Acceptance, Accountability, and Accreditation

Each year someone in the legislature files a bill that would funnel public money into nonpublic school programs. These infamous voucher programs would allow parents to apply their 'cost per pupil' allocation to any school of their choice. Framed as a way to give families options, a common argument is that parents should be able to have the choice to send their children to school wherever they wish, without regard to zip code. The problems with these type of schemes are numerous, but for the purpose of our discussion here I'll focus on what I refer to as the three 'As': Acceptance, Accreditation, and Accountability. 

In an effort to contextualize the argument in the proper paradigm, it is necessary first to underscore a key flaw, which is the idea that competition in our educational system will make the entire system better. Truthfully, I can understand this logic; albeit flawed. Educational systems are unable to fit the mold of a capital(ist) tradition because the missions of each are so contrary to one another. Even so, if we were to capitulate to such an argument there is no mistaking the harsh reality that students [[or] our 'raw material'] for lack of better terminology; are imperfect. Each student is different, unique, and has needs unlike their counterparts. And thank goodness for that! On the other hand in the traditional business model, all the raw material is the same. Quality control measures are employed which ensure raw material meets exacting standards before it is turned into a finished product. What happens when this raw material doesn't meet the standards? It is discarded, or sent back. That is not the case in your local public school. When our students don't meet the 'exacting standards' or in our terminology the Iowa Core Curriculum, we don't simply discard them. We work with them. We try a different strategy. We take them from where they are and help them to grow. Yet that is not the requirement for our nonpublic counterparts. In fact, legislation that has been proposed in the past gives them the right to refuse acceptance into their institution based on academic standards. 

Accreditation standards refer to the general programming that a school district is required to provide in order to be considered a school. In order for a school to be considered a school, it has to meet certain assurances. For example, certain courses have to be part of the program and highly qualified teachers must be properly certified and licensed in the content they teach. Granted, the majority (but not all) of the nonpublic schools in Iowa meet general accreditation requirements. But when evaluated side to side, the programming provided at Iowa public schools is very robust. Perhaps the most glaring of examples is a lack of special education programming at most nonpublic schools. Certainly this shouldn't be surprising considering the fact these schools have the right to admit based on academic standards.

Finally we have to acknowledge the fact these are public tax dollars we are talking about. Every public school entity in Iowa has the duty to operate with the utmost of transparency. We have to independently audit our books annually. The bills we pay and those to whom we have debt are published each month in the newspaper. The compensation we pay for every employee in the district is a matter of public record. If our governing body wishes to have a meeting, proper notice must be given to the public. If we want to discuss something in private, it can only be done under a very narrow scope of circumstances and we must announce in advance what we are discussing, and any action taken as a result of that discussion is done in the open, public eye. Those rules don't apply to our nonpublic counterparts.

So help me with this argument. We want to 'level the playing field' because of a belief competition is good for the system. But, we are going to have the competitors operate under two separate sets of rules. For our public schools, you must accept everyone who comes your way no matter what. The other schools can selectively cherry pick those who provide them the best academic advantage. Second, public schools have to offer a robust program that encompasses a broad range of curricula. If the other school so chooses, they can instead offer whatever they so desire. The public school must be accountable for every penny they spend, and you must be able to demonstrate that it was spent on a public purpose. The other school can pretty much do whatever they wish because no one is looking. Who do you think would win that competition?