| Abstract: | A Summary The replacement of the existing system of publicly operated schools by a market of private ones-supported by government vouchers—would probably yield mixed results. On the one hand, some parents would have greater choices among schools and some schools would have to be productive in order to survive in the competitive framework. The increase in consumer choice and the resultant competition among schools would be likely to lead to greater educational benefits for many students and their families (private benefits) than those which they receive under the present monopolistic system.On the other hand, the schools are also expected to fulfill certain social functions. It is in these that a market approach to schooling is likely to yield poor results. For example, basic schooling represents the primary device for equalizing opportunities among racial and social groups. Yet, advantaged children would probably receive far better schooling under the market proposal than would disadvantaged ones, and it is likely that this disparity would lead to larger future inequalities in opportunity between the children of the middle class and those of the poor. Further, it is not clear that a set of largely autonomous schools could provide the common set of values and knowledge necessary for the functioning of a democratic society. Finally, it is likely that the market proposal would increase racial and social stratification of students among schools. Whatever the success of the market in meeting consumer preferences, it would be offset by the market's failure to satisfy the social goals of basic schooling.Fortunately, we are not limited to choosing between the traditional educational bureaucracy on the one hand or an unmitigated free market for educational services on the other. There are several ways to create competition within a public school system. Jencks, Sizer, and Coleman have suggested particular plans based upon the competitive framework, and the proposal for community schools represents a more general framework in which the competition of the market place might be used to advantage. The time is ripe to experiment with at least one of these plans for the children of the ghetto. Do we have any buyers?
Henry M. Levin
is a research associate with the Economic Studies Division of the Brookings Institute. He has written on economic and educational matters in the Saturday Review, the Journal of Human Resources,and other publications. He is currently organizing a Brookings conference on the community school. |
