Parental Rights in the Balance – Part 3

An earlier article reviewed a panel discussion at the Heritage Foundation on May 29, concerning parental control of the education of minor children, guaranteed by the Supreme Court in the Pierce v. Society of Sisters decision (1925), and currently denied by Montgomery County, Maryland in its requirement that all pre-K to fifth grade students participate in a pro-LGBT curriculum, about which the Supreme Court is expected to rule in the Mahmoud v. Taylor case at the end of June.

A second panel reviewed the issue of public funding for private education, including religious education. Jason Bedrick, Research Fellow, Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation, served as moderator of the panel. The panel consisted of Derrick Max, President and CEO, Thomas Jefferson Institute, which promotes free market policies in Virginia, Stephen Novotny, Head of School, Fort Bend Christian Academy and Special Advisor, Association of Christian Schools International, and Colleen Hroncich, Policy Analyst at the Cato Institute.

Past Educational Expectations and School Funding

Bedrick said that the debate about private and religious education, vindicated by Pierce, has been “settled, you can choose” private and/or religious education. The debate today “is whether the public money should follow the child.” Following the secularization of public education at the mid-twentieth century, America saw the rise of private Protestant schools, Jewish schools, Islamic schools, and classical education.

Hroncich said that motivations for education have varied over the centuries of America’s existence. In colonial America, there was a desire for literacy, basic mathematical ability, and religious and moral instruction. She noted that “historically, religion has been a big part of the push for education.” In the early federal period, a major emphasis was “Americanizing people.” People wanted government financial support for schools, but not government control of schools. The point was “an educated citizenry.” At mid-nineteenth century Horace Mann favored “common schools” for the nation. Schools were essentially Protestant, intended to “produce good Americans,” and give people a common background. She said that the common school movement and anti-Catholic nativism “ran alongside each other.” Education was mandated in various state constitutions and encouraged by the federal government as southern states sought to rejoin the Union, and new western states were established. School districts were established so that students would attend the school closest to their home.

But over the course of the twentieth century, “the country has grown more diverse … [and] not everybody wants what is offered in the government schools.” There was particular dissatisfaction with the court decisions in the 1960s that prohibited public school prayer and Bible reading. Catholic schools advanced claims for public funding for many years, but until recently this was not successful. Compulsory education has led to the school choice movement, since for most other services people are not “mandated to go to a specific government provider” to get needed services.

Recently there has been a dramatic increase in the choice of schooling. This has been particularly true since the coronavirus lockdown. Alternative schooling, or school choice, has different motivations. Some motivation is religious, some people are fleeing poor public schools (especially in urban areas), and others want to get ahead at a better private school. Support for school choice was once bipartisan and continues to be at the base level of parents deciding what is best for their child. In the political arena, however, it has become a partisan issue, with teachers’ unions pressuring Democrats to oppose or seek to curtail school choice.

The Classical Education Alternative

Derrick Max said that it has taken 100 years since the Pierce decision to recognize that school choice is meaningless to those who don’t have the resources to pick the school of their choice. The coronavirus lockdown was important in advancing school choice, because many parents became aware of much of what was actually being taught in public schools. He noted that colleges and universities, including elite schools “are being forced to teach remedial classes,” and businesses are finding that college graduates are “woefully unprepared” to work.

Additionally, the last decade has seen schools become indoctrination stations for progressive ideas that are an offense to much of the public. While acknowledging that school choice will bring and is bringing many alternatives, Max believes that liberal arts based classical education will become the “dominant model.” It is rigorous and encourages people to think critically. When asked by parents whether classical education is appropriate for inner city residents, Max said he pointed out that both Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, Jr. were “studied in the classics.” He remarked at how inner-city students wonder if they are living in Plato’s cave. It was the suffering of children in the inner city led him to open a classical school in southeast Washington.

Schools as Ground Zero in the Culture War

Steven Novotny noted the cultural clash at the time of the Pierce decision. Modernism in various forms was attacking traditional religion and belief. 1925, the year of the decision, was also the year of the Scopes trial concerning the teaching of evolution in public schools. At the same time the Bolshevik Revolution had introduced atheistic materialism as a major player on the world stage. Against materialist devaluing of individual human life, the Pierce decision said that human beings are not mere creatures of the state. Parents have a “superior right” in the formation of their children.

Between the Pierce (1925) and Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) decisions, further modernization of American society occurred, with the crises of the Great Depression, World War II, and communist expansion thereafter. Secularization of public schools was decreed by the Supreme Court in the early 1960s, with prayer and Bible reading banned. The hippie movement in the 1960s spearheaded the cultural revolution of that day. It was this environment, Novotny said, that moved the Amish to insist that their children not be required to attend public schools beyond the eighth grade. The Supreme Court, agreeing with the Amish on religious freedom (constitutional) grounds, said in the Yoder decision said that “the primary role of parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.” This, Novotny said, gives parents a clear right to opt their children out of objectionable curricula. As the leading edge of Western culture has changed over the decades, it is now possible to deny God, once dominant societal mores, biological sex, and even one’s humanity. Litter boxes are now available in some public schools for students who believe themselves to be animals.

