Skip to main content

Educational Choice: A Simple Solution to School Inadequacy


To put it mildly, 2020 has not been the year everyone hoped for. Between the “mostly peaceful” riots, calls for the reduction or abolition of police departments, and the discord over how to handle Covid-19, our institutions are in disarray. Most school districts are a mess. Many were caught with no plan for the fall semester, while others lacked a good plan. For example, Stillwater Public Schools implemented a system that only added to the uncertainty and stress. 

The Stillwater plan was to attempt in-person education, but re-evaluate that decision each Friday based on an arbitrarily defined range of area-reported Covid cases. The Friday after school started, the Stillwater district announced it would have classes the next week. Then, on Sunday afternoon, district administrators made a second announcement suspending in-person learning for the upcoming week, forcing parents to make new plans for their children within a very short window of time. The district has yet to resume in-person classes.

Consequently, parents have the added expense of childcare in a time where money is increasingly tight. In addition, given the unfamiliarity with online platforms and lack of student supervision, there is no guarantee that the public school system will effectively educate children this fall (there is scant evidence that they were doing this anyway). As a result, many parents are considering other options. EPIC Charter School has surpassed Tulsa and OKC in size, becoming the largest school “district” in the state.

For those who have the financial means or spare time, options like private schools, tutoring, or homeschooling are alternatives to the chaos of public schools. Unfortunately, many parents are unable to pursue such options, especially given the increased hardship and job loss created by the pandemic. There are some who are concerned that this will create knowledge gaps, which in turn will widen the disparity between the rich and the poor, perpetuating class differences. Fortunately, Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) offer a simple solution. 

The 1889 Institute has proposed a model ESA bill that, were it enacted, directs funding to student education instead of the government school system. It creates flexible funding, ensuring that parents can choose the schools that make the most sense for their children.

An ESA is an account administered by the parents in the student’s name, and acts similar to a health savings account or flex spending account that many are familiar with through their job. Funding is drawn from the state allocation of per-child funds to district schools, and may only be used for qualifying educational expenses such as school tuition, books, technology, tutoring, or testing. Enrollment in the program is predicated on an agreement by the parents not to avail themselves of the public-school system. Parents must have the student tested yearly, though they are free to choose from a list of nationally recognized norm-referenced tests. This provides accountability while also securing a great deal of autonomy for the parents.

At the end of the school year, any unused funds may be rolled over to the subsequent year. In addition, the funds may be used at career or tech schools as well as eligible postsecondary institutions. This creates an incentive for parents to economize, as any unused funds may be used to help pay for college. However, the account does not remain open forever; it is permanently closed on the child’s 25th birthday, and any remaining funds are returned to the state’s general operating fund.

Both the Oklahoma and United States Supreme Courts have legally cleared the way for funds from ESA programs to be used at religious schools. The state court ruled that a similar state scholarship program did not violate the “no aid” clause of the Oklahoma Constitution because the money was given to the parent (not the school) who then made an independent decision, free of state control. The court noted that this independence of choice by the parent breaks the circuit between government and religion. This precedent, as well as a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, effectively surpass any legal obstacles that stand in the way of a universal ESA program.  

The unique circumstances created by the coronavirus pandemic have magnified the need for universal ESAs, the Courts have clarified their legality, and public support is high. If the legislature truly believes in improving educational outcomes in our state, they must not let this opportunity to implement meaningful school choice reform go to waste.

Tyler Williamson is a Research Associate at 1889 institute and can be reached at twilliamson@1889institute.org. The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.

Popular posts from this blog

Eat Your Vegetables: City Council Considers A Well-Disguised Sin Tax

The Oklahoma City Council is considering a well-disguised sin tax. They call it a Healthy Neighborhood Zoning Overlay, but the effect is the same. It limits new dollar stores in the specified neighborhood. The ostensible goal is to create a welcoming environment for grocery stores selling fresh meat and produce. But it accomplishes this goal by giving existing dollar stores a monopoly, which will raise prices, and punish residents for shopping at the purveyors of (allegedly nothing but) junk food, instead of subsisting on fresh, organic kale smoothies like good little citizens. Why would the Council intentionally restrict the supply of stores where many of their residents buy basic household goods and food? Several possibilities present themselves, though none are sound.   A fundamental misunderstanding of the laws of supply and demand. Economists call the current state of the neighborhood a contestable market: dollar stores choose low prices because the mere p...
Read more

The Problem of Diffuse Costs and Concentrated Benefits

Do you ever find yourself observing a seemingly illogical government program , spending decision, or other strange practice and ask “how is it that no one has fixed that?” If you are like me, you encounter this phenomenon regularly. This often takes the form of a curious headline (Save Federal Funding for the Cowboy Poets!) that most people see and can’t believe is real. I would like to suggest that this phenomenon often results from the problem of diffuse costs and concentrated benefits. To understand this concept, consider a hypothetical law that assessed a $1 tax on everyone in the United States with the proceeds to be given to one individual for unrestricted use as he sees fit. The people harmed by such a law—the individual taxpayers—will not be very motivated to spend the time and effort to convince Congress to change the law. They might resent the dollar taken from them for a silly cause they don’t support, but the lost dollar isn’t worth the trouble of doing something about i...
Read more

About Those Roads in Texas

A s Sooner fans head south for the OU-Texas game next week, they will encounter a phenomenon most of us are familiar with: as you cruise across the Red River suddenly the road gets noticeably smoother. The painted lane stripes get a little brighter and the roadside “Welcome to Texas” visitors’ center gleams in the sunlight, a modern and well-maintained reminder of how much more money the Lonestar State spends on public infrastructure than little old Oklahoma. Or does it? Why are the roads so much, well… better in Texas? Turns out, it isn’t the amount of money spent, at least not when compared to the overall size of the state’s economy and personal income of its inhabitants. Research conducted by 1889 Institute’s Byron Schlomach reveals that Oklahoma actually spends significantly more on roads than Texas as a percentage of both state GDP and personal income . And that was data from 2016, before Oklahoma’s tax and spending increases of recent years. The gap is likely gr...
Read more

Why Oklahoma's Method for Selecting Judges Is a Bad Idea

The state of Oklahoma selects supreme court justices using a system known as the Missouri Plan, which is a form of merit selection. Advocates paint a rosy picture of the plan, claiming that it is a more sophisticated system than the federal model or the election model and that it strikes the perfect balance between the other two systems. Unfortunately, that is simply not the case. Here is how the plan works: the Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC), a board of individuals who review candidates for vacancies on the supreme court, selects three candidates to present to the governor. The governor must select one of these candidates. If he does not, after 60 days, the Chief Justice selects one of the candidates to fill the vacancy. Once on the court, justices face an uncontested “retention election” every six years; however, not one justice has been voted off the court in the half century that this system has been in place. On its face this system might seem like a good idea, but...
Read more