, bureaucratic districts unwilling or unable to change. Red tape and politics prevented teachers, principals, and parents from choosing the creative solutions that would work for their students.”

There is a lot of information there. Bryan’s tenure in the classroom, while admirable, was not long at all. Most teachers in NC went through more time training to become a teacher than he spent in the actual classroom. He worked in a poverty-stricken inner-city school, the same kind of schools he helped label as failing with a Jeb Bush style grading system that he helped create. Furthermore, while in office, he actually helped foster an environment that keeps those poverty-stricken schools under the foot of government by lowering per pupil expenditures and vilifying veteran educators.

And then he created a bill and with the help of a loaded committee became willing to siphon money to charter schools run by out-of-state private entities for which he now works and may potentially profit from.

That is a pile of manure of the most putrid stench.

To further add to the incestuous nature of the proposal by Achievement for All Children, it includes on its board of directors Darrell Allison of PEFNC. He is the megaphone for “school choice” advocates in the state and a strong proponent of the Opportunity Grants.

If this becomes a reality, Allison will literally be taking money away from public education through multiple avenues: vouchers for private schools and money to finance an ISD district that will be paying his company to run a school that is probably unwilling to be taken over. And Allison, like Bryan has cloaked himself with ambiguity: Bryan hasn’t spoken to the press yet and when Allison speaks he seems to not be clear. Consider this post on the use of vouchers – https://caffeinatedrage.com/2017/07/31/a-third-person-open-letter-to-darrell-allison-and-the-pefnc-why-hide-behind-the-ambiguity/.

In that post, the work of Lindsay Wagner is referenced and shows how a great journalist can ask the very question that deserves an open answer. It also shows that a “non-answer” screams louder than one that is straightforwardly given.

In a political climate that often screams “FAKE NEWS!” and constantly berates the freedom of the press, it just might be the journalists who save the day. Those who report on the educational terrain here in North Carolina are doing great work and providing an invaluable service.

Even if people like Rob Bryan and Darrell Allison don’t think so.

A Third-Person Open Letter to Darrell Allison and the PEFNC – Why Hide Behind the Ambiguity?

Lindsay Wagner’s latest piece for the AJ Fletcher Foundation entitled “Are publicly-funded private school vouchers helping low-income kids? We don’t know” showcases one of the primary redundancies purposefully used by funded “school choice” advocates in the quest to make sure that the best way to argue for “freedom in choosing schools” in North Carolina is to control what information parents have in “choosing” educational avenues for their students.

In short, it is easier to hail school choice as a viable means of giving parents freedom as long as what they know about the choices can be controlled.

Wagner focuses much of her article on the most vocal proponent of the school choice movement in North Carolina – Darrell Allison, the leader of PEFNC (Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina).

To say that he is the most influential non-law maker on educational reform in the state is not a stretch; his recent appointment to the UNC Board of Governors and his ability to lobby lawmakers in Raleigh certainly gives him more clout than most pro-public school legislators on West Jones Street.

Wagner raises a rather glaring inconsistency when it comes to whether vouchers are really helping low-income students.

The leader of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina, Darrell Allison, said recently that school vouchers aren’t likely to hurt children from low-income households who use them. But he couldn’t say definitively that the voucher program actually helps these children, either.

Why? Because despite the fact that North Carolina spends millions of taxpayers’ dollars each year on vouchers, we have no meaningful data that can tell us if this is an effective way to help poor students who deserve a high quality education (http://ajf.org/publicly-funded-private-school-vouchers-helping-low-income-kids-dont-know/).

What Wagner is referring to is the PEFNC’s official reaction to a Duke University report on the Opportunity Grants that contained a flawed conclusion that was later corrected but did not really diminish the results. As Billy Ball reported on July 14th,

The Duke report, released in March by the school’s Children’s Law Clinic, initially suggested the state’s voucher recipients were not performing as well as their public school peers, although the university later edited that portion, arguing instead that the state lacks sufficient data to draw that conclusion (http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2017/07/14/school-choice-advocates-blast-duke-voucher-report-flawed/#sthash.76QLNaKS.dpbs).

