U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

67–175 PDF 2011

THE DC OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM:

KEEPING THE DOOR OPEN

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE, DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA, CENSUS AND THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MARCH 1, 2011

Serial No. 112–5

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov

http://www.house.gov/reform

(II)

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

DARRELL E. ISSA, California, Chairman

DAN BURTON, Indiana

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

JIM JORDAN, Ohio

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah

CONNIE MACK, Florida

TIM WALBERG, Michigan

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma

JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona

RAU ́ L R. LABRADOR, Idaho

PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee

JOE WALSH, Illinois

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina

DENNIS A. ROSS, Florida

FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Ranking

Minority Member

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

JIM COOPER, Tennessee

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa

PETER WELCH, Vermont

JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut

JACKIE SPEIER, California

LAWRENCE J. BRADY, Staff Director

JOHN D. CUADERES, Deputy Staff Director

ROBERT BORDEN, General Counsel

LINDA A. GOOD, Chief Clerk

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CENSUS AND THE

NATIONAL ARCHIVES

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina, Chairman

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona, Vice Chairman

DAN BURTON, Indiana

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee

JOE WALSH, Illinois

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois, Ranking Minority

Member

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on March 1, 2011 .............................................................................. 1

Statement of:

Chavous, Kevin, chairman of the Black Alliance for Education Options;

Dr. Patrick Wolf, professor and 21st century chair in School Choice,

Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas; Betty

North, principal and ceo of the Preparatory School of DC; and Dr.

Ramona Edelin, executive director of the DC Association of Public

Charter Schools ............................................................................................. 63

Chavous, Kevin .......................................................................................... 63

Edelin, Ramona ......................................................................................... 88

North, Betty ............................................................................................... 84

Wolf, Patrick .............................................................................................. 70

Holassie, Ronald, senior at Archbishop Carroll High School and DC OSP

recipient since the 6th grade; Lesly Alvarez, 8th grade student at

Sacred Heart School, and DC OSP recipient; Sheila Jackson, mother

of an OSP student, Shawnee, who is in the 10th grade at Preparatory

School of DC; and Latasha Bennett, single mother of two, Nico receives

an opportunity scholarship, while Nia was one of the 216 students

whose scholarship was retracted; however, through donations her family receives, Nia is able to attend the same school as her brother ........... 29

Alvarez, Lesly ............................................................................................ 34

Bennett, Latasha ....................................................................................... 45

Holassie, Ronald ........................................................................................ 29

Jackson, Sheila .......................................................................................... 39

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Alvarez, Lesly, 8th grade student at Sacred Heart School, and DC OSP

recipient, prepared statement of .................................................................. 36

Bennett, Latasha, single mother of two, Nico receives an opportunity

scholarship, while Nia was one of the 216 students whose scholarship

was retracted; however, through donations her family receives, Nia

is able to attend the same school as her brother, prepared statement

of ..................................................................................................................... 47

Burton, Hon. Dan, a Representative in Congress from the State of Indiana, prepared statement of .......................................................................... 106

Chavous, Kevin, chairman of the Black Alliance for Education Options,

prepared statement of ................................................................................... 66

Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Maryland, prepared statement of ............................................................ 111

Davis, Hon. Danny K., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Illinois, various letters ............................................................................. 4

Edelin, Dr. Ramona, executive director of the DC Association of Public

Charter Schools, prepared statement of ..................................................... 90

Holassie, Ronald, senior at Archbishop Carroll High School and DC OSP

recipient since the 6th grade, prepared statement of ................................ 31

Jackson, Sheila, mother of an OSP student, Shawnee, who is in the

10th grade at Preparatory School of DC, prepared statement of ............. 41

North, Betty, principal and ceo of the Preparatory School of DC, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 86

Wolf, Dr. Patrick, professor and 21st century chair in School Choice,

Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas, prepared statement of ........................................................................................ 72

(1)

THE DC OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP

PROGRAM: KEEPING THE DOOR OPEN

TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 2011

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE, DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA, CENSUS, AND THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES, COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:33 a.m., in room

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Trey Gowdy (chairman

of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Gowdy, Gosar, Burton, McHenry,

Walsh, Davis, Norton, Clay, and Murphy.

Staff present: Robert Borden, general counsel; Molly Boyl, parliamentarian; Drew Colliatie, staff assistant; John Cuaderes, deputy

staff director; Howard A. Denis, senior counsel; Adam P. Fromm,

director of Member liaison and floor operations; Linda Good, chief

clerk; James Robertson, professional staff member; Laura L. Rush,

deputy chief clerk; Peter Warren, policy director; Jeff Wease, deputy CIO; Ronald Allen, minority staff assistant; Carla Hultberg,

minority chief clerk; Lucinda Lessley, minority policy director; William Miles, minority professional staff member; Suzanne Sachsman

Grooms, minority chief counsel; Donald Sherman, minority counsel;

and Mark Stephenson, minority senior policy advisor/legislative director.

Mr. GOWDY. Welcome to our committee. This is a hearing on the

DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Keeping the Door Open.

The committee will come to order and I will read the mission

statement of the Oversight Committee, which reads as follows: We

exist to secure two fundamental principles: first, Americans have

a right to know that money Washington takes from them is well

spent and, second, Americans deserve an efficient, effective government that works for them. Our duty on the Oversight and Reform

Committee is to protect these rights. Our solemn responsibility is

to hold government accountable to taxpayers because taxpayers

have a right to know what they get from their government. We will

work tirelessly in partnership with citizen watchdogs to deliver the

facts to the American people and bring genuine reform to the Federal bureaucracy. This is the mission of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Just so our panelists and audience can know, we will have a couple of opening statements, and then we will swear the witnesses

and go into the testimony. And on behalf of all of us, thank you

for being here.

2

Consensus is not always easy to find in the world in which we

live, but I am confident that all of us in this room, regardless of

political persuasion, agree on the value of education. I can testify

from firsthand experience about the magic and power of education

and its ability to transform not just a single life, as important as

that is, but also to transform generations of lives.

My parents grew up in a small farming town in South Carolina.

My mother’s grandfather was a sharecropper. My mother’s father

had a sixth grade education. My father is the first male to attend

college in his family, and he did so by getting up at 4 a.m., and

rolling newspapers and delivering them because he dreamed of

going to college. And he saved all of his money and he went and

took all the math and science classes he could take at the University of South Carolina and then, when the money ran out, he went

to medical school. So when I tell folks back home that my father

is a medical doctor, but he is not a college graduate, they don’t believe me, but it is true.

My father realized that education was his only ticket to a better

life, and because of his sacrifices he changed not only his own life,

but the life of my three sisters and me, and generations to come.

