PART ONE: Public Schools and the Pro-Student Paradox
At the end of the Forest Hills School District (FHSD) School Board meeting on June 26th, a discussion about EdChoice vouchers raised considerable concerns. Katie Stewart, an FHSD school board member, identified herself as being pro-student, rather than pro-public schools. Later in the conversation the superintendent stated that he did not oppose the EdChoice vouchers. These remarks are especially troubling for families whose educational experiences have navigated both private and public school systems.
This story is shared with permission and centers on one such family. Their oldest child began school in a private setting — a decision made in 2015 due to FHSD’s lack of full-day kindergarten and concerns over the outdated facilities at Wilson. However, what started as a seemingly sound choice, turned into a nightmare. Disillusioned by their private school experience, the family ultimately chose to enroll all their children in FHSD, where the contrast was stark and the results overwhelmingly positive.
The child who is highly intelligent but has ADHD, struggled significantly in private school. Despite notifying the private school kindergarten teacher about the child’s ADHD and offering resources, there was a lack of experience and support. In first grade, the situation worsened as the private school teacher seemed to disparage the child for ADHD tendencies, increasing anxiety and necessitating medication.
When the child began attending Wilson, a public school within FHSD, in second grade, the difference was stark. The public school teacher was well-qualified, familiar with ADHD, and provided the necessary support, helping the child overcome anxiety. Eventually, the child was even identified as gifted.
Reflecting on this experience, the parents — an attorney mother and an engineer father — concluded that many private schools might work for average students but fall short in providing for those who need extra support or who are gifted. While some private schools cater specifically to special needs or gifted students, the average private school seems ill-equipped for students outside the norm.
Recent stories from other families suggest little has changed. One family was told that their private school need not provide accommodations for their son, who is on the autism spectrum. While appalling, this is accurate; private schools are not required to accept all students, implement 504 plans or IEPs, meet specific educational standards for their teachers, or consistently measure student progress.
This brings the focus back to the school board meeting. The idea that one can be pro-student without being pro-public school is flawed. Public schools have legal obligations and inclusive practices that private schools often lack, ensuring educational opportunities for all students. This series of articles will explore the nuances of the EdChoice voucher program, examining its impact on public education and why it fails to serve all students equitably.
The story shared above highlights some of the key differences between public and private schools. Future articles will address:
- The intent and history of public schools in Ohio.
- The legal requirements of public versus private schools.
- The limitations of the EdChoice voucher system in ensuring success for all students.
- The financial implications of the EdChoice voucher system on public schools.
- Double-dipping into public school funds by those participating in the EdChoice program.
- The negative impact on property taxes due to the current EdChoice voucher system.
- Important aspects of the FHSD school board discussion regarding litigation related to EdChoice.
- The impact of EdChoice-type vouchers on education in other states.
- Alternative approaches to ensure Ohio invests in public schools.
- Other options available to preserve and strengthen Ohio’s public schools.
Stay tuned for an in-depth exploration of these topics to understand why supporting public schools is crucial to supporting all students.
