Blacks Need High-Quality Education, Not a DEI Agenda — Part 2

I argued in my previous article that to increase the supply of quality black professional candidates, the focus should be on high-quality education, not equity. Specifically, the black community needs to improve the black college graduation rate, which will first require us to address the poor state of K-12 education. Addressing this deficiency is the only way to markedly increase the supply of black students who will go on to college, successfully complete their studies, and be prepared to compete for sought-after jobs. (READ MORE: Blacks Need High-Quality Education, Not a DEI Agenda)

So how do we go about fixing a broken K-12 public education system? I don’t think any single factor could do more than to introduce school choice into the equation. The evidence is clear that school choice can have a significant positive effect on education outcomes. In what follows, I consider some of the factors working against school choice in our country, the positive effects of school choice, and some of the counterarguments against school choice.

The first thing to examine is how the black community votes. Black voters overwhelmingly vote for Democrat candidates, with 84 percent identifying with or leaning toward the left. It is hardly a secret that Democrat candidates strongly favor teachers’ unions who routinely oppose school choice. A recent article in USA Today, argues that Democrats have missed the mark on school choice, to the detriment of future generations. I’m not advocating that blacks start voting Republican, but when they neglect to factor in where a candidate stands on school choice, they are not considering the best interests of black students.

There are myriad reasons, but I will focus here on just a few of the several benefits that have been identified. First, school choice provides options for low-income families they could not otherwise afford. Charter schools, for example, which like other public schools are funded by taxpayers, but are given greater flexibility in tailoring their curriculum, academic focus, and other factors, offer an excellent option for these families. While charter schools may not be right for all students, the key here is to have options.

Second, students involved in school choice programs have consistently demonstrated higher graduation rates. Third, a market-based approach to education makes schools more accountable to parents, since the parents are the key stakeholders instead of teachers. Simply put, a competitive education environment rather than a monopolistic, bureaucratic public school system is best for the vast majority of students.

Invariably, the pushback on charter schools and other alternatives is that they siphon funds from traditional public schools, thus undermining them. Indeed, there are fixed costs built into the public school system: administrative, building maintenance, teacher salaries, student activities, etc. However, if traditional public schools are not successfully delivering a quality education, doing nothing is unacceptable. Districts that lose students to charter schools can adjust to charter schools just as they routinely adjust to changing demographics. The associated costs are worth it if student performance is improved, which should be the primary concern of policymakers.

Of special concern to many is a perceived lack of investment in urban public schools. Specifically, according to the Urban Institute, black students nationwide receive about 4 percent less funding on average compared to other students. However, this still represents robust funding, as public education spending is at an all-time high. And, state and federal funding has largely made up for discrepancies in schools and districts with high percentages of low-income households.

Furthermore, there is little correlation between funding and student performance. For example, the Baltimore City Public Schools budget is one of the highest in the nation, yet only 25 percent of its students are proficient in math. California has a $128 billion K-12 budget, yet it too boasts only 25 percent proficiency in core subjects (black students are particularly hard hit, with only 10 percent achieving proficiency in math). Chicago Public Schools spend over $29,000 per student, yet only 11 percent of black students were reading on grade level according to the 2021 Illinois Report Card.

Another argument from school choice detractors is that school choice is nothing more than a partisan attack from “the right” on urban areas that are primarily composed of blacks and other people of color. This is a poor argument in the category of genetic fallacy, where an argument is dismissed solely based on its origin rather than its merits. The facts bear out that black educational attainment in urban areas, where blacks remain concentrated in racially segregated public schools, is significantly lower than that of whites.

Given these factors, my earnest appeal to black voters is to fully embrace the wave of school choice legislation that is sweeping the country.  Currently, twelve states have enacted universal or near-universal education freedom — giving roughly 18.9 million students (approximately 36.3 percent of all students) access to education funding for their parents to select a learning avenue they deem best for their children.  In the long run, nothing will be more beneficial to increasing the supply of black students who will go on to college, successfully complete their studies, and earn their way into the corporate world.

Walter Myers III is a senior fellow at the Seattle-based Discovery Institute and an adjunct faculty member at Biola University’s Talbot School of Theology.

The post Blacks Need High-Quality Education, Not a DEI Agenda — Part 2 appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.