Special choices: do voucher schools serve students with disabilities?
Wolf, Patrick J. ; Witte, John F. ; Fleming, David J. 等
Nine school voucher programs in seven states specifically provide
choice for families with disabled children (see sidebar, page 18). In
Florida, for example, more than 22,000 students with disabilities
receive McKay Scholarships to attend private schools at a perstudent
cost to the government that averaged $7,220 in 2010-11. But what about
the private schools that participate in voucher programs open to all
low-income families, such as those in Milwaukee, Cleveland, New Orleans,
and Washington, D.C.? Do these schools exclude most students who in a
public school setting would be identified as in need of special
education?
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Critics of voucher programs often argue that private schools do
exclude most disabled students, and the matter occasionally has been the
subject of litigation. Yet accurate information on students with
disabilities served by private schools is notable for its absence.
The main reason for the lack of accurate information is that
private schools do not operate under the provisions of the federal law
that furnishes aid to the states for students identified as needing
special education. Public schools expend considerable resources
identifying children eligible for special services, both because they
are under an obligation to provide those services and because they
receive additional funds from federal and state governments if a child
is identified as having a disability that affects their learning. Those
obligations, rights, and funding support do not apply if parents choose
to place their children in private schools with the help of a voucher.
By and large, private schools have not developed the capacity to
identify children with disabilities, and many of them are reluctant to
do so, as they believe it leads to stigmatization of the children.
In other words, a child who may be classified as in need of special
education in a public school may not be classified as such if his or her
family chooses a private school, using a voucher to defray the cost. As
a result, any official statistics on the prevalence of students with
disabilities in public and private schools can be highly misleading.
We have not been able to surmount all of the obstacles to
identifying the percentage of students in private schools who would have
been identified as in need of special education in public schools, but
we believe we have fairly accurate information on this question for the
country's largest and longest-running school-voucher program. The
Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP), first established in 1990 and
steadily expanded to include more private schools and more students in
subsequent years, now serves more than 23,000 students who attend 107
different private schools. The annual voucher a school receives for each
MPCP student is approximately $6,000. MPCP thus provides an excellent
context for detecting the admission policies of private schools when a
modest-value voucher program for low-income students is operating at
scale.
In 2006, the State of Wisconsin authorized our research team to
conduct a five-year evaluation of MPCP. Through the course of that
study, we collected a wealth of data about the students in the voucher
program and in the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) that permit us to
estimate what proportion of the voucher student population would qualify
for special education if the students were enrolled in public schools
instead.
Drawing on different sources of data and various analytic methods,
we estimate that anywhere between 7.5 and 14.6 percent of voucher
students have disabilities that would land them in special education
were they in public schools. That rate compares to the national
public-school rate of student disability of 12 percent and the official
student disability rate reported by MPS of 19 percent.
Our estimates are at least four times higher than the 1.6 percent
disability rate among voucher students in Milwaukee reported by the
Wisconsin State Department of Public Instruction (DPI), a figure that
gave rise to a lawsuit alleging discrimination by the MPCP program.
Following is a discussion of the procedures we followed to obtain
our estimates and an explanation for the disparity between our estimates
and the ones DPI has provided.
Structure of Special Education
As mentioned previously, receiving a special education designation
brings with it certain legal rights for services or accommodations in
the public educational sphere, as provided by the federal law known as
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Once so
designated, public school students are entitled to receive a free and
appropriate public education (FAPE), to include special education
services in the least restrictive environment possible and according to
an individualized education program (IEP). A student's IEP is drawn
up by a committee that includes the student's parents or guardians,
local public-school officials, and relevant medical or psychological
diagnosticians and care providers. The resulting special services and
accommodations are funded through a combination of federal, state, and
local monies based on formulas established in law. In Wisconsin, the
federal government pays about 11 percent of the extra cost of educating
each special-education student, with the state paying 26 percent and the
local public-school district covering the remaining 63 percent.
The legal and funding structure surrounding students with
disabilities in the private sector differs greatly from the situation in
the public sector. Unless a public school district itself places a
special education student in a private school, the IEP and additional
funding associated with a student with a disability in the public sector
does not transfer with the student if the child enrolls in a private
school. The point is made in an August 2011 DPI memo on the subject:
Students with disabilities attending voucher schools as part of the
MPCP are considered parentally placed private school students and as
such, DPI treats them in the same fashion as students attending
private non-voucher schools. Under [state law] parentally placed
private school students are ... not entitled to a Free and
Appropriate Public Education.
