Studies have shown that a school choice program can benefit both low and middle-income students. School choice programs offer options to lower-income families and eliminate the connection between housing and school attendance. While upper and middle-income families can afford private school tuition, lower-income families can’t afford the fees. Regardless of the cost, school choice programs can provide a better educational experience for a student.
While the study found a strong correlation between the initial selection of a school and student mobility, it was less clear about cumulative mobility. While a small fraction of students changed schools twice or more during the study period, most remained in the same school. This suggests that initial school choice may matter more than student mobility. Still, the study highlights policy implications and areas for future research. And for those who are concerned about the cost, the research suggests that a school choice program can save states money in the long run.
In theory, school choice programs can cause three things in a system: filling empty seats at high-quality private schools, encouraging existing private schools to grow, and creating new, high-quality schools. But the reality of school choice programs is far from ideal. While school choice programs can fill existing private school spaces, they have failed to drive the creation of new, high-quality schools. The most important premise of school choice is that it should empower students to choose a school that is best for them and their circumstances. The government should not limit students by geography or budget. Latest website: newspaperworlds
