WILLIAM RASPBERRY'S WASHINGTON POST
COLUMN ON SCHOOL CHOICE

The Historical Case for School Choice

By William Raspberry

Washington Post, Monday, August 17, 1998; Page A19

Andrew J. Coulson didn't really want to go where the facts seemed to be dragging him. But facts are facts, and the Seattle researcher is convinced that his conclusion, however reluctantly reached, is correct: The public school system is bad for education.

Oh, boy, you say: Another public-education basher, another apologist for "choice." Well, yes, but listen:

"I am an education researcher and writer, and I have had the luxury of dedicating myself full time for the past four years to a single question: What sort of school system would best meet the public's actual educational goals?

"To answer that question, I have analyzed public opinion data from polls and focus groups, I have studied school systems around the world from ancient times to the present, and I have pored over virtually every scrap of relevant research on the performance of public and private schools. In keeping with the public's broad range of aspirations for their institutions of learning, my investigation has gone beyond academic and job outcomes to include the indirect social effects that schools have on their communities and societies, and the impact of different school systems on poor and minority families."

And his finding: "Free educational markets, in which parents have been able to choose any school for their children and schools have been forced to compete with one another to attract students, have consistently done a better job of serving families and nations than state-run systems such as we have today.

"In other words, the institution of public schooling is not the best mechanism for advancing the ideals of public education."

Coulson's is a sweeping blow to those of us who keep hoping the system that served earlier generations reasonably well can be helped to overcome the effects of bad policies, inadequate teachers, disengaged parents and indifferent students to perform their magic yet again.

He wonders if the magic ever was there in the first place, though undoubtedly a lot of people -- including the 31-year-old Coulson himself -- have come out of public schools in good shape. He says he is convinced by his research, though he cannot prove it, that the free-market approach -- including competition, the profit motive and the direct cost to parents -- adds value to schooling. Unfortunately for his case, there is no place in the world where [public] and free-market systems can be fairly compared.

"That's why most of my book ["Market Education, the Unknown History" will be published next January] is historical. As far back as ancient Greece and the Muslim Empire of the eighth through the 11th centuries, you can find some really interesting comparisons.

"If you compare Athens' free-market education to Sparta's highly centralized state system, for example, you find some compelling distinctions. Athens, as anyone who's looked at history knows, produced fine literature and pioneering work in mathematics and art, had the most sophisticated economic system of its time, and left an enormous legacy of learning. Sparta didn't fail utterly, but it became mainly a narrow military society with no culture. Sparta has given us names for high school football teams and not much else."

Coulson says he understands the radical nature of his conclusion and fears that it will be dismissed as the product of ideological fervor.

"I am neither a fundamentalist Christian nor a social conservative," he told me. "I am pro-choice on abortion, supportive of equal rights for all citizens irrespective of race, religion, sex or sexual orientation. And yet I'm afraid that my book will be discounted by many other well-meaning liberal-minded people simply because it is not favorable to the institution of public schooling."

Coulson is not the first observer to note the connection between direct cost and parental involvement. He cites a prominent lawyer, born in the early '60s in a small town without a high school, who undertakes to endow a school out of his own pocket. But though he could afford to underwrite the entire tuition cost, he decides to provide only a third, for fear that his "gift might be abused for someone's selfish purposes, as I see happen in many places where teachers' salaries are paid from public funds."

The prominent lawyer was Pliny the Younger, born in the early '60s of the first century A.D.

© Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company

Back to the "About the Editor" Page

Copyright © 1998, Andrew J. Coulson
www.schoolchoices.org
All rights reserved