If a parent enrolls a student with special needs in a private
school, that student must surrender her legal rights to special
educational services. Private schools are not required by federal law to
enroll students with special needs, and they are not entitled to any
additional resources from the state if they do so. Private schools can
either accommodate the student themselves, using whatever resources they
have, or negotiate with public school officials regarding the provision
of special services to the student by the public school system with
additional public funds (a process called "equitable
services").
Maintaining a count of those thought to be in need of special
services also varies by sector. In the public sector, careful record
keeping is stressed because disability status has major implications for
the kinds of instructional and other services students will receive. In
the private sector, special education tends to be handled much less
formally, inasmuch as schools are ordinarily not required to follow
formal procedures in diagnosing or serving students with special
educational needs.
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Given the contrasts between how special education is governed and
managed in the public and private education sectors, we hypothesize the
following:
1. The same student will have a higher likelihood of being
identified as in need of special education if in a public school than if
in a private school.
2. Given the funding available for extra services for disabled
children attending public schools, a higher proportion of students with
disabilities than those without disabilities will choose to remain in
the public sector rather than use a voucher.
3. Any data that rely on official reports of disability will
undercount the percentage of students in private schools who would have
been identified as in need of special education had they attended public
schools.
To test these hypotheses, we used two alternative methods to
estimate the actual percentage of students in private schools who would
have been identified as in need of special education in public school
had they selected that sector.
Method I: Same Student, Different Sector
The better of our two methods relies on information from those
students who attended schools in both the public and the private sectors
during the course of our study. During the five years of our evaluation,
20.1 percent or 1,475 of the 7,338 students in our MPCP and MPS study
panels switched from one school sector to the other, in some cases
multiple times.
We received enrollment files from MPS each year that included
information on the special education status of each MPS student. We also
collected enrollment lists from every private school in MPCP and asked
school officials to indicate if students had disabilities that qualified
them for special education. For students who switched school sectors
during the study period, we can determine whether those who were
identified as needing special education in the public sector were
similarly identified when they attended private schools, and vice versa.
In other words, we can use each student in our study as his or her own
control group to learn whether disability designations vary by sector.
Our analysis indicates that Milwaukee students who switched between
the public and private school sectors were much more likely to be
identified as in need of special education when they were in the public
sector. On average, controlling for factors such as year and student
grade, those who attended schools in both sectors were classified as in
need of special education at the rate of 9.1 percent when attending
private schools but at a rate of 14.6 percent when attending
Milwaukee's public schools. If we assume that a student's need
for special education did not change at the time the student switched
sectors, this suggests that 5.5 percent of students attending private
schools were not identified as in need of special education but would
have been had they been attending public school. In other words, the
identification rate in the public schools appears to be 60 percent
higher (the 5.5 percent increment divided by 9.1 percent) than in the
private schools.
The identification rate was higher when students were in MPS both
because many students who switched from MPCP to MPS received special
education designations in MPS and because many students with special
education designations in MPS shed them when they enrolled in MPCP
schools.
The 14.6 percent MPCP disability rate is based only on students who
switched sectors (35 percent of MPCP students). Those students appear to
have higher rates of disability than those who did not switch. Based on
principal surveys, for the 65 percent of MPCP students who did not
switch, the disability rate was 3.75 percent. To get an overall rate for
MPCP students, we compute a weighted average for the two groups of 7.5
percent. We suspect that this rate is conservative, since several
voucher school principals told us they resist labeling students in such
a way. Combining this conservative estimate with the estimate from our
analysis of only students who switched sectors yields a range of 7.5 to
14.6 percent, which we think captures the likely student disability rate
in MPCP.
Method II: Parental Estimates of Disability Rates
Our second estimate of the student disability rate in MPCP comes
from interviews with parents. In 2007 we interviewed a random sample of
parents of MPCP students in grades 3-8, all the parents of MPCP 9th
graders, and a sample of parents of MPS students who were matched to the
sample of MPCP students based on their grade in school, neighborhood of
residence, ethnicity, test-score performance, and other characteristics.
We expanded this sample with additional parents of 3rd-grade students
similarly chosen in 2007 and 2008. Altogether, we interviewed a majority
of the parents of 3,669 students in MPCP and 3,669 students in MPS.
The survey included the following questions:
* Does [child's name] have any physical disabilities?
* Does [child's name] have any learning disabilities?
If a parent answered yes to the learning disabilities question, we
further asked,
* How well do the facilities at [child's name] school attend
to his/her particular needs?