And I have been continually reminded of the power of education in

my professional life as a prosecutor. Along with my friends in law

enforcement, I have seen almost every form of crime imaginable.

The one constant in those 16 years of being a prosecutor is the inextricable link between education, or a lack thereof, and crime.

Yesterday I had the pleasure of meeting with your chief of police

in the District of Columbia for the second time, but it was a more

extended meeting; a wonderful person. I am very impressed with

the department. And what they were doing was coming up with a

crime reduction strategy for the District of Columbia, and I could

not help but think, during that meeting, that the best crime reduction strategy of all is a high school diploma.

So we are here to evaluate the District of Columbia’s Opportunity Scholarship Program and, in my judgment, the evidence

proves beyond a reasonable doubt the value and the efficacy of this

program. The parents overwhelmingly approve of the Opportunity

Scholarship Program. They are engaged, they are involved, and

they feel vested. Students approve of the program, as evidenced by

the fact that demand outpaces supply four to one. Parents value

the discipline and learning environment afforded by the Opportunity Scholarship Program. Student performance is up both generally, as evidenced by the higher graduation rates, and more particularly as evidenced by their reading scores.

Parents value the choices afforded by this program. They don’t

want to be told their choices are limited because their bank accounts are limited. What is good enough for the highest ranking officials in our country should be good enough for everyone. Even the

U.S. Department of Education once lauded the Opportunity Scholarship Program as an example of a program that is working, before

someone or something told them to think otherwise.

The residents of the District of Columbia overwhelmingly want

choices with respect to the education of their children. The Opportunity Scholarship Program may not be the answer for every student, and this bill acknowledges that by providing ample funding

3

to the public school system, the charter school system, as well as

the Opportunity Scholarship Program. But the Opportunity Scholarship Program has been successful in the eyes of the participants,

and it is frankly beyond comprehension how there could be opposition to a program that parents like, students want, that produces

results, and does nothing to detract from other educational resources.

The most compelling piece of evidence in support of this program

is the personal testimony of the students and the parents. I have

listened as students and parents alike have vouched for this program as a lifesaver and a dream maker. It is one thing to remind

parents and children that their income levels are low. I will not be

the one to tell them that their dreams are too high.

With that, I would yield to the gentleman from Illinois, Mr.

Davis.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me, first

of all, congratulate you on your selection as the chairman of this

important subcommittee and I look forward to working and building a very positive relationship with you as we carry out the subcommittee’s work. And while I intend to keep my remarks somewhat brief this morning so that I can share some of the time with

Congresswoman Norton, I appreciate the chairman’s inaugural

hearing on a topic that I care so deeply about and have spent such

a great deal of my life focused on, and that is the issue of public

education.

I would also like to ask unanimous consent that the statements

of the National School Boards Association, the National Coalition

for Public Education, Americans United for Separation of Church

and State, the American Association of School Administrators, the

American Civil Liberties Union, and the American Association of

University Women in Opposition to H.R. 471 be included in the

record.

Mr. GOWDY. Without objection, they will be made part of the

record.

[The information referred to follows:]

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I was intrigued, as I listened to you in your opening comments, because I

too, like your father, grew up in rural America, went to a one-room

school where one teacher, Ms. B.D. King, taught eight grades plus

what we called the little primer and the big primer, all at the same

time. So I share your commitment to education.

However, as a staunch supporter of public education, I am not

in favor of escalating private school vouchers at this time because

what they mean to me is that fewer taxpayer dollars for traditional

schools will be reduced or diminished. However, I am in favor of

improving education across the board so that every child in the

District of Columbia would have optimal opportunity to have the

kind of experience, educational experience, that would prepare him

or her for everything that they would want to be, do, and accomplish in life.

Improving public education in the District of Columbia is in the

rest of the Nation’s, has been, and will remain a long and difficult

climb. The Federal Government has played a critical role in providing the District schools with badly needed funding since 2004. The

city deserves recognition for prioritizing, turning around its

schools, and for the improvements it has made. For this reason, I

do feel that it would have been helpful for the committee to have

heard from the mayor of the city and other elected leaders on this

important topic.

I commend the students and parents here today for their advocacy of expanded educational opportunities and for your personal

commitment to getting the best education that you can for yourselves and for your children. However, I am concerned that there

are no parents of students here to advocate for the public schools.

Families from those schools also have wonderful stories to tell

about exceptional teachers and successful innovative teaching practices. Allowing Federal dollars to fund private schools diverts attention and resources away from private schools that educate the vast

majority of students in our country.

If we have limited Federal dollars for education, we should focus

on fixing the public schools that are not performing well and aiding

their students rather than undermining those schools by syphoning

not only off scarce Federal dollars, but in some instances the mix

of students who would add to the dimension and opportunities of

acquiring a great education for all.

With that said, Mr. Chairman, I would like to reserve the balance of my time to be added to that of Representative Norton when

she has a time to make her remarks.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Davis.

The Chair would recognize the gentlelady from the District of Columbia, Ms. Holmes Norton.

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate my very good conversation with Chairman Gowdy

when I learned that the chairman had not received two requests

I left with his office on Friday to call me after Mayor Vincent Gray

was denied the courtesy that has always been given to the mayor

of the District of Columbia, whatever party controlled the Congress

and, for that matter, to most busy, highly placed public officials

whose time is charged to the taxpayers. I also learned that ChairVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:57 Jul 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\67175.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
26

man Gowdy did not make the decision concerning the appearance

of Mayor Gray.

What was gained by denying the mayor’s two separate attempts

to get small changes that would have enabled them to testify here

today except to make it impossible for him to testify as a minority

witness against the bill before us, or if he did testify, to try to humiliate him and to disrespect his office? Instead of the courtesy of

a routine accommodation by being placed early enough to be heard,

the mayor was offered the option of being the last witness on a

panel with his constituents, with no guarantee that he could be

heard early enough to get back to urgent city business he had offered to push back for a reasonable period.

In 20 years of service in the Congress, I have never seen any

highly placed public official treated so shabbily. The discourteous

response to our mayor’s request was inconsistent with past practice

of this committee and its subcommittees. It was offensive, petty,

and beneath the dignity of any committee of the Congress.

I knew that this response could not have come from the new

chairman. At Chairman Gowdy’s request, I took him to Mayor

Gray’s office just 2 weeks ago and he and the mayor had a very

cordial meeting. Considering Mayor Gray’s respect for Chairman

Gowdy, I know that the mayor wants to put this matter behind

him so that he can continue the cordial relationship that began

when Chairman Gowdy visited the mayor’s office. I ask unanimous

consent that the mayor’s statement concerning this bill be entered

into the record of today’s hearing.

