The article critiques school choice initiatives for focusing on benefits for students who can escape dangerous public schools while neglecting those who remain. It argues that while school choice may seem advantageous to some, it merely relocates problems rather than solving them. The analogy of moving away from high-crime areas illustrates this point; creating private educational options doesn't tackle issues like school violence or inequity. The piece urges the consideration of broader implications and stresses that those left behind still matter.
It could be argued that school choice can still solve the problem. However, the obvious reply is that even if all children are given vouchers, this will merely recreate the problematic public schools but in private form.
This approach is analogous to moving away from high-crime areas, ideally to well-policed gated communities. While this is beneficial to those who can choose to escape, it does nothing to address the underlying problems of school violence.
While this might be appealing to those on the right side of the gates, the obvious problem is that they do not (yet) exist in total isolation from those left behind.
An argument in favor of school choice is based on the claim that it allows students to escape from dangerous public schools. It is true that public schools can be violent places.
Collection
[
|
...
]