OPINION:
Few efforts of local and state government are as critical to the well-being of our society as ensuring our children have quality educational opportunities. It is an effort that is best practiced by those closest to the students and their parents. Modern education policy, alas, is based on growing and intrusive federal interference, which squelches opportunity and condemns kids to failing schools.
Despite this ever-growing federal interference, there are some very targeted, very specific federal programs that return to parents a measure of control over key decisions affecting their child’s education.
The supplemental education services (SES) or tutoring provision was created in 2001 in the latest version of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). It provides funding to parents to pursue tutoring opportunities for a child who attends a failing public school and lags behind in his or her studies at school.
Taking a small portion of the roughly $30 billion in federal funding that flow into the school districts under the law, this program gives grants to parents who can use the funds to select a tutoring program from a list of providers approved by the state. The basis for the program is straightforward - individual students who don’t have the luxury of time can get specialized tutoring opportunities to help their reading or math performance. True, the program restricts parents to a government-approved list of tutors from which to choose, but at least they get to choose something.
And that’s a key distinction. What makes this tutoring program different from other federal education programs is the fact that the decision-making on how to use the money rests - despite some restrictions - with the family and not ultimately with the education establishment. This program allows parents a limited opportunity to rescue their child from the failing schools he or she is forced to attend and regain some control of their child’s education. It frees parents to choose the best (government-approved) provider to meet the child’s needs. So, in addition to providing children this critical boost, the program refocuses the responsibility for the education of a student from the government’s public education system to the parent, where it belongs.
As one would imagine, this doesn’t sit well with the education establishment, including the Obama administration. In their latest proposal to amend the ESEA law, which is up for renewal, the administration is siding with most education groups to strip this parental opportunity from federal law and return the money to the control of the school district to use as it sees fit. At a time when our public education system is not serving so many children, it’s sad that the administration is following such a reactionary course.
As Congress debates the future of federal education policy, it is critical that we continue to support those few opportunities in the law that provide resources directly to children and families to ensure that students in need continue to receive the specialized attention their parents want them to have.
Penny Young Nance is the CEO of Concerned Women for America. Ms. Nance was formerly a special adviser for the Federal Communications Commission.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.