Nevada's Trifecta of Education Failures

In his May 31st Nevada News & Views, Chuck Muth mentioned that four of five of Nevada's "anti-charter school" State Board of Education board members are up for re-election this year. This is notable because the Board has killed (by a vote of 5-5) all recent school choice measures including slapping a moratorium on all new charter school applications as well as voting against the expansion of existing charter schools. (The Board's explanation for denying new school applications? They were "overwhelmed" - with all 11 of them.) Muth has often pointed out that just one vote would make a difference. Happily, four challengers have now been found and have successfully filed to run against the anti-charter board members. Happier still, the four challenged members have now decided NOT to run - and there is apparently serious discussion of a recall effort against the remaining anti-charter member, Anthony Ruggiero. Those hoping for greater school choice may be only one election away from seeing change.

Why does this matter? The answer, according to Matthew Ladner's recent piece over at the Nevada Policy Research Institute (for the whole article go to http://www.npri.org/publications/quality--quantity) is twofold. First, the US Census Bureau has estimated that the number of Nevada children under the age of 18 will nearly double between now and the year 2030. To accommodate this growth, Nevada will have no choice but to build many new schools as well as fix up some old ones. Second, Nevada's quality of education is extremely poor. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which tests representative samples of students in all 50 states, shows that Nevada's fourth graders rank 46th in the nation in reading skills, while its eighth graders rank 47th. An alarming 43 percent of Nevada fourth graders scored below the basic level on reading on the recent 2007 exams, while 37 percent of eighth graders scored below basic reading levels. Add all this to the above mentioned slap-down of charter schools, and you've got a Trifecta - of failures.

Nevada's apologists for these problems are constantly calling for more money. Unfortunately, our taxpayers have been pursuing spendy policy for decades with little to show for it. Nevada's public school spending in 2003 was between 40 and 60 percent higher than the national average on a per-pupil basis (depending on the spending category) yet our students are testing more poorly than ever. Given our rapid growth, increased costs are unavoidable, but borrowing for new school facilities must eventually be repaid in the form of lower classroom spending - or, as is customary here in the Silver State, higher taxes. Even with tax hikes, Nevada's public school districts continue to take on millions in new debt each year as they strive to keep up with rising enrollment.

School choice - including the addition and expansion of charter schools - can improve public school performance, reduce the need for new debt, and reduce the burden on taxpayers. School choice programs can actually place students in quality private schools for less than the cost to educate the student in the public system. How is this possible? One example Ladner cites comes to us from Florida's corporate scholarship tax credit program, Step Up for Students. He says it "gives a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to corporations that assist non-profits to provide private school scholarships." The result, according to the Collins Center for Public Policy, is that the state saves about $3,800 for each student using a scholarship credit voucher. Sounds like good policy to me.