The Pigeonhole

By Winged Avenger

Q.    when is a voucher not a voucher?
A.    when it’s a bulk fund.

Q.    when is a voucher also not a voucher?
A.    when it means the removal of zoning.
 
Q.    when is a voucher good for education?
A.    so far, never…

So, what is a voucher?
“Vouchers” describes various systems that place school funding in the hands of students and families.  The idea is that each student is entitled to access education up to a set value each year.  This value is issued in the form of a voucher.  The student takes the voucher to their chosen school and redeems it for their education.

 

Generally, vouchers (and their ilk) are raised in the context of ‘consumer choice’.  Advocates argue that vouchers enable parents and children to choose the school that best fits their needs.  Evidence shows that, actually, without significant state intervention, vouchers work the opposite way: some schools get to choose their students – not the other way around.  Discussion of vouchers in education is generally linked to right-wing or free-market agendas.  Vouchers are not the only means that are used to try and effect change:  Zoning removal has a “quasi-voucher” effect; bulk funding has similar effects to vouchers – though is arguably less destabilising for schools than voucher systems.

Vouchers are predicated on a free-market notion of competition between schools, which has also been shown to have a detrimental effect on students’ learning.  Moreover, a common net effect of voucher systems is increased social segregation.

Voucher systems resemble bulk funding because schools get their income (almost) entirely from the vouchers students bring with them.  Unlike bulk funding, or the current system of funding based on half-yearly roll returns, schools’ incomes wax and wane as students come and go.  The idea is that if one school proves unsuitable, a student simply takes their vouchers (and remaining annual value) and moves to another school.  This would mean real budgetary instability for schools, combined with an administrative nightmare for those called upon to calculate values, transfer rates, etc.  Even Maggie Thatcher admitted that “colossal” administration costs probably rendered a voucher system unworkable when it was under consideration in Britain.

The voucher system proposed by Roger Douglas in the 1990s was a combination of tax breaks or vouchers (depending on your income).  He argued that it would achieve innovation, variety and high performance.  His system covered teacher salaries as well as other school funding, with Boards of Trustees determining pay rates.  Douglas’ system also included the right for schools to decline an enrolment – goodbye student choice; hello segregated schools!  Also under this system schools would set their own fees.  So, it would be possible for a school to set fees above the voucher entitlement to students, meaning that schools could establish their own client base using economic barriers to entry.  The appeal of vouchers for many of the proponents is that they may be used indiscriminately at state and private schools. Yes that’s right – 100% taxpayer subsidy for wealthy parents to send their children to private schools. Chile trialled a voucher system a few years ago, believing that it would lead to improved learning outcomes for all.  They got the opposite – variable outcomes, combined with social streaming.  Not achieved.

The OECD says there is no direct evidence that competition improves school performance.  Vouchers are predicated on the belief that competition and free market business models will work in the school system.  You would think, particularly since the most recent international financial collapse, that people might have learned that “pure market models” (a) don’t always work in the financial sector and (b) bear little relevance to the serious work of teaching and learning in the public education sector.

Vouchers don’t work.  Educationally, they are not compatible with a quality public education system; environmentally, you don’t have to be a wild green to see that transporting kids across cities twice a day instead of having them walk or bike to their nearest local school is madness.    Voucher debates are an irritating distraction from more important conversations about the nature of 21st century schooling. It’s time to put this red herring aside and work actively to promote better understanding of the public value of education.