Mr. GOWDY. Without objection, it will be made part of the record.

[The referenced information follows:]

[NOTE.—NO INSERT/INFORMATION PROVIDED.]

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to be clear that my remarks today are addressed to my

colleagues, not to my constituents who desire better education. I

too am a mother, and I cannot blame any parent for taking advantage of any educational opportunity that comes your way. Although

I am a proud graduate of the D.C. public schools and strongly support our public schools, I have always supported public charter

school alternatives for those parents who are dissatisfied with our

traditional public schools. Children cannot wait until public

schools, now in the throws of a race to the top, meet the necessary

standards.

This is true even though the D.C. public schools have made impressive strides by any measure. For example, notwithstanding the

many improvements the D.C. public schools must make, the National Assessment of Education Progress, which recently measured

math progress in the Nation’s public schools, found the D.C. public

schools to be the only schools in the Nation to improve average

math scores at both fourth and eighth grade levels by at least 5

points.

However, the Department of Education’s final report on the Opportunity Scholarship Program did not report the results we are

seeing in the District’s chosen alternatives to our traditional public

schools, our public charter schools. The Department of Education’s

report found ‘‘no conclusive evidence that the Opportunity ScholarVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:57 Jul 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\67175.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
27

ship Program affected student achievement as measured by standardized reading and mathematics tests.’’

Yet, this program was established precisely to measure the difference between the academic performance of students in the lowest performing public schools and those in the private school program. Unlike the private schools, our public charter middle and

high schools, with a majority of economically disadvantaged students, scored almost twice as high as their D.C. public school counterparts in math and reading, and the graduation rate of charter

schools in the District is 24 percent higher than the graduation

rate of the public high schools and 8 percent higher than the nationwide graduation rate.

Yet, our public charter schools have a significantly higher percentage of African-Americans and of disadvantaged children than

our D.C. public schools. Of particular importance, unlike our private schools, D.C. public schools are fully accountable to the public

in measures of performance and in every activity. Both public and

public charter schools can and have been closed when acceptable

standards have not been met. D.C. public charter schools, on average, have a remarkable record, but they are quick to concede that

not all of them meet high standards.

However, with this record of the D.C.’s own public charter

schools, not a couple thousand students, but almost 28,000 students in these schools with this record, why would Congress target

the District of Columbia for private school vouchers? Moreover, the

continuing focus on private school vouchers exclusively for the District of Columbia comes despite a compromise that allows every

D.C. student now in the program to be funded until graduation

from high school. That compromise, in turn, followed a prior compromise to extend the program 2 years beyond the authorized 5-

year cutoff date.

What is before us today is the startup of a brand new program

for new children, and, again, only in the District of Columbia. The

single-minded focus on public funding of private schools only in the

District raises many questions. If my Republican colleagues believe

private school vouchers are so important, why haven’t they used

the experiment here in the District to offer a national bill on the

floor, allowing school districts that might choose vouchers? Could

it be that the majority is influenced by State referenda on vouchers, all of which have been lost by voucher performance? Could it

be that the Republican majority has read the national polls showing that the American people overwhelmingly oppose public funding of private schools?

If the Republican majority is truly concerned about alternatives

to public education, why are they not expanding funding for public

charter schools which have a large congressional bipartisan majority both in the House and the Senate? The inescapable conclusion

is that the Republicans believe they can indulge their personal and

ideological preferences with impunity here in the District, a risk

they are unwilling to take in their own districts with private school

vouchers.

The Republicans did not consult the District’s elected officials before introducing a bill to startup a new voucher program. Yet, the

desperate budget situation in the District has put most in the counVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:57 Jul 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\67175.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
28

cil in a position of appearing to reverse their position against

vouchers that they previously took in letters to me when D.C. residents mounted one of the largest protests during my——

I ask unanimous consent to complete my remarks.

Mr. MCHENRY. Reserving the right to object. How much longer

does the gentlelady expect to talk?

Ms. NORTON. The gentlelady expects to talk only about a minute

longer.

Mr. MCHENRY. I ask unanimous consent for one additional

minute.

Mr. GOWDY. One additional minute.

Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentleman. There is a history to this,

and I appreciate it.

I was speaking of the reversal of some members of the council

on the position they previously took opposing vouchers in letters to

me at a time when a huge demonstration was mounted here in the

Congress by residents against imposing vouchers on the District.

They can hardly be blamed for this change of mind. They certainly

know that it would do very little good to lobby the House for any

new funding for the home rule choice of our parents for independent public school alternatives.

However, this is exactly what Speaker Newt Gingrich did. When

he first mentioned private school vouchers to me, I told him of public opposition to vouchers in the city, but not to public charter

schools.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to use my time to question

witnesses to complete my statement. I think this is important history for people to understand.

Mr. GOWDY. Yes, ma’am. You are welcome to do that.

We will now go to the testimony, and it is my pleasure to introduce the panel. I will introduce the panel in whole, and then we

will start with you, Mr. Holassie, and go in that order. How is

that? Does that sound good?

All right, we are pleased to have Mr. Ronald Holassie, who is a

senior at Archbishop Carroll High School and a District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program recipient since the sixth

grade.

To his left and our right is Ms. Lesly Alvarez. She is an eighth

grader at Sacred Heart School and a D.C. Opportunity Scholarship

Program recipient.

Ms. Sheila Jackson is the mother of an OSP student, Shawnee,

who is in the 10th grade at Preparatory School of District of Columbia.

And Ms. Latasha Bennett is a single mother of two children,

Nico received an Opportunity Scholarship Program, while Nia was

one of the 216 students whose scholarship was retracted. However,

through donations her family receives, Nia is able to attend the

same school as her brother.

Welcome to all four of you and, Mr. Holassie, we will recognize

you for your 5 minute opening statement.

Before we do that, because it is a policy of the committee to

swear the witnesses, we will ask you to rise and lift your right

hands.

[Witnesses sworn.]

29

Mr. GOWDY. Let the record reflect all witnesses answered in the

affirmative. You may be seated and, Mr. Holassie, you may begin.

STATEMENTS OF RONALD HOLASSIE, SENIOR AT ARCHBISHOP

CARROLL HIGH SCHOOL AND DC OSP RECIPIENT SINCE THE

6TH GRADE; LESLY ALVAREZ, 8TH GRADE STUDENT AT SACRED HEART SCHOOL, AND DC OSP RECIPIENT; SHEILA

JACKSON, MOTHER OF AN OSP STUDENT, SHAWNEE, WHO IS

IN THE 10TH GRADE AT PREPARATORY SCHOOL OF DC; AND

LATASHA BENNETT, SINGLE MOTHER OF TWO, NICO RECEIVES AN OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP, WHILE NIA WAS

ONE OF THE 216 STUDENTS WHOSE SCHOLARSHIP WAS RETRACTED; HOWEVER, THROUGH DONATIONS HER FAMILY

RECEIVES, NIA IS ABLE TO ATTEND THE SAME SCHOOL AS

HER BROTHER

STATEMENT OF RONALD HOLASSIE

Mr. HOLASSIE. Chairman Gowdy and members of the committee,

thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

My name is Ronald Holassie. I have served as D.C.’s Deputy

Youth Mayor for Legislation for 2 years. I am now a senior at Archbishop Carroll High School.

