Public Education at a Crossroads: The True Cost of School Choice

After watching Part IV of School: The Story of American Public Education, I was left with a complicated mix of emotions and reflections. This final segment confronts the idea of school choice—an idea that has gained momentum in recent decades as a potential solution to the challenges facing public education. As I considered the guiding question—“Does school choice improve public education?”—my answer became increasingly nuanced. While school choice offers some benefits in theory, the real-world consequences often reveal a deeper divide in equity, access, and opportunity. The more I considered the evidence, both from the documentary and from our country’s educational history, the more I concluded that school choice, as it is currently implemented, does not improve public education in a broad or sustainable way. Instead, it often contributes to a fragmented system that favors some students while leaving others behind.

The concept of school choice is rooted in the belief that competition breeds excellence. If parents are allowed to choose where to send their children, proponents argue, schools will be forced to compete for students and funding, pushing them to innovate and improve. This idea appeals to many Americans because it aligns with free-market principles, personal freedom, and the desire to provide children with the best possible education. On the surface, it sounds fair—even inspiring. Why should a child’s future be limited by the quality of their neighborhood school, especially in communities that have historically suffered from disinvestment and neglect?

The documentary does a powerful job of capturing the optimism surrounding charter schools, magnet programs, and voucher systems. It shows schools that have created new models of learning, tailored to student interests and community needs. In several cases, students thrive in these alternative environments, gaining access to opportunities that would not have been available to them otherwise. For some families, especially those in struggling urban districts, school choice has been a lifeline—a chance to break generational cycles of poverty through education. These success stories cannot be ignored, and they represent the best-case scenario of what school choice can offer.

However, the documentary also presents a more sobering and honest assessment of the unintended consequences of school choice. One of the most glaring issues is that school choice often leads to greater segregation—by race, class, and academic ability. When families with more resources, information, and flexibility are able to navigate the system more effectively, they can access the “better” schools, leaving others behind in underfunded, overcrowded, and lower-performing public schools. In this way, school choice unintentionally reinforces the very inequalities it claims to solve.

Moreover, charter schools and voucher programs often siphon funding away from traditional public schools. Because public education funding is tied to enrollment numbers, when students leave for charter schools, the neighborhood public schools lose money—but their expenses don’t go down proportionately. They still have to pay for teachers, buildings, and transportation. This leaves them with fewer resources to serve the students who remain, often the ones with the greatest needs. The result is a two-tiered system: one that benefits a select few, and another that struggles to survive.

The documentary also touches on the issue of accountability. While traditional public schools are subject to a range of regulations, oversight, and public transparency requirements, many charter schools operate with less scrutiny. This can open the door to mismanagement, inconsistent teaching standards, and even corruption. And while some charter schools produce strong outcomes, others perform no better—or even worse—than the public schools they were intended to replace. Without strong systems of accountability, school choice can lead to a patchwork system where quality varies wildly from school to school, leaving parents to navigate an uneven and confusing landscape.

As I watched the stories unfold, I kept thinking about the original purpose of public education in America. Public schools were created to be a unifying force in a diverse and democratic society—a place where children from all walks of life could learn together, develop shared values, and prepare to participate in civic life. The school choice movement, while well-intentioned in many cases, undermines this vision by turning education into an individual pursuit rather than a public good. When families are encouraged to "shop" for schools the way they might shop for clothes or technology, it shifts the focus from collective responsibility to personal gain.

This isn’t to say that the current public school system doesn’t need improvement—it absolutely does. Many schools are underfunded, overcrowded, and struggling to meet the needs of their students. But the solution to these problems should not be to abandon the system or divert funds away from it. Instead, we should invest in it—fully and equitably. We need to address the root causes of underperformance, such as poverty, systemic racism, lack of community support, and outdated infrastructure. We should also empower educators with better pay, professional development, and the autonomy to innovate within the public system itself.

One of the most powerful takeaways from Part IV of the documentary is the reminder that education is not just about individual success—it’s about building a stronger, more just society. When we only focus on giving a select few the chance to “escape” their local school, we ignore the systemic problems that affect everyone. True improvement means raising the floor for all students, not just lifting the ceiling for some.

In conclusion, while school choice may offer immediate relief for some families and encourage pockets of innovation, it does not, in its current form, improve public education overall. Instead, it often exacerbates existing inequalities, drains resources from neighborhood schools, and undermines the sense of shared investment in public education. If we want to create a system that truly serves all children—regardless of race, income, or zip code—we need to recommit to the idea of public education as a common good. That means holding all schools accountable, ensuring equitable funding, and centering our efforts on the schools that serve the most vulnerable. School choice may sound like freedom, but real freedom is having a great public school in every neighborhood—not just the option to leave.

After watching Part IV of School: The Story of American Public Education, I was left with a complicated mix of emotions and reflections. This final segment confronts the idea of school choice—an idea that has gained momentum in recent decades as a potential solution to the challenges facing public education. As I considered the guiding question—“Does school choice improve public education?”—my answer became increasingly nuanced. While school choice offers some benefits in theory, the real-world consequences often reveal a deeper divide in equity, access, and opportunity. The more I considered the evidence, both from the documentary and from our country’s educational history, the more I concluded that school choice, as it is currently implemented, does not improve public education in a broad or sustainable way. Instead, it often contributes to a fragmented system that favors some students while leaving others behind.