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

When It Comes to the Cox Center, “What if I Get to Meet a Movie Star?” Isn’t Good Enough

In a recent   post , 1889 Institute expounded on the fiduciary duty of elected officials “to act in the best interest of the people of the state as a whole,” a “high duty, executed as a public trust … wherein one puts the people’s interest above one’s own.” This fiduciary duty must not stop with elected officials. Once an elected body or an elected official – the legislature, a city council, the governor, or a mayor – has taken final action, the faithful implementation of each enacted law, policy, or program falls to an army of bureaucrats. Thus, a fiduciary duty to execute laws and policies with diligence and integrity, tantamount to that of elected officials, must extend to government employees. Recently, I had a few moments to sit down and watch a show with my children. Unsurprisingly, my son picked a series entitled “The Stinky and Dirty Show.” I was naturally skeptical that the show would yield any real value. However, as I watched, I found myself pleasantly surprised. Each ep...
Read more

How to Spend $47 Million in 4 Months

The CARES Act passed by Congress has a provision to give funds to state and local governments. Out of this, Oklahoma County has been given the onerous task of spending $47 million by the end of the year. The caveat being all expenses must be related to COVID-19. Any money not used must be returned to the federal government. While the county is undoubtedly receiving a plethora of self-interested letters request ing a portion of the funds, there are a few ways to spend the money to the benefit of all Oklahoma County residents. This should not be read to condone spending money just because it is available. Government officials must remember that the money they spend comes directly from the taxpayer, and should only be spent in ways that benefit all or most of society. Oklahoma County could also use the money to give grants to small businesses that were forced to shut down or otherwise damaged by the government’s actions related to COVID-19. Small businesses could use the money to avoi...
Read more

Will the United States Supreme Court Stand Up For Lawyers’ First Amendment Rights?

To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical. Oklahoma law requires attorneys to join and pay dues to the Oklahoma Bar Association in order to practice their occupation. The folly of this this requirement lies not just in the financial burden imposed on lawyers, but in its affront to their First Amendment rights. This is because the Oklahoma Bar Association (OBA) routinely uses the money it receives in mandatory dues payments to support political causes. As a result, attorneys are forced to subsidize political activity and opinions they may disagree with. Over the Christmas holiday I filed an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief urging the United States Supreme Court to weigh in. You can read my brief here . The case in question involves a North Dakota attorney, Arnold Fleck, who sued North Dakota’s mandatory bar association for using his mandatory dues to engage in the same type of activity th...
Read more

What if Legislators Were Licensed? Well, Just to Make a Point...

1889 Institute, as a general matter, objects to occupational licensing. We have written about it more than any other subject. The scant benefits simply do not outweigh the enormous costs to consumers and entrepreneurs, and  the  burdens that disproportionately impact the poor.   It must be noted that the remainder of this post is a work of satire. This should be obvious to anyone who has read even one of our papers, but each of the proposals below has an analogous provision in Oklahoma licensing laws. To those supportive of government-created cartels, these proposals might sound almost reasonable.  A material threat to the public safety and welfare has for too long gone entirely unregulated, unrestrained and unchecked. This menace has the power to corrode not only mere industries, but to corrupt the entire state economy. It’s no overstatement to say that the practitioners of this perilous profession hold the power to destroy democracy as we know it. After a...
Read more