Opponents of school choice claim that (1) it doesn't benefit rural kids b/c there are no alternatives to the district schools and that (2) it hurts district schools because so many kids would leave for those alternatives.
What's the truth? 🧵 1/11
These claims are mutually exclusive. They can't both be true simultaneously.
But as @matthewladner & I detail in a new @Heritage report, they both can be--and actually are--false. 2/
Families in rural areas have access to more education options than ever before. 70% of rural families live w/in 10 miles of a private school. Charters are scarcer, but they don't have to be. In AZ, 84% live in a zip code w/ at least 1 charter school. 3/
Moreover, in states with school choice, supply rises to meet demand. Florida's rural private school enrollment has more than doubled over the last 20 years. 4/
Recent years have also seen the rise of microschools. In states like AZ that have robust school choice options, there has been tremendous growth in microschooling, particularly in rural areas. 5/
Virtual schooling is also increasingly available. A 2021 survey by the Pew Research Center found that 72% rural Americans said they have a broadband Internet connection at home, up 19 percentage points since 2016. 6/
Okay, but if there are so many options, doesn't that mean the critics are right that choice policies will "destroy" rural district schools? No, not at all.
To test that theory, look at the state w/ the most robust school choice policies: Arizona. 7/
Arizona is #1 for school choice on the @Heritage Education Freedom Report Card. It has the highest private school choice enrollment per capita and 2nd highest charter school enrollment nationwide. So how are their rural district schools faring? 8/
In the decade before the pandemic, Arizona's rural schools were knocking the socks off rural schools nationwide in terms of academic growth, as measured by the NAEP. 9/
Nearly every sector's scores fell during the pandemic, but Arizona's rural schools are still mostly up vs. 2007, and the declines in 8th grade reading/math weren't nearly as bad as rural schools elsewhere. 10/
In short: There are lots of education options for rural families and there's no evidence school choice hurts rural schools. Indeed, the best evidence suggests that school choice is the rising tide that lifts all boats. 11/11 heritage.org/education/repo…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
On Friday, @sos_arizona declared a “historic victory.”
But by Monday, SOS was conceding defeat.
What happened? The parent-led #DeclineToSign movement thwarted SOS's attempts to block the expansion of education choice, then SOS torched their credibility at a press conference. 1/
SOS claimed they handed in 142K signatures to put the Empowerment Scholarship Account expansion on the ballot. They needed 119K.
But according to a tally by @GoldwaterInst & @azpolicy, SOS actually turned in fewer than 90K. 2/
So-called "Save Our Schools" declared victory today, but their victory is ringing hollow. A 🧵 1/7 dailysignal.com/2022/09/23/app…
Beth Lewis, executive director of Save Our Schools Arizona put on her best game face today as she announced that SOS has gathered enough signatures to put the recent expansion of AZ’s Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program on the ballot. But she doesn't look happy. 2/7
She shouldn't be. SOS needs about 119K valid signatures to refer the ESA expansion to the ballot.
"Valid" is the key word. They only got 142K signatures and the average validity rate is 75%, which would require 150K. They'll need a validity rate of about 84%. 3/7
Earlier this week, the NY Times launched an assault on Hasidic yeshivas, claiming they leave students unprepared to earn a living.
They relied only on anecdote and innuendo to make their case but provided no data. That's because the data paint a very different story. A 🧵1/
The NYT piece was timed to influence a Board of Regents vote to regulate *all* NY private schools. Despite 350,000 public comments overwhelmingly opposed to the regulations, the Regents voted unanimously to adopt them. There was no debate. 2/ washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-ne…
The pretext for regulation is public funding. The NYT headline claims the yeshivas are "flush with public money" raking in $1 billion over 4 years.
But the schools they're focused on serve 50,000 kids, so that's only $5,000 per pupil. The public schools spend $31K per pupil. 3/
Yesterday's SCOTUS decision in Carson v. Makin was rightly decided but not revolutionary. Indeed, the justices themselves emphasized how "unremarkable" it was, given that it flowed directly from the logic of the Trinity Lutheran and Espinoza decisions. 1/
The core of the decision was this line from Espinoza: "A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious."
Yesterday, SCOTUS merely said, "Yes, we really meant that." 2/
As Justice Gorsuch made clear in prior concurrences, the "religious status vs. use" distinction is meaningless. The minority essentially said, "You can be whatever religion you want so long as you aren't religious in the public square." The majority rightly rejected that. 3/
No word about how the public schools down the street are doing. How many former students from those schools regularly get NYDN and NYT op-eds calling for a massive overhaul because of the failure of the system?
For those who want to know what's actually going on in Haredi schools, listen to my interview of Dr. Moshe Krakowski, who has spent years studying the schools.