School Choice: The Moral Debate.

Vol. 15 No.6 (June 2005), pp.598-601

SCHOOL CHOICE: THE MORAL DEBATE, by Alan Wolfe (ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002. 384pp. Cloth $67.50 / £43.95. ISBN: 0-691-09660-0. Paper $26.95 / £17.50. ISBN: 0-691-09661-9.

Reviewed by Francine Sanders Romero, Department of Public Administration, University of Texas at San Antonio. Email: Francine.Romero@utsa.edu .

SCHOOL CHOICE: THE MORAL DEBATE, a volume edited by Political Science professor Alan Wolfe with contributions from sixteen diverse scholars, is a welcome new entry in the literature of the school choice debate. Avoiding many of the pitfalls of an edited work, SCHOOL CHOICE advances the dialogue on this policy issue through an unapologetic, unswerving emphasis on expansive moral and normative questions. In so doing, it succeeds in illuminating not just the narrow topic at hand, but also the varied and often competing value frameworks that form the backdrop of many current American policy controversies. Its most notable feature is this broad scope, moving well beyond typical efforts limited to the presentation of evidence of the effect of school voucher plans, or other choice mechanisms. Even the most notable weakness of the book, the tendency of a small number of contributors to come across as rather bombastic and rigid in their views, engages the reader in this topic to an extent that eclipses narrower, empirical treatments.

The volume is organized into four thematic sections, each covering one aspect of the debate. Each section includes three long chapters and a short summary response that ties the ideas together. Although the thematic consistency occasionally lags (portions of chapters in different sections seem to have more in common than those in the same section), and the responses vary in their utility, this organization scheme helps to guide and pace the reader through what otherwise might be an overload of information. Wolfe’s introduction also does a very nice job of clearly previewing the dominant questions and controversies of each section. I found this to be a more useful entry than commonly found in edited books. Rather than try to provide an exhaustive synopsis of each contribution, Wolfe outlines just enough to pique our interest in the work to come.

The first section, centered on the theme of “School Choice and Equality,” functions as an enormously helpful primer on the issue and establishes the generally open-minded tone of the volume. Some limited evidence can be found here on the ability of vouchers to bring about a more equitable educational system. However, the real strength of the contributions by Joseph P. Vitteritti, Alan Wolfe, Stephen Macedo, and (in the section response) Paul Weithman, is a sophisticated exploration of the competing goals of equality and liberty. Vitteritti offers an educational and even-handed overview of policy choice models (market-efficiency versus social justice) and imparts some crucial, yet subtle, points about policy design and its [*599] relationship to actual outcomes; while Wolfe frames the debate appropriately as “a window for an exploration of American public values.” Macedo extends the theme by considering school choice within the larger context of the level of goods that are “due” all American citizens. All three authors also provide insightful commentary on the policy process, and the dynamics of public demand/approval of certain policies over others.

The second section covers “School Choice and Pluralism,” considering public funding of private schools from the perspective of (for good or bad) the subsequent diversification of educational opportunity. This set of contributions by Nancy L. Rosenblum, Meira Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Amy Gutmann, and (in response) David Hollenbach, is, as a whole, somewhat inconsistent and lacking in unity, probably because this aspect of the topic simply resists coalescing around a single core concept or theme. Rosenblum, in a contribution that would have been enhanced by a brief introduction to basic terms and issues, thoughtfully challenges the assertion that choice and pluralism build upon each other; while Levinson and Levinson provide a lively, reader-friendly assessment of the desirability of diversity in the classroom. These two chapters, however, illustrate the elusive nature of the section’s purported theme—while Rosenblum concentrates on diversity of schools, Levinson and Levinson focus on diversity within schools. Both topics are important, but because of the divergence, it is difficult to reconcile these essays.

In my mind, the real gem of this section is Gutmann’s disputation of a number of pro-choice arguments (again, not really accurately described by the “School Choice and Pluralism” title). Although articulating some of the same themes as other contributors, this essay most clearly conveys the battle of ideas at the heart of the school choice issue. Whether or not one agrees with Professor Gutmann’s conclusions, this chapter challenges readers to consider the serious responsibilities incumbent upon citizens seeking to preserve the vitality of liberty and choice. This piece makes a persuasive argument that individual liberty is insured only through vigilant protection of the overall societal good—in this case the beneficial returns from standardized public education.

