This commentary is by state Rep. Scott Beck, R-St. Johnsbury, who has served on the House Education and Ways & Means Committees.
In recent years, issues of governance, special education, and educational quality and equity as they relate to public tuitioning and independent schools have been discussed and action has been taken with the support of independent schools, the Agency of Education, State Board of Education and key lobbying groups: Vermont NEA, Vermont School Boards Association, Vermont Superintendents Association, Vermont Principals’ Association, Vermont Council of Special Education Administrators, and Vermont Independent Schools Association.
Everyone has been at the table and all perspectives have been heard as legislators, administrations and boards have considered policy and made decisions.
These discussions have led to statute and rule (Act 173 and State Board of Education 2200 rules) that positively impact independent schools receiving public tuition.
Many changes were recommended by independent schools. Specifically, independent schools must now provide special education, offer blind admissions, and follow nondiscrimination laws. Most have complied previously, but now all must. Schools that have a boarding program must now be accredited.
In the summer of 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued Carson v. Makin. This case, originating in Maine, challenged whether a state offering public tuition to independent schools also had to include religious schools. The court ruled that states offering public tuition did.
In anticipation of this ruling, the Vermont NEA, Vermont School Boards Association, Vermont Superintendents Association and Vermont Principals’ Association formed a group called the Vermont Education Equity Alliance. The alliance is opposed to religious schools potentially receiving public tuition. It has offered several “solutions,” which have included: eliminating public tuitioning altogether, eliminating public tuitioning and invoking eminent domain of independent schools, and most recently elimination of all public tuition except for four historic independent schools (St. Johnsbury Academy, Lyndon Institute, Thetford Academy and Burr & Burton), all public schools, and independent therapeutic schools.
This most recent option, included in S.66 and H.258, also allows school districts to purchase independent schools and prevents any school district from designating more than three schools. St. Johnsbury Academy receives students from 18 school districts.
From my vantage point, the alliance seems to be having a meandering negotiation with themselves that has ignited nearly 100 communities offering public tuition in some or all grades.
The alliance appears frustrated that no one will negotiate with them. Putting aside the reason to not negotiate with a group negotiating with itself, the alliance’s focus and principles are confusing and disingenuous.
Independent schools educate about 4,000 publicly tuitioned students and generally report that they are doing well. Public schools educate 81,000 students and often report that they are struggling to emerge out of the pandemic. Why is a group that represents schools that educate 81,000 students focused on schools they don’t represent that educate 4,000 students?
On principle, the alliance and its supporters share their perspective as a humble request to follow a few simple rules which independent schools are already following or soon will be, while simultaneously proposing to restrict public tuition to all but four independent schools, if they are designated.
The absurdity of this argument places this group in the category of politicians and lobbyists masquerading as educational leaders. Educational leaders would not pursue policies that reduce excellent opportunities for students and families, particularly those in the most rural areas.
To prevent a handful of religious schools in towns that don’t even offer public tuitioning from receiving public tuition, the alliance is pursuing a sledgehammer approach instead of searching for a credible surgical solution. It is concerning that theaAlliance has a considerable amount of power over Vermont schools and students, yet seemingly no capacity or understanding to recommend solutions that help all Vermont students.