“Culture and law go together,” Novotny said. He added his voice to those who see the coronavirus lockdown as having “pulled back the curtain” regarding what was happening in public schools. The identity politics ideology that controls much of the public square has the aspects of a new religion, clashing with both science and common sense and with any “view of reality that makes sense.” “Parents are rightfully shocked by this.” Between 2019 and 2022 “public school enrollment was down 15 percent.” At the same time, “private school enrollment rose 22 percent … homeschooling went up 144 percent … [and] charter schools up 36 percent.” Educational Savings Account (ESA) legislation, school vouchers, and tax credit scholarships have increased dramatically since 2021. Public school enrollment, Novotny said, has declined to 75 percent of students.

Nevertheless, private schools should be prepared for “greater swings both in enrollment, and their own budget parameters.” He said that “what the government gives, the government can take away.” Also, requirements to comply with municipal or state antidiscrimination requirements can be a problem. Further, religious schools must be careful to maintain fidelity to their professed religious beliefs. As schools grow, “there’s more voices, and with more voices there’s more pressure to say, ‘do you really have to be distinctive?’” But being distinctive in religious commitment is the reason for the religious school. Additionally, religious schools must “continue to invest in quality teachers, and quality leadership.” Finally, there must be wisdom in the use of technology and artificial intelligence.

Questions about Public Funding for School Choice

Hroncich was asked whether universal school choice (public funding of education of children in non-state schools) having expanded to include many conservative states “is this a tipping point,” or has school choice gone as far as it can go? She said that the main challenge “is making sure that the policies that we have now work well … that they don’t get bogged down in new regulations.” But she does think that “we’re past the tipping point.” Parents will fight for the rights they have secured.

Max was asked about the possibilities for classical education expanding. He said that “success breeds success.” The more people see of classical education, the more they will want it. He noted that 100 classical schools were established last year. Public schools continue in many cases “to be a disaster,” and competition will improve education overall.

Novotny was asked about religious charter schools, particularly in view of the Supreme Court’s inability to decide (in a 4 to 4 split) about Oklahoma’s prohibition of such schools. Novotny said that the danger of these schools was that public funding “would end up degrading the distinctiveness” of the religious school. What such a school needs is some legal protection like the religious exemption available in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (which protects religious schools in their sincerely held beliefs from antidiscrimination provisions that are contrary to them).

A questioner asked about a government requirement for public funding that involves labelling children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as “disabled,” resulting in an inability to discipline them. Max said that school choice means parents have a choice not to participate in such a school. Novotny said that school choice enables parents to choose a school that is specially concerned with such a problem as ADHD.

Max said that private education provides the opportunity to teach young people moral precepts not possible in public schools. This results in better graduates than currently come from public education.

Another questioner asked about the future of public education. In particular, whether or not private education can accommodate as many students as public education, and how can public education “be helped and restored?” Hroncich said that the future of public education “will certainly look different.” Large private schools are not the answer for the educational future, she said. The many private alternatives to public education reach children “in a more personal way.” She observed that less than half of children in Florida attend a public school. But a century ago, public schools crowded out the many educational alternatives that were developing (such as classical education, Montessori schools, or Waldorf schools).

Today, many educational alternatives are again developing, but the result of these “will not look like public education.” Novotny said that loving our neighbor means “we can’t give up on public institutions.” However, the “experiment” of public education has not been successful. Suicide is one of the top causes of death among adolescents. Anxiety has increased dramatically. The attempt at “value-free” education simply has not worked well. The Judeo-Christian framework of public education until 60 years ago inculcated in students personal responsibility “to their maker, to their neighbor, to their community,” that is lacking today.

Max said that his classical Christian school accepts children from many different backgrounds, including children from Muslim parents or same-sex couples. He tells them that the school will teach that Jesus “is the Christ the Son of the living God,” and that “marriage is between a man and a woman for a lifetime.” But “they chose us because their students felt loved, and they felt loved … they knew what we were going to teach, and where we were coming from.” These parents “may have de-doctrinated them at home” but there must be schools where students “are known and loved and cared for in a way that’s unique from past generations.”

Recovering the faith and morality of past generations is vital to restoring American education. Not all parents will want that for their children, but many will, and those parents should have the right to direct the education of their children in either public or private school, or in homeschool for the reason Robert George gave in his introductory remarks – natural law.

More from IRD:

Parental Rights in the Balance – Part 1

Parental Rights in the Balance – Part 2