Should the Left Embrace School Choice Before It’s Decided for Them?
For decades, the debate over school choice has been dominated by conservative voices advocating for charter schools, vouchers, and education savings accounts. But as the conversation shifts and grassroots movements demand more equitable solutions, progressives find themselves at a crossroads. Should the political Left reconsider its skepticism toward school choice—not as a concession to libertarian ideals, but as a proactive strategy to shape policies that prioritize marginalized communities?
The answer isn’t simple. School choice, in its current form, often carries baggage: underfunded public schools, profit-driven charter operators, and policies that deepen segregation. Yet progressives risk ceding control of this conversation to the Right if they dismiss the concept entirely. By reframing school choice through a lens of equity and justice, the Left could reclaim the narrative—and perhaps transform education reform in the process.
The Progressive Case for School Choice
Traditional progressive skepticism of school choice stems from legitimate concerns. Public schools are pillars of democracy, designed to serve all children regardless of background. Critics argue that diverting resources to private or charter institutions undermines this mission, leaving underfunded districts to struggle. But this perspective overlooks a painful reality: For many low-income families and students of color, the existing system is already failing.
Take Detroit, where public schools have faced chronic underinvestment, overcrowded classrooms, and crumbling infrastructure. For parents in neighborhoods like these, school choice isn’t about ideology—it’s about survival. Charter schools, magnet programs, or even homeschooling co-ops may offer safer environments or curricula tailored to students’ needs. When progressives dismiss these options as “privatization,” they inadvertently side with a status quo that perpetuates inequality.
This isn’t theoretical. In New York City, progressive lawmakers have recently clashed with Black and Latino parents advocating for the preservation of specialized high schools and gifted programs. These families argue that dismantling selective admissions in the name of equity would deny their children rare opportunities for advancement. The tension reveals a paradox: Can a one-size-fits-all public system ever address the diverse needs of marginalized communities?
Learning from Missteps: When School Choice Goes Wrong
Of course, not all school choice models are created equal. The conservative vision—rooted in free-market principles—often prioritizes competition over collaboration, leading to predatory practices. For-profit charter chains, for example, have a track record of cherry-picking students, inflating test scores, and suddenly closing schools, leaving families stranded. Wisconsin’s voucher program, expanded under Republican leadership, has funneled public dollars into religious schools with discriminatory admissions policies.
These outcomes validate progressive fears. But they also highlight a critical lesson: School choice without guardrails exacerbates inequity. The Left’s role could be to design choice systems that are inclusive, transparent, and accountable. Imagine publicly funded Montessori programs in low-income neighborhoods, bilingual schools for immigrant communities, or vocational academies partnering with local unions. Such models wouldn’t replace traditional public schools but would expand options within a framework of equity.
The Power of Community-Driven Reform
Real-world examples already point the way. In California, the Oakland REACH—a parent-led advocacy group—has partnered with the school district to create virtual learning hubs and tutoring programs, proving that families can co-design solutions when given agency. Similarly, Massachusetts’ “innovation schools,” which operate with flexibility similar to charters but remain under district oversight, have shown gains in student achievement without sacrificing accountability.
These initiatives share a common thread: They reject the binary of “public vs. private” and focus on empowering communities to meet their own needs. For progressives, this approach aligns with values of local control and participatory democracy. It also sidesteps the pitfalls of top-down reforms, which often ignore cultural context.
What’s at Stake for the Left?
The danger of inaction is clear. If the Left continues to treat school choice as a conservative ploy, it leaves a vacuum for libertarian groups like the American Federation for Children (backed by Betsy DeVos) to dominate policymaking. Recent legislative wins for school choice in states like Florida and Arizona—framed as victories for “parental rights”—demonstrate how effectively the Right has mobilized this issue.
But there’s an opportunity here, too. By embracing school choice as a tool for racial and economic justice, progressives could build coalitions with grassroots organizers, teachers’ unions, and families. This would require tough compromises, such as supporting charter schools only when they’re nonprofit and unionized, or vouchers that exclude religious institutions with discriminatory policies. It would also mean advocating for increased funding for all schools, ensuring that choice doesn’t come at the expense of public systems.
A Path Forward: Principles for Progressive School Choice
For the Left to reclaim this space, any school choice proposal must adhere to core principles:
1. Equity First: Policies must prioritize underserved communities, not subsidize affluent families already opting out of public schools.
2. Accountability: All schools receiving public funds—including charters and private institutions—must adhere to anti-discrimination laws, accept students with disabilities, and publish performance data.
3. Collaboration Over Competition: Funding mechanisms should incentivize districts and charters to share resources and best practices.
4. Educator Voice: Teachers and staff deserve union representation and fair working conditions, regardless of school type.
Conclusion: Seizing the Moment
The question isn’t whether progressives should embrace the current version of school choice—they shouldn’t. Instead, the Left must redefine what “choice” means. By centering marginalized voices and demanding policies that lift up all schools, progressives can craft an alternative vision: one where every family has access to high-quality education, and where “choice” isn’t a zero-sum game but a pathway to justice.
Waiting isn’t an option. As conservative lawmakers accelerate their push for privatization, the Left has a chance to step in—not as opponents of innovation, but as architects of a system that truly serves the many, not the few. The lesson is clear: If you don’t shape the future of education, someone else will.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Should the Left Embrace School Choice Before It’s Decided for Them