According to parental responses to the first two of these
questions, 2.5 percent of students in MPCP have a physical disability
and 9.8 percent have a learning disability (see Figure 1). The
corresponding rates reported by parents of MPS students were 4.1 percent
and 18.5 percent for physical and learning disabilities, respectively.
Combining the categories and eliminating overlapping cases, it is
estimated that the disability rate in the MPCP sector is 11.4 percent,
as compared to 20.4 percent for the MPS sector.
There is every reason to believe that these parental responses are
consistent and fairly accurate indicators of what the parents are told
by school officials and what they themselves know about their children.
The official MPS rate for this time period is between 18 and 19 percent,
just slightly less than the 20.4 percent reported by our MPS parents.
The 11.4 percent disability rate for MPCP students based on our survey
is midway between the 7.5 percent rate for all students in MPCP based on
school staff designations and the 14.6 percent rate based on observing
some of the students in both school sectors.
It is interesting that within a scaled-up, long-standing voucher
program, parental satisfaction with services for students with
disabilities achieves a balance across sectors. Similar levels of
satisfaction with special education services are reported, regardless of
whether the student was in MPCP or MPS (see Figure 2). Presumably, the
choice of sectors and schools allowed parents to obtain an educational
setting they view as appropriate for their child.
Discussion
Our estimates of the prevalence of MPCP students who have a
disability range from 7.5 to 14.6 percent. The 14.6 percent estimate is
based on the identification by public schools of the need for special
services for those students who attended school in both sectors, while
parental reports peg the rate at 11 percent, and the combination of MPCP
and MPS school personnel suggest it is 7.5 percent.
All of these estimates are higher than the one provided, on March
29, 2011, by DPI, which said that "the private schools
[participating in MPCP) reported about 1.6 percent of choice students
have a disability." That statement provoked a lawsuit by disability
rights groups against DPI, which administers MPCP, based on the charge
that the program discriminates in admissions against students with
disabilities.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
The estimate provided by DPI was based on the percentage of MPCP
students who were given test accommodations on the 2010 state
accountability exams. Only a fraction of students with disabilities
receive accommodations on exams, and accommodations are only permitted
if an IEP committee of school personnel requests them. Since few
students with disabilities in private schools have IEP committees, the
student-testing accommodation rate for MPCP may bear little relationship
to the actual student-disability rate in the program. In fact, using
administrative data we collected from the MPCP schools, we were able to
determine that only one-quarter of the MPCP students judged by their
school to have a disability were actually given any accommodation for
last year's test.
Using multiple measures of student disability, each of which is
more valid and reliable than testing accommodation statistics, the
estimates we produced indicate a 7.5 to 14.6 percent participation rate
for students with disabilities in the voucher schools in comparison to
the 17 to 19 percent participation rate reported for students with
disabilities by the public schools. The difference could be due to
discrimination against disabled students, as has been alleged, but the
evidence is not sufficient to draw any such conclusions. Where
disabilities are severe, private schools may not have the necessary
facilities, and even in less severe instances, parents may prefer the
legal entitlements and the greater range of funded services in the
public sector.
What we do know, with considerable certainty, is that while the
percentage of students in the voucher schools with disabilities is
substantially lower than the disability rate in the public schools, it
is at least four times higher than public officials have claimed. These
statistical findings reinforce our views that the sectors cannot be
easily compared to one another on this particular metric, because they
operate under different legal obligations, financial incentives, and
cultural norms. Special education is special in very different ways in
public schools and in voucher programs.
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
State Programs for Students with Special Needs/Autism
Seven programs provide vouchers:
* McKay Scholarship Program (Florida)
* Georgia Special Needs Scholarship Program
* School Choice Pilot Program for Certain Students with
Exceptionalities (Louisiana)
* Autism Scholarship Program (Ohio)
* Jon Peterson Special Needs Scholarship Program (Ohio)
* Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for Students with Disabilities
(Oklahoma)
* Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship (Utah)
Two others offer tax credits or Education Savings Account (ESA)
scholarships:
* Arizona Empowerment Scholarship Accounts Program
* Lexie's Law (also Arizona)
SOURCE: Alliance for School Choice, School Choice Now: The Year of
School Choice, The School Choice Yearbook 2011-2012, Washington, D.C.
Patrick J. Wolf is professor of education reform at the University
of Arkansas. John F. Witte is professor of political science and public
affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. David J. Fleming is
assistant professor of political science at Furman University.