Green III: Protecting Rural Schools
In Preserving Rural School Districts from the Threat of Vouchers and Charters, Preston C. Green III (Urban Education and Educational Leadership and Law, University of Connecticut), Bruce D. Backer (Teaching and Learning, University of Miami), Christopher M. Saldana and Julie F. Mead (both Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison) discuss how voucher and charter school programs are having an unintended negative impact on rural school districts and communities. The authors suggest that state legislatures take action to ensure public access to education by creating “education preserves.”
In recent years, participation in school choice programs has steadily increased. According to the authors, this increase poses a unique threat to rural schools, given their small populations and geographic isolation. The authors note that modest enrollment losses to school choice programs could deprive rural students of equal access to education as districts are forced to close and combine. Additionally, when local schools close, rural residents lose not only a primary employer, but also “a hub of community life.” The authors’ proposed solution is to follow the lead of state hunting laws that protect endangered wildlife by creating educational preserves to support at-risk school districts.
The authors argue that state laws that target recreational hunting by creating bag limits and wildlife management areas provide an example of an effective and successful policy modification that balances individual choice with the promotion of the public good. Following this lead, the authors propose a data-driven process for establishing educational preserves: identifying at-risk districts, labeling them as education preserves, and following a tailored approach to amend current charter and voucher laws.
The goal of these preserves would be to maintain a student population capable of supporting multiple schools within each district. Therefore, amendments to current laws would seek to limit or prevent the operation of vouchers and charters in education preserves. Because of the prevalence of religious voucher schools, the authors anticipate legal challenges under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, which protects religious freedom. However, they assert that this can be overcome by developing education preserves that are “religiously neutral” and “generally applicable,” therefore complying with Supreme Court Free Exercise case law. Looking ahead, the authors hope state legislatures will act and apply the methods behind hunting regulations to protect the educational futures of rural students.
