- During a recent interview, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Josh Stein said the program takes a half billion dollars from the public schools and gives it to unaccountable private schools and wealthy families
- Stein’s criticized OSP for benefitting unaccountable private schools, serving wealthy families, and having too many teachers who lack teacher certification
- Stein’s criticism is contradicted by state statutes and close examination
Josh Stein is North Carolina’s attorney general. He’s also the Democratic nominee for governor. Last week Stein was interviewed by Tim Boyum of Spectrum News’ Capital Tonight program on various topics. One of those topics was the Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP).
Stein’s opposition to the program is no secret. Nevertheless, Stein’s less-than-truthful answers to some of Boyum’s questions were surprising. As sitting attorney general, it’s difficult to dismiss Stein’s inaccurate claims as being due to ignorance of the law. Partners for Educational Freedom in NC has posted relevant parts of Stein’s interview here.
This brief and the next will walk through Stein’s answers.
In one part of the interview (see timestamp 0:32-0:51), Stein claims:
Right now, they’re giving half a billion dollars to people, public taxpayer dollars, taking it away from public schools to give to unaccountable private schools and wealthy families. And understand there are no curriculum requirements, there are no teacher certification requirements, there is no requirement that these schools not discriminate against students.
What is Stein talking about?
Myth: They’re Taking Taxpayer Dollars Away from Public Schools
Perhaps Stein could make that charge if OSP money were already funneled into the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction budget. Instead, the OSP is administered through the University of North Carolina System. As such, it makes no sense to suggest that money appropriated for the OSP program would otherwise go to the public schools and has therefore been “taken away” from them. It’s equivalent to suggesting that money to fund, for example, Elizabeth State University is “taking money away from public schools.” It’s simply not true.
Myth: OSP Money Goes to Schools that Are Unaccountable
The state’s attorney general should know better. State law spells out the numerous obligations placed on nonpublic schools that accept students receiving OSP grants. Some of the accountability requirements facing OSP schools include:
- comply with laws requiring documentation regarding tuition and fees
- provide criminal background checks for the highest-ranking school members
- provide parents with reports on their child’s academic progress, including test scores on standardized tests
- administer a nationally standardized test once a year
- administer the ACT exam for scholarship recipients in 11th grade
- furnish graduation rates of scholarship recipients to the North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority (NCSEAA), the state agency that administers the OSP
- have an independent financial audit for all schools with over 70 scholarship students
- report the aggregate scores on nationally standardized tests to NCSEAA and also verify that annual testing requirements have been fulfilled
To say private schools are unaccountable is flat wrong, as I explained in greater detail here.
Myth: Scholarship Funds Are for Wealthy Families
While Opportunity Scholarships are open to all students, the program is built to help children from families with low and moderate incomes. The OSP uses a sliding scale for scholarship amounts, and lower-income families receive larger scholarships.
The average awards range from $7,460 for students in lower-income tiers (1 and 2) to $3,360 for students in higher-income tiers (3 and 4). While Tiers 3 and 4 comprise about 55 percent of recipients, Tiers 1 and 2 comprise a higher percentage of the scholarship money and almost half of all recipients. In 2022-23, the average household income of Opportunity Scholarship recipients was just $44,299.
Stein’s implication is that extending OSP eligibility to students from higher-income households is unjust. Considering taxes paid, that’s a difficult argument to make. Individuals who make over $100,000 annually account for less than a quarter (23.4 percent) of all taxpayers but provide almost three-quarters (74.3 percent) of all tax revenue. The argument against providing a small voucher to their children is far from compelling when you consider the full picture. Moreover, why should it be considered okay for taxpayer funds to be used to educate children from wealthy families in traditional public schools, but not private schools of their choice?
Finally, who does Stein count as “wealthy”? Are four-person households earning $115,440 a year — the Tier 2 threshold for a family of four — wealthy? Two teachers earning the state average of $59,423 would best that figure. Are they wealthy under Josh Stein’s definition?
Myth: Private Schools Should Have the Same Curriculum as Public Schools
Josh Stein fails to understand the fundamental differences between public and private schools and how those differences affect curriculum. Private schools are different by design. They are frequently formed for the very reason to offer different academic, pedagogical, or religious perspectives. To assert — as Stein does — there should be the same curriculum throughout North Carolina ignores this obvious fact.
While there is no law requiring a uniform curriculum, it is wrong to assume that private schools don’t take seriously the need to develop a strong curriculum. There is accreditation, and many private schools are accredited by governing bodies, such as the North American Christian School Accrediting Agency and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). Accreditation frequently requires a clear and defined curriculum that fosters the development of core knowledge and skills that allow individuals to function and contribute to society.
There are also requirements in law that OSP schools offer standardized testing in basic subject areas like grammar, spelling, and mathematics, and in competencies in verbal or quantitative areas, all with the intention of determining how well students are progressing. These requirements are all intended to ensure that OSP students progress academically, and the data can help provide comparisons to other students. Schools therefore cannot neglect their instructional duties in choosing their curricula.
Finally, and also obviously, parents helped by the OSP are seeking better instruction than what is offered by their child’s assigned public school and are looking for a strong curriculum. Schools of choice are ultimately held accountable by the parents.
Myth: Private Schools Should Have the Same Teacher Certification Requirements as Public Schools
In saying that private schools with OSP students have “no teacher certification requirements,” Stein is implying that a lack of certification limits the ability of teachers to teach. Teacher certification is not a prerequisite to teacher quality nor to improved student outcomes, as research as shown (see here, here and here). Private schools are also concerned with the development of quality teachers, and even when they use different means to accomplish it — such as through professional development and provisional licensure — it does not mean private schools offer an inferior educational product.
Once again, Stein’s complaint completely ignores the ability of parents to hold the schools they choose for their children accountable as well as the schools’ ability to demonstrate their instructional quality through student performance on standardized tests and more.
The next brief will examine Stein’s myths that OSP schools discriminate against students and that there are no ways to evaluate whether the public’s investment in the Opportunity Scholarship Program even makes a difference in student learning.