School choice petition drive nears
The diocese will participate in the statewide School Choice Petition Drive after Masses Oct. 9-10 and 16-17 and during Back-to-School Night and other activities in both elementary and high schools, officials said.
The purpose of the petition drive is to present the signed petitions to state legislators so that they will get an indication of the support for the general concept of school choice within their districts, said Judith M. Krilla, diocesan director of New Jersey Alliance of School Families.
Krilla called school choice a social justice issue.
“Parents should be able to choose where their child goes to school,” Krilla said.
“People would be surpirsed to know that there are parents in this state who fear for their children’s safety,” she added. “No parenst should have that on their mond and no child should have that expereience.”
The petition drive is sponsored by the New Jersey School Choice Alliance, which is comprised of the New Jersey Alliance of Catholic School Families, New Jersey Catholic Conference and the New Jersey State Council Knights of Columbus.
School choice is the primary mission of the New Jersey Alliance of Catholic School Families and is “a critical goal” of the New Jersey Catholic Conference because it offers parents an opportunity to select the schools that are best suited for their children’s needs, but which many currently can’t afford, Krilla said.
Any New Jersey resident who is at least 18 years old may sign a petition, which includes space for the signer’s name and address.
The petition’s additional goals are: educate parents and supporters of Catholic education who wish to read more about school choice and to learn about the myths that are perpetuated by opponents and provide a forum for families’ voices to be heard regarding their need for school choice.
Myths listed in bold and answers about school choice in the alliance’s Website include:
1. Nonpublic and charter schools
will not be able to accommodate the influx
of new students.
Where school choice exists,
nonpublic school buildings that were
closed for financial reasons are opening
up again to accommodate new students.
Over a reasonable period of time, the existence
of school choice will attract education
providers.
2. Providing money for children to
attend nonpublic and charter schools
will weaken the already under-funded
traditional public schools.
About 40 percent of the money spent
on education makes it to the classroom.
With some children leaving the public
systems for other schools that cost less
per pupil, there should be even more
money for traditional public schools.
3. School choice doesn’t
improve education.
In Milwaukee, which has had school
choice for 10 years, public school student
performance on statewide standardized
tests has risen steadily. Scores for every
ethnic group in every subject have risen
every year for six years.
4. School choice allows schools
accepting vouchers to choose which students
it wants from among the pool of
applicants, thus “creaming” the traditional
public school population.
In states where choice is available,
School choice petition drive nears
schools accepting voucher students must do
so by random selection only. They also cannot
consider disciplinary history, race, gender
or religion when reviewing applicants.
5. School choice will lead to the social,
racial and economic separation of
students.
The current public system already assigns
students by where they live, which
almost always separates them into social,
racial and economic enclaves. Choice options
such as charter schools, private scholarships
and public vouchers remove or reduce
the importance of geography and political
boundaries. Most inner-city nonpublic
and charter schools are more diverse than
their traditional public school counterparts.
6. Public funding of schools with
religious affiliations violates the constitutional
ban against public support for
such institutions.
The U.S. Supreme Court handed
down its landmark decision in 2002, upholding
the constitutionality of
Cleveland’s voucher program. Consistent
with prior rulings, the justices ruled that
when an individual uses public funds to
make a private choice – in this case when
a parent uses a voucher to make an individual
decision to send his or her child to
a private or religious school – it does not
violate the First Amendment.
Also, public money supports both
religiously-affiliated preschool programs,
as well as programs such as the G.I. Bill
and Pell Grants in colleges.
7. School choice is an anti-teacher ploy.
More choices for parents and students
result in a teaching environment
where innovation and autonomy are rewarded
and lead to more job satisfaction
for teachers.
*The attached/referenced article was originally published in The Catholic Spirit, the official newspaper of the Diocese of Metuchen, and is protected under U.S. and international copyright law