School choices is an issue that is controversial mainly because of the wide variety of interpretations of what choice would entail. Using the same word, one group seeks to address problems such as low student achievement, another aims to alleviate the de facto segregation that exists in many schools, while a third group may be operating from a viewpoint tainted with racial prejudice.

Defining Choice

Despite the wide range of interpretations, there exists a broad consensus that some form of school choice is the solution to our educational crisis. Why? Well, first of all, the word choice implies power, freedom, options, opportunities: elements of the American Dream. Not all choice plans, however, mean all these things to all people. To better understand the many facets of choice, some form of clarification is needed.

Education expert John Witter has divided school choice programs into two categories: those incorporating parental influence and those under parental control.

Parental influence refers to the ability of the parent to affect a decision ultimately made by the school officials. Plans incorporating parental influence include the majority of existing choice plans; these include magnet (also called focus) schools and open-enrollment schools. Magnet schools arouse out of attempts at desegregation, but their numbers are now expanding because of the appeal of choosing schools. Open enrollment schools offer as much choice as possible among all schools in a district while maintaining racial balance in almost all schools.

In parental control programs the student's parents have the final say regarding which school their child will attend. These programs are primarily implemented using vouchers or tuition tax credits. Under voucher systems, the partial or full cost of a student's education is provided in the form of a voucher that parents can use to purchase education in either public or private schools. Tuition tax credits are income tax deductions for the tuition paid to private schools.

The Liberal Party has historically opposed parental control programs, therefore the remainder of this article focuses on programs incorporating parental influence.

Problems Motivating the Push for Choice

Poor student achievement. During the past two decades, the gap in reading and writing test scores between black and Latino students and their white counterparts has narrowed by 50 percent. Despite these gains, the gap remains great.

Additionally, research indicates that nearly all students are acquiring the basics in reading and math; what American students appear to lack is the proper preparation to undertake the more complex kinds of work increasingly required by employers and institutions of higher education.

Indifference to the concerns of parents. Real or not, there is a perceived indifference to the concerns of parents on the part of the education system in America. This frustration has contributed in part, to the decentralization movement sweeping the nation; people want to be able to make the major decisions concerning the education of their children.

The choice argument holds that returning a level of influence or control to the parents would establish a pattern of rewards and punishments to make aloof, unresponsive public educators sensitive to the desires of their clients. Similarly, because they would be competing for students, schools would more readily institute needed changes.

Failed Desegregation Policies. Court-ordered desegregation plans often created schools without unity, lacking a sense of community or common purpose; the main entrance criteria was the student's neighborhood, with race being a subset and consequence of that factor.

Magnet schools were created as an alternative, to foster a sense of community among students. To ensure equal access to all racial groups enrollment is based upon program specificities. By shifting the focus toward academic interests and away from the usual entrance criteria, magnet schools are attempting to bring together students who have common interests regardless of race.

Failure of Previous Attempts at Reform. Public school reform, like many government programs, has been dealt with in an 'all or none' mindset: policy reforms are instituted system-wide from above, fail, and are followed by a new sound of alternate reforms.

The choice argument holds that the introduction of parental choice will lead to widespread examination of the school system on every level. Rational decisions can then be made to change such problems as flaws in the curriculum, inadequate teaching, overcrowding and dangerous building conditions.

Assumptions underlying choice

Centralized control of the school system has always been rationalized by an agreement on common goals: schools should instill students with a sense of civic awareness, schools should develop in students interpersonal skills. Individual interests, whether of parents or educators, have traditionally been subordinated to these broader aims — the public goal.

Parental choice would alter the educational perspective from common, societal concerns to individual, 'consumer' concerns. The choice argument assumes that students, teachers and parents will be more committed to and satisfied with schools they chose to attend, work or send their children to, and that because everyone involved chooses to be there for similar reasons, a choice school will have common goals, shared values and broad expectation.