However, the corrected statement by the Duke study team coupled with PEFNC’s statement still gives every indication that people like Darrell Allison do not want to adequately measure how well voucher recipients are performing compared to their public school peers.

“The bottom line is this: We do not yet know how most scholarship students in North Carolina are performing on nationally standardized tests, and we do not know how scholarship students compare to other low-income students not using scholarships,” the group’s paper states.

That refutation from Allison and his cohort is weak. It’s saying that in the three-plus years the state of North Carolina has enacted the Opportunity Grant program and expanded it greatly, it does not really know if it is working.

Allison is claiming victory in the ambiguity. And it is the ambiguity that he wants to remain in the forefront to cloud what really may be the truth: that voucher recipients are not doing as well.

That’s opaque transparency with lots of tax-payer money which is siphoning the resources of traditional public schools which service a vast majority of the low-income students that Allison and PEFNC claim to be helping.

Wagner comments about how hard it is to actually get student achievement data concerning voucher recipients.

… only 11 percent of all voucher schools (that’s 34 schools if you’re counting) were required to publicize their students’ test results at the end of 2016. How students fared at nearly 300 other private voucher schools in North Carolina is unknown…

That’s ridiculous. That’s ludicrous. That’s egregious.

Almost a billion dollars has been set aside in the next decade to fund a program which Allison and PEFNC gleefully defend against Duke’s study as something that is not even measurable. But there is a reason that it is not measureable.

Wagner noted that “Efforts were made this past legislative session to require all voucher schools to use just one national test so that, ultimately, parents can make more of an informed choice—but those efforts failed.

Why did those efforts fail? God knows with as much back-door dealing in this last session of the NC General Assembly, this “failed effort” was craftily thwarted by those who want vouchers to remain in North Carolina. Would it be too far of a stretch to think that Allison and PEFNC lobbied for that “effort” to fail?

No, because it would have removed any doubt as to whether voucher recipients were doing as well as their public school peers. But if there is any indication that they were not, then the voucher program would be shown to be a “failed effort” in and of itself.

So, “in this context, one must wonder how a parent is supposed to know whether or not a private voucher school is a good choice for his or her child.”

This past week, NC State released a research study entitled “NC State Research Explores How Private Schools, Families Make Voucher Decisions” that explored perceptions of families of voucher recipients (https://news.ncsu.edu/2017/07/nc-state-research-explores-how-private-schools-families-make-voucher-decisions/).

Some very curious observations came out that could use a little explanation from Allison and the PEFNC to shed some light on what the voucher program is actually doing.

Consider:

IMG_5490

And…

IMG_5489

And..

IMG_5488

That’s not flattering because it can easily be concluded that what vouchers are doing is not allowing for “low-income students” to actually attend reputable private schools because those schools cost lots of money. Private schools are not non-profit entities. They cost money for a reason.

Secondly, students who did use voucher monies tended to already be behind the academic curve. To bring those students up-to-par would require remediation or it may be symptomatic of the fact that many of these students may have come from under-resourced public schools.

And if 71% of parents thought their kids were safer, it may be indicative of the lack of personnel and lack of support the traditional public schools receive. Most private schools are smaller and have lower teacher: student ratios.

But that racial diversity satisfaction percentage? That’s not encouraging if you investigate the socioeconomics of the almost %20 of school age kids in the state.

If most of the recipients of vouchers do not go to proven academic private schools or remain there (over 90% of recipients go to a religious school), and if you negate the ability to actually measure how well academically these voucher recipients are doing compared to public school students all the while slashing funds for DPI and not fully funding existing schools, then it is hard to say that there is really freedom of choice occurring.

Darrell Allison knows that.

If he is certain that voucher recipients are receiving a better education, then he should be the first to push for efforts to accurately measure achievement levels between voucher recipients and public school students.

The fact that he is not and has not for the last few years certainly indicates a willingness to control what many think is a “freedom of choice.”