The “School Choice and Ecology” section, although also somewhat less than clearly unified around a defined theme, offers contributions that generally focus on the implications of public funding of religious, especially Catholic, schools. Richard J. Mouw, Charles L. Glenn, Joseph M. O’Keefe, and (in response) John T. McGreevy, all provide both illuminating facts and productive considerations of the societal role of Catholic schools and how that fits in the school choice context. Mouw offers an instructive history lesson on the Netherlands school settlement of 1917, drawing parallels to the contemporary American setting. He concludes with a provocative challenge: just because religion at its worst is a negative influence does not necessarily mean we can afford to ignore the contributions of religion at its best, especially in regard to education. Glenn continues the international focus with an overview of a multi-nation study of public funding of non-public schools. Although the evidence he presents is sometimes less [*600] than compelling, again the strength is not in facts and descriptions but in the broader question raised—do the unique circumstances of our nation’s founding and governing philosophy render successful experiments in public funding of private schools in other countries irrelevant to our situation? Finally, O’Keefe zeroes in on the Catholic educational mission, contributing in particular a thoughtful consideration of how Catholic social teaching clashes with the free market philosophy that would, ironically, make these schools the beneficiaries of voucher or other similar funding mechanisms. I especially appreciated the serious explanation of the philosophy of religious schooling in this and the other chapters in this section. Although there are of course strong rejoinders to these arguments on the advantages of religious schools, a constructive dialogue cannot take place in the absence of forthright discussions of what the missions of these schools actually are.

The fourth and final section tackles “School Choice and the Law,” with chapters by Martha Minow, Michael J. Perry, Rosemary C. Salomone, and (in response) Patrick McKinley Brennan. Readers interested in the purely legal considerations of the school choice debate may be somewhat disappointed in this section, as it is more a conceptual than a factual overview. Still, there are important insights to be found here. Minow addresses the role of due process and equal protection questions in school choice challenges, thus shedding light on potentially meaningful constitutional considerations usually bypassed in favor of First Amendment arguments. Salomone sketches a useful history of the “religion” of public schools as it evolved from basic Protestantism to secular democracy and also very adeptly explains the consequences of an overly loose understanding of the distinction between direct and indirect public aid to private schools. I was disappointed, however, that Salomone’s chapter was not updated to discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in the Cleveland school voucher case (ZELMAN v. SIMMONS-HARRIS, 2002), referring only to the pending decision. Although the conference that inspired this book was held before the case was decided, the decision was certainly available well in advance of publication, since it is referenced in the “Introduction.”

Perry’s chapter on the Establishment Clause is somewhat maddening, but for that very reason contributes to the thought provoking nature of this volume. What is frustrating about Perry’s contribution is that, after dismissing the utility of predicting the positions of Supreme Court justices on this matter in favor of seeking out the “best” interpretation, he proceeds to justify his conclusion with essentially his personal opinions, bolstered by arguments made by Justices with whom he agrees. Brennan’s response to this section, while providing an intriguing discussion of James Madison’s views on the moral duty of citizens, is similarly heavy-handed. Both Perry’s and Brennan’s rather dogmatic insistence on the moral justification of generous school choice policy ironically reminds the reader of what some of the opponents of vouchers and other mechanisms fear—an intolerant and rigid approach to education.

Albeit refreshingly forthright, these pieces inject a somewhat contentious [*601] tone to the volume that was absent in the first three sections. For example, one could quite effectively and thoughtfully contrast Gutmann’s and O’Keefe’s views on the utility of public funding of religious schools. While disagreeing on crucial points, to some degree at least they seem to approach the topic with a commitment to shared goals. Reading these two chapters together leads to a deeper understanding of the subtleties of disagreements on school choice. On the other hand, Gutmann’s chapter seems to reside on the opposite side of a conceptual chasm from Perry’s and Brennan’s. Encountering these chapters together might lead the reader to despair of the possibility of any progress on this issue.

These and other previously mentioned concerns aside, however, this volume does coalesce into a useful whole that constructively advances the dialogue on school choice. I gained a great deal of information from this book, and it inspired me to think through some novel concepts. The subtitle is accurate—this collection of essays moves beyond typically bland discussions of the arguments and evidence for and against school choice to dive into an unabashed, yet even-handed, debate on the moral aspect of this question. I doubt that anyone who reads it will ever participate in, or listen to, prosaic debates on school choice in the same way again. What most excited me about this work was its reflection of a broader truth of the American political arena—the sometimes antithetical, yet equally legitimate, value frameworks that inform policy decision-making: liberty versus equality; community versus efficiency, and so on.

I plan to assign SCHOOL CHOICE for my graduate-level policy analysis course to illustrate this dynamic. Students introduced to these essays will achieve not only an understanding of the issue at hand, but also a better sense of the guiding principles of our democracy, as well as crucial disagreements in regard to those principles. The collection is written at an appropriate level for graduate students and would probably also work for undergraduates, although the scope and length might prove a bit daunting. Scholars focusing on the school choice debate should certainly add this volume to their collection. I would also encourage those who do not think they are particularly interested in this topic to give the book a chance. The ideas at play here illuminate far more than the worth of school vouchers.

CASE REFERENCE:

ZELMAN v. SIMMONS-HARRIS, 536 US 639 (2002).

*************************************************