My journey with the Washington, DC, Opportunity Scholarship

Program began 6 years ago, when I was 13. I was raised in a single

parent household with my mother and younger brother. I faced

many challenges in the public school system. I attended various

D.C. public schools during elementary school. Altercations with

other students and a lack of academic achievement resulted in me

switching to different schools around D.C. But it seemed that I was

faced with the same problems at each new school.

Then 1 day my mother saw an ad for the D.C. Opportunity

Scholarship Program. She quickly applied, and soon after I was accepted and given a scholarship to attend any private school of our

choice in D.C. My mother now had a chance to send me to a school

she knew would fit me best. The scholarship covered tuition, books

and my uniform. My mother saw it as a blessing and an answer

of prayer from God for her child. She always wanted me to have

a quality education.

When I received my scholarship, I was so far behind that the

school asked me to repeat the sixth grade. The first few months

were very different, as the expectations and standards were much

higher. The discipline in the school was also much stricter. Adjusting to the new school wasn’t easy; it took time. I had to catch up

and get on the academic level I needed to be on and fulfill the expectations of the new school. But it all didn’t happen that fast. It

took some years and hard work and dedication. There was a transition stage that I had to undergo. It took some time to adjust to the

new standards and expectations, but I soon adjusted well.

When I entered high school, I was quite nervous and didn’t really

know what to expect. Being at Archbishop Carroll High School

shaped me academically, shaped me to perform academically with

my greatest potential. As I am now a senior at Archbishop Carroll

High School finishing up my last year, I am ready to take on the

30

world and new opportunities. I credit the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program for my success.

This program has worked, is still working, and will continue to

work. It is a must to reauthorize the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship

Program. Everyone deserves a choice and should have the right of

school choice and opportunity. As I said before unto the U.S. Senate ‘‘public schools did not get bad overnight and they are not going

to get better overnight.’’ So we need to take action now and have

a program installed to give children a quality education such as the

D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. Reauthorization of the D.C.

Opportunity Scholarship Program is critical. We should always

have options, and this program is an option for parents and students.

Looking back, I can see throughout the past years I have evolved

so much and at the same time dealt with many obstacles. As a

young child, many challenges came before me in which I had to undergo hardships and persevere. Through all the pain, suffering, and

tears, I am still standing. Not just standing but standing strong

ready to take on the world and achieve much more.

As a young man, I see a future ahead of me and a vision of a

successful life. I feel as if all these years served as preparation for

the real world. I am now confident that I can go out into the world

and make something out of my life, and that I will not only impact

people here in the United States, but around the world.

I made it this far and nothing can stop me now from succeeding.

Not a single voice or action of opposition can stop my success, nor

the success of thousands of children who have the opportunity to

choose a school that is best for them.

It is not just about me and my story, as I am now a senior,

months away from graduating. I am here for not only myself and

the students currently enrolled in the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, but the thousands of children who have not been

given the same opportunity.

I am here to fight for quality education and have the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program reauthorized, as it needs to be. I am

a product of this program, a successful result. The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program has provided the education that has

shaped me into being the intelligent, ambitious, person that is in

front of you all now. The results of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program are certainly life-changing. Now being a young adult,

taking on my own responsibilities, I have certainly been greatly influenced by this program. I can look back and credit this program

for my success.

It’s not just what this program does academically, but it is how

it impacts an individual’s life through education. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Holassie follows:]

31

32

33

34

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Holassie.

Ms. Alvarez, we will recognize you for your opening statement.

STATEMENT OF LESLY ALVAREZ

Ms. ALVAREZ. Hi, Chairman Gowdy. Hello, Ranking Member

Davis and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me

to tell my story today.

My name is Lesly Alvarez. I am an eighth grade Opportunity

Scholarship student. I live at home with my mother, father, and

brother. At home, we speak Spanish and English. English is my

second language; I learned it while attending Sacred Heart School.

Both languages are taught at Sacred Heart because it is a bilingual

school. In fact, it is the only bilingual Catholic school in all of D.C.

Sacred Heart is a very special and unique place. My classmates

and I represent a lot of different countries, for example: El Salvador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Cameroon, Barbados, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, and Vietnam. Also, we share different religious

backgrounds. There are Catholic and Buddhist students and there

are Protestant students like me. The common thread between us

all is that we are all learning to be responsible citizens of our

school community and the greater community. My teachers are

very proud of me for testifying on behalf of our school community

today.

I am very involved in my school. A minimum of 20 hours of community service is needed in order to graduate eighth grade. I only

have 2 hours left. My favorite subject in school is Language Arts.

I love it so much because there is reading involved. I am able to

grasp the material quickly and connect stories to my life.

I am definitely planning on attending college in my future. I am

sure that I want to make something out of my life and be successful. I am interested in studying law. I think I would be a good lawyer because I am a persuasive arguer and fight for what I believe

in. The main reason why I find interest in law is because I like defending people and I stand up for justice.

One of my favorite books is En Busca de Milagros. In English

this translates as ‘‘In Search of Miracles.’’ I am reading this book

right now in my Spanish class. It is so powerful and has changed

the way I looked at my life and my future.

I connect with the main character, Milly, short for Milagros, in

a couple of ways. The first way is that we are both searching for

something. Being an adopted child, Milly is searching for knowledge of her past. Being an Opportunity Scholar, I am searching for

knowledge for my future. The Opportunity Scholarship Program

has been a miracle for me and hundreds of other students like me.

Milly wants to know where she comes from. I want to know where

I am going. With my scholarship, I know I will go far.

Milly and I have one more thing in common: we are young and

a lot of people tell us that we are too young to overcome the obstacles set in front of us. Milly’s successful story showed me that I

should just keep working to get through the obstacles. I know I

cannot change the minds of the adults who doubt the value of the

Opportunity Scholarship Program. But, like Milly, I know that I

need to work hard every day to overcome my obstacles and demVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:57 Jul 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\67175.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
35

onstrate the value of my scholarship so that more kids like me can

receive it too.

There are a couple of ways that Milly and I are different. First,

Milly finds only two adults who help support her on her journey.

I have more than two people helping me. I have my parents and

teachers. I know that Cardinal Wuerl is supportive of me and there

are many Members of Congress, like Speaker Boehner and Senator

Lieberman, who support me in this program.

The second way we are different is that it took Milly until the

middle of her story to learn she could not control the world around

her and that she just needed to take control of her actions and be

really dedicated to get her miracle. In my case, I feel like I am still

in the beginning of my life story. I still have a lot of years of education ahead of me in order to achieve my dreams. But, unlike

Milly, I will not wait to take control of my actions until later. I am

taking control today by testifying.

Milly’s miracle comes to her because eventually her work leads

her to learn about her past. The miracle that I am searching for

today is that the Opportunity Scholarship Program be reauthorized. I know other kids will enjoy their scholarship as much as I

have.

My name is Lesly Alvarez and I am en busca de un milagro.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Alvarez follows:]

36

37

38

39

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Ms. Alvarez.

We will recognize Ms. Jackson for her 5 minute opening statement.

STATEMENT OF SHEILA JACKSON

Ms. JACKSON. Chairman Gowdy, members of the committee,

thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today.

I am a single parent of two. I have a 15-year-old daughter who

is and has been a recipient of the Opportunity Scholarship for 6

years.

I was educated in the south and experienced racism firsthand. I

attended segregated schools until I began high school. I prayed

that when I became a mother my child or children would never

have to experience racism on the level I did.

As a young girl, I remember waking in the middle of the night

to screaming neighbors because a cross was burning on their lawn.

I also have memories of being told that I could not use the restroom in public buildings while out shopping with my mother because I was not the appropriate skin color; watching the Ku Klux

Klan parading in our neighborhood just because they could. The

list goes on. But, in spite of all the racial negativity surrounding

me, I vowed that I would not let it hamper my growth and that,

when I had children, I would provide the best I could and that they

would have the best education possible.

In spite of all my efforts, my daughter now faces another form

of segregation: to segregate her from attending a school of my

choice and that is best suited for her just because some politicians

feel that my child and many others who are currently recipients of

the Opportunity Scholarship do not deserve the quality education

their children receive. Why? That’s a question we parents would all

like an answer to. I am disabled and I live on a fixed income. If

this program is not reauthorized, it would be impossible for me to

pay tuition to the private Christian school my daughter currently

attends. The Opportunity Scholarship Program has been the difference to her having to attend schools that are not safe and are

still underperforming to her attending a school that meets her

needs and where I know she is safe. My daughter attended D.C.

public schools through fourth grade. I was not pleased with the

overcrowded classrooms, teachers having to share teacher aides,

purchase school supplies with their own money, children so unruly

the police had to be called because they were a threat to the rest

of the student body.

During her fourth grade year I had taken as much as I could.

She was struggling in math and her teacher was not willing to do

anything outside of her plan to help my daughter. We went back

and forth, with her teacher accusing me of trying to run classroom.

She blatantly told me that if my daughter did not get it, then she

was sorry. I agreed with her that she was sorry if she was not willing to do what she was there for, to educate the students in her

charge. I was determined that I would not allow this school system

to fail my child, and I knew that if she continued in the D.C. public

school system that would surely be the case. The school she attended was an underperforming school, as were most of the schools

40

in my ward. I requested a meeting with the principal and that

meeting was granted.

In attendance were her teacher, the principal and myself. After

hearing from her teacher and myself, he was in agreement with me

that her teacher was not doing enough to help my daughter. I

learned about tutoring options for low income families under the

No Child Left Behind Program. I applied for my daughter and she

was accepted.

After an assessment of her by the tutor, it was discovered that

she was intimidated by math. Ms. Johns her tutor, who is currently

a professor at the University of Oklahoma, worked with my daughter through the remainder of the school year. There was a tremendous improvement in her math grades.

That was her last year in the D.C. public school system. During

that year, I learned about and applied for the Opportunity Scholarship and Shawnee was accepted. She is now a sophomore in high

school attending The Preparatory School of D.C., an honor roll student, and making plans for college.

Not only has the Opportunity Scholarship provided me a choice

for my daughter, but also for thousands of other parents. I stand

today asking that the Opportunity Scholarship Program be reauthorized and be opened to new students as well.

My motto is simple ‘‘Walk Good and Journey Safe,’’ that our children will continue to be afforded the opportunity to have a good

walk through their education and all their educational journeys be

safe. Thank You.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Jackson follows:]

41

42

43

44

45

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Ms. Jackson.

The Chair will recognize Ms. Bennett for her 5 minute opening

statement.

STATEMENT OF LATASHA BENNETT

Ms. BENNETT. Good morning, Chairman Gowdy and members of

the committee and supporters. Thank you for allowing me to share

my family’s story regarding the need to continue the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program and for it to be reauthorized.

My name is LaTasha Bennett. I am a 39-year-old single parent

of two very intelligent children. My son Nico Thomas, here today,

is 9 years old and attends Naylor Road Private School, where he

is in the fourth grade and he is excelling. My daughter Nia Thomas

is 6 years old and she also attends Naylor Road, thanks to generous private donations which we have truly been blessed to receive.

Without these donations, I do not know where my daughter would

be going to school. I am currently unemployed due to a disability.

I worked from the age of 14 until the year 2000, when I became

disabled. Because of the inability for me to work, the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program has been a true blessing for myself and

my son and our family.

Nico is thriving academically in his school and loving it. The students in Nico’s class get more hands-on from the teacher because

there are only nine students in his class. Students are given so

much more attention and they learn twice as much in their class.

I don’t want to see my son’s dreams of becoming a doctor washed

down the drain because he is forced to attend a school that does

not meet his needs.

I applied for the scholarship for Nia so she could attend Naylor

Road School for the 2009–10 school year. I had received a letter of

authorization granting Nia a scholarship and I was so elated. Then,

a month or two later, a retraction letter came. It was like a nightmare. I was appalled. I felt a bit of injustice not only to my daughter, but to all of the other children as well. I felt like the system

had failed my baby before she had been given a chance to even

begin her dreams. I was totally devastated and angry that my child

was denied an opportunity to attend the school along with her

brother, a school where she would be safe and get a quality education. Why shouldn’t my child be given the same opportunity as

your children to get the best education possible? Is my child not

worthy of getting what so many of our ancestors fought for years

ago?

My daughter has dreams of being a famous dancer and singer,

and I motivate her dreams because as long as she has a dream,

there is a chance for a good future. I want Nia to have the same

opportunity to excel well as her brother. In the same way that she

has big dreams to excel, I want that also for other students. Nia

is so looking forward to going to college in the future. She continues to ask me, ‘‘Mom, will I go to my school with my brother next

year?‘‘ I use to answer her and tell her yes. Now I don’t know what

will I tell her. I know that I cannot count on private donations to

send her to Naylor Road for the remainder of her time in school.

But I look at my child and see she is so happy that I can’t bring

myself to express doubt. I believe you, Chairman Gowdy, and the

46

members of this committee know how it feels when your child is

so happy that their little face lights up and you can’t bring yourself

to cause that light to go out. We are looking to those of you who

have power to continue this program and assure that our children

have the opportunity to get the type of education they deserve.

Without the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, I pray daily

that I will have peace of mind to know, because I don’t know where

I will truly send my daughter to school. I know for certain it will

not be any schools in my area. I have seen what happens to the

children in neighborhood that fall through the cracks. I lost my

nephew to a neighborhood school. I will not lose my children, when

they are so bright and willing to learn and be productive citizens.

Please allow my children to continue this opportunity through the

Opportunity Scholarship Program to have a bright and better future by continuing this program.

Education is the No. 1 priority, besides God, in my household,

and by reauthorizing the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program,

so many parents and children like myself will have hope for a better future. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bennett follows:]

47

48

49

50

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Ms. Bennett.

I will recognize myself for 5 minutes for questions, and I want

to start by saying what I am sure most of the people in the room

know, but it may bear amplification, which is the D.C. Opportunity

Scholarship Program does not take one red cent from the D.C. public school system; and to argue otherwise is disingenuous at best.

This is not an argument about whether or not we are going to fund

all three layers of the D.C. school system; it is about whether we

are going to give the same choice to poor folk that rich folk have.

So against that backdrop, let me ask Mr. Holassie and Ms. Alvarez to do what is sometimes hard even for adults to do, which is

imagine circumstances are different. I want you to imagine if there

were no D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. Do you have

friends whose lives have taken a different path because they didn’t

have the same opportunities you did? We will start with you, Mr.

Holassie, then we will go to you, Ms. Alvarez.

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes, absolutely. Some of my friends that actually

went back into the public school system completely change. Some

of them are on the street; some of them don’t really know what colleges they are going to. Some haven’t even applied to college. So

it is a big difference.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Alvarez.

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes. I had some friends that used to go to Sacred

Heart with me, but now they attend public school, and they just

don’t know what to do. Some haven’t even applied to high school.

So it is just sad.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Jackson and Ms. Bennett, if I understood your

testimony correctly, it was that if you were persons of means, if

money were not an issue in life, you would choose to go to the private schools that your children are going to. Is that correct?

Ms. JACKSON. That is correct for me, sir. I firmly believe that it

should be a choice of where I send my daughter to school, where

I feel it is safe for her, where her educational needs are met. And

right now, where she is, I feel that everything she needs is met

there; she is safe. I don’t worry about her during the day, whether

a fight is going to break out or whether the police will have to be

called. I am very comfortable with the environment that she is in.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Bennett.

Ms. BENNETT. Likewise. I also am, as you asked, if it had not

been for the funding, I am totally approved and I am appreciated

of this school that I chose, that I had the opportunity to choose for

my children, for one, because of the safety, because of the teachers’

commitments to teach the children, and the grades that my children are getting. I brought today, for an example, Nia, being she

had donations, made all As in the first grade and is writing in cursive, which I know we started like in third grade. And if I had the

funds, I would pay for a better education for my child, but I don’t.

Mr. GOWDY. So the only reason that Ms. Jackson and Ms. Bennett are here, you have already made the choice in your mind. If

you were people of means, you wouldn’t have to come before a congressional committee and ask for this program.

Ms. BENNETT. Not at all.

51

Mr. GOWDY. Can you fashion any reason why poor folk or folk

who are not wealthy enough to attend private school on their own

should have fewer choices than rich folk?

Ms. BENNETT. I don’t see any reason why not, because I think

that our children should be able to get the same education and allowed the same education, be it that we are poor or not. We just

can’t afford to give our children that education. And if most people

empathize that are wealthier and put theirselves in our shoes, I believe that they would think differently to reauthorize this program.

Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Holassie, you are pleased with your educational

experience?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes, I am.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Alvarez, you are pleased with your educational

experience?

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes, I am.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Jackson, you are pleased with your children’s

educational experience?

Ms. JACKSON. Yes, I am, sir.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Bennett, you are pleased with your children’s

educational experience?

Ms. BENNETT. I am pleased with Nico. I ask and pray that you

all reauthorize because I can’t guarantee donations for Nia’s continued. But I am pleased that both of them are on the honor roll.

Mr. GOWDY. You are pleased with the environment from a safety

and security and environment conducive of learning? You are

pleased with that aspect of your school?

Ms. BENNETT. I am pleased with every aspect of the school that

we chose.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Jackson.

Ms. JACKSON. Yes, I am, sir. I am pleased as well that the school

she currently attends has a family atmosphere. They not only care

about the education of the students, but they are helping to groom

those boys and girls into young men and women, and I am very

pleased with that.

Mr. GOWDY. Ms. Alvarez, you are pleased?

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes, I am. I feel safe in my school.

Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Holassie, you are pleased?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes, I am, as my principal, Dr. Stofa, enforces

every day to have a safe environment for us all.

Mr. GOWDY. The Chair would recognize the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Davis.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Let me thank all four of you for your tremendous comments and

statements. I seriously appreciate them.

Ms. Jackson and Ms. Bennett, both of you indicated that there

is a serious difference between the schools that your children currently attend and the schools that they attended earlier. Could you

share with us what those differences are?

Ms. JACKSON. Yes, Mr. Davis. The last school my daughter attended in the D.C. public school system was McGogney Elementary

School, which is in Ward 8, where we were living at the time. We

actually lived next door to the school, so I had a full view of the

outside activity, not knowing what was going on on the inside.

Being disabled, I was at home a big portion of the day and often

52

would see police cars pulling into the parking lot, which would give

me great fear because I did not know what was going on with the

student body inside. And this happened on a daily basis.

The school that she is currently attending and the school that

she previously attended before her current school were both private

Christian schools. When I leave her or when she leaves me in the

morning and she steps into the school, I don’t worry. I know that

her educational needs are going to be met; I know that she is going

to be safe. I know that if anything happens, that I will be contacted

to know that maybe she has fallen and had an accident. I didn’t

get that in the D.C. public school system. She would come home

on numerous days saying that someone had taken something from

her. She was afraid to say anything to the student for fear of being

beaten up. So there is a big difference in the education she has had

over the past 6 years and the first 4 years of her education in the

D.C. public school system.

Mr. DAVIS. Ms. Bennett.

Ms. BENNETT. OK, I can say Nico only had 1 year experience in

public schools, and that 1 year he went to Clark Elementary, which

was in Ward 4, which we had lived at that moment. And I was

pregnant with my daughter. I was a high-risk pregnancy; therefore,

I was unable to work. And I was one of those apron string moms

and I frequently went up to Nico’s school, which he was in pre-K,

and I can honestly say every entrance to the school, be it the side

entrance, because his class was accessible to the outside, their

playground, the doors were open. I would go through just to see.

And one time I even drove up to the school and parked on the

side, and the students were actually on the playground by themselves just because a door was open to their classroom. And after

that I had several questions for the teachers why Nico wasn’t

learning more than what he had learned at home. They couldn’t

give me any answers, and I wanted more for my child and I took

him out of the public school.

Mr. DAVIS. Let me ask you are the same children going to the

same schools? Are the children that your——

Ms. BENNETT. My two children?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes.

Ms. BENNETT. Yes. They both attend Naylor Road. Only Nia does

through donations that I won’t be able to——

Mr. DAVIS. Are any of the students who attended their prior

school also attending this school?

Ms. BENNETT. Not to my knowledge.

Mr. DAVIS. Ms. Jackson, do you know if any of the same children

are attending with your child?

Ms. JACKSON. Children from D.C. public schools?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes.

Ms. JACKSON. No, there aren’t.

Mr. DAVIS. And so the schools that your children currently attend, are they much smaller?

Ms. BENNETT. Smaller classes, yes.

Ms. JACKSON. Yes.

Mr. DAVIS. Are the students perhaps more selective?

Ms. BENNETT. I notice that the students—excuse me. I notice

that the students are very intelligent from the teaching which even

53

my son receives. I notice that, because I did volunteer up at their

school several times, that a lot of the students did come from public

schools, and it is the parents that chose to take advantage of the

opportunity. And the classes are smaller, so there is more handson teaching.

Mr. DAVIS. And you indicated that these are both Christian

schools, charter Christian?

Ms. BENNETT. My son and Nia go to a private school, it is not

religious-based.

Mr. DAVIS. None of them are charters, they are all private?

Ms. BENNETT. To my knowledge.

Ms. JACKSON. Yes. Their school is a private school.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Ms. JACKSON. You are welcome.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Davis.

The Chair would recognize the gentleman from Arizona, Dr.

Gosar.

Dr. GOSAR. Thank you.

I also come from a State that is struggling with education. I am

also from rural America, from a town of 1,000. That is where I got

my education. And I saw what it takes as a community to educate.

My question to you, Ms. Bennett and Ms. Jackson, is why would

you find it a problem not to have a choice and able to dictating

where your child goes to school? Do you see a problem?

Ms. BENNETT. I see a problem with not having a choice, because

that takes away, first of all, my own liberty that we are supposed

to have to choose, and it is a problem to me to not have that choice

to choose, because I want what is best for my child, just like other

people choose to send their children where they choose to. It is just

that I am not financially fit to pay for what I choose, so that is a

problem for me.

Dr. GOSAR. Ms. Jackson.

Ms. JACKSON. I agree in whole with Ms. Bennett. I want the

choice to have my child have a quality education, just as wealthy

Americans make the choices to send their children to private

schools that they know are safe, where they are going to receive

a quality education. I feel my daughter deserves nothing less, and

I want to continue to have that choice, although I am also not financially able to make those payments to a private school. But I

would like to continue to have the choice to send my daughter to

a school that works for her.

Dr. GOSAR. Let me continue. Would you look at the public education system and say it is a success as it currently is right now?

Ms. BENNETT. Honestly, I would say no. Just to be brief, I have

nephews and a nice that goes to the local school in my area, and

I frequently go with my sister to the school because they are calling

almost twice a week or three times a week because of incidents

that are happening at the school; either somebody is trying to beat

up my nephew or beat up my niece. They are twins. And this is

a D.C. public school.

And I had almost got frustrated with not knowing about the Opportunity Scholarship Program continuing that I had almost applied to that school, and I sat in there for 30 minutes, and after

seeing what was going on I honestly left out and left the papers

54

on the table, and I said no matter what, if they didn’t reauthorize

this program, I would home-teach my daughter other than have

her in an environment that is not safe and that—I mean, I saw

teachers and things that you wouldn’t even believe happening. And

this isn’t the first time.

Dr. GOSAR. Ms. Jackson.

Ms. JACKSON. I am just really passionate about this and I think

that the D.C. public school system is not a bad school system, but

it needs great improvement, and I believe that at this time it would

not satisfy me or satisfy the needs of my daughter for her to be in

the D.C. public school system. As Mr. Holassie stated, the school

system didn’t get that way overnight, and it is not going to be fixed

overnight; so it is going to take a while to get it back to where it

should be. I believe that the school system could be a great school

system if all the efforts are put forth and things are done to make

it better. But right now, no, I don’t think it is the school system

that—well, I know it is not the school system that I would want

my child in at this time.

Dr. GOSAR. One last point. It seems to me that on education

there has to be the family input, an important segment that we

have never really tried to involve in the public school district. And

with my education everything is results based as a doctor. Now,

when we look at positive results, could you see any way, as a parent, the opportunity for choice gives you the opportunity for success

in the educational model?

Ms. JACKSON. I believe so. I believe that because of the disarray

that the D.C. public school system is in and the choice that I have

chosen and the choice that I have been able to take has been a difference in her quality of education, her grades. Her grades have

greatly improved in the 6-years that she has been out of the D.C.

public school system, and I just know that because of this, that is

why her grades are there, where she attends school. I know in my

heart, in my soul that because she was out of the D.C. public school

system, that these grades that she is making, the career choices

that she is thinking about are because of the choice of her being

in a school that cares about what she learns and where she goes

in her future.

Ms. BENNETT. And I agree with Ms. Jackson. It is evident by the

report cards that I have here that my children are excelling in the

school that I chose for them to go to, and I was very vigorously

searching when I was choosing. And if they had not had the opportunity or I had not had the opportunity to choose, I don’t believe

they would be making these same grades and as motivated to be

what they want they want to be in the future.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Dr. Gosar.

The Chair would recognize the gentlelady from the District of Columbia, Representative Holmes Norton.

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I want to congratulate the achievements of my young constituents, and clearly against the odds. Very proud of you. And I want

to congratulate the parents, because you are doing what parents

are supposed to be doing. The most important factor in student

achievement is passion of the parents for that achievement, and I

know that well.

55

Ms. Jackson, I graduated from segregated schools in the District

of Columbia. I went to Bruce Monroe Elementary School, I went to

Banneker, where there was a junior high school, and I am a proud

graduate of Dunbar High School. Schools then were perhaps better.

There was a large population here in the District of Columbia. I

love the D.C. public schools; they are doing much better. But you

will never find that this Congresswoman is an apologist for anything that offers less than quality education to our children.

Mr. Holassie, I am proud that you are about to graduate. I hope

you know about DCTAG.

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes, I do.

Ms. NORTON. All right. DCTAG is the 100 percent funded Federal program that allows our youngsters to go to any public college

anywhere in the United States, and that program has doubled college attendance here. And, Mr. Holassie, whether you choose a

public or private school, anybody that gets you is going to get a lot

of quality.

I am going to use the remainder of my time simply to put on the

record what the record is for this program, and I appreciate the

time that was given me in my opening remarks.

I was speaking about Speaker Gingrich, who approached me

about school vouchers, and I told him of public opposition to vouchers in the city but not to public charter schools, as demonstrated

by fledgling charter school law in the District that had attracted

only a few charters. The result was Public Law 104–134, which included the School Reform Act of 1995, passed here in the Congress,

that has produced what amounts to a large-scale, robust alternative public school system that has become a model for the Nation, with almost half of our children in attendance. The long waiting lists of our public charter schools are the best evidence of their

quality and their embrace by our parents and residents at the

school’s own home rule choice.

Our public charter schools are aware both of the need and the

demand. Why then set up a congressionally sponsored private

school program for the city? Why, when ours is the only big city

with both rapidly improving public schools and a model alternative

public charter school system; why, when the city is one of the few

jurisdictions in the Nation that has no barriers to public school alternatives; why isn’t the District of Columbia being rewarded with

funding to continue to build the city’s public charter schools and to

respond to the waiting lists of parents that can’t get in, can’t enroll

their students? The answer is power; the same congressional power

that stripped the city of its vote on the first day of the session, that

also seeks to reimpose anti-democratic amendments on the city in

the pending appropriation bills. It is power that this power respected D.C. democracy.

We appreciate congressional interest in our children. We ask only

for congressional respect for the people of the District of Columbia

who have built their own alternative to our public schools. Any new

funding for education in the District should reinforce the hard work

of our own parents and residents who have shown the Nation that

they know how to build a popular alternative public school system

with a dazzling variety of public character schools, from the nationally resounded Kipp Schools to Hospitality High, from the Latin

56

Charter School to the Seed Residential Charter School. D.C. residents know what to do without the benefit of congressional paternalism, instruction, or intervention.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you.

The Chair would recognize the gentleman from Illinois, Mr.

Walsh.

Mr. WALSH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And thank you, panel, for coming today. I want you all to do me

a big favor: put a big smile on your faces. [Laughter.]

This should be such a happy, happy hearing; and, believe me, I

have sat in a number of hearings that are not happy. You all are

a huge success story. You all are, especially you two right there,

you are the future. You are the future. You are the face of education in this country.

I come from Illinois. In Illinois, we have a new mayor of Chicago,

Rahm Immanuel. And I think a couple days ago Mr. Immanuel was

asked where is he going to send his kids to school now that he is

moving back to Chicago, and I believe his answers—and I don’t

want to get it wrong—was I don’t know, it could be public, could

be private, could be religious, could be charter, but that is going

to be the decision my wife and I make, and I would just ask that

you respect that decision. How refreshing.

I want you to do something that might be terribly——

[Applause.]

Mr. WALSH. Yes, clap. Do something that the four of you might

not want to do: pretend you are politicians for a minute. Put on

your political hats. Try to give me short answers. Politicians don’t

give short answers. Do your best.

Why do you think it is that there are people in this country—

think like a politician—that don’t want you to have this choice? Be

brief. Think like a politician. Why is it that people don’t want to

give you that choice? Let’s start here.

Mr. HOLASSIE. What I feel is how could you oppose of such program as——

Mr. WALSH. No, no, Mr. Holassie. With all due respect, that is

not what I asked.

Mr. HOLASSIE. Oh.

Mr. WALSH. But you know what? You are going to make a good

politician, because you didn’t answer the question. [Laughter.]

I want a straight, direct answer out of you. Why do you think

it is that there are people who don’t want you to have this choice?

Simple, why?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Other priorities.

Mr. WALSH. What? Give me one priority that might come before,

before your parents having that choice.

Mr. HOLASSIE. It can be political decisions.

Mr. WALSH. Political.

Ms. Alvarez, why do you think there are some people that don’t

want your parents to have a choice.

Ms. ALVAREZ. I really don’t understand why they wouldn’t want

us to have the choice or my parents to have the choice. I don’t understand. It is just not a right choice to make to not want our parents to put us in a good school.

57

Mr. WALSH. Ms. Jackson, be political for me. Come on. Why do

you think it is there are people that do not want you to have that

choice, this choice? Come on.

Ms. JACKSON. Honestly speaking, sir, I believe they don’t even

know why, truly, they don’t want our children to have the same

valued and quality education as their children do. It is all politics.

And if you get right down to it, it stems from money.

Mr. WALSH. Maybe I have asked a bad question. If you had to

guess, Ms. Bennett, you can start, who doesn’t want you to have

that choice? Who do you think it is that doesn’t want you to have

this choice?

Ms. BENNETT. To me, it is probably the NEA.

Mr. WALSH. The NEA is who?

Ms. BENNETT. The National Education Association.

Mr. WALSH. The teachers unions.

Ms. BENNETT. And it is probably the public schools, of course, the

public school and private school sector; and it is the opposers that

know that this program works.

Mr. WALSH. All right, now this is getting a little fun. Now, Ms.

Bennett, play a game with me. Take the teachers unions.

Ms. BENNETT. OK.

Mr. WALSH. Just think off the top of your head. Why would they

not want parents to ultimate have choice?

Ms. BENNETT. Because they would choose what is better for their

kids.

Mr. WALSH. And if they did that, what might happen?

Ms. BENNETT. They would lose a lot of their jobs because they

will take them and put them to the private schools and take them

out of the public schools.

Mr. WALSH. We are getting somewhere. [Laughter and applause.]

Oh, and I am running out of time.

If this program succeeds, Ms. Alvarez, if the D.C. Scholarship

Program succeeds, what will that show people?

Ms. ALVAREZ. It will show people that everybody, the kids have

a future and have something to look forward to.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Holassie, who would be afraid of the fact that

the program might succeed?

Mr. WALSH. People who are in opposition of this program.

Mr. WALSH. And our ranking member very eloquently, I thought,

said that this is an issue all about power, and it is about power.

I think the nuance that I would add is that when it comes to educating our kids, who should have that power. Pretty simple question, right? When it comes to educating our kids, should it be us

up here? Should it be the teachers? Should it be the administrators? Should it be the Governor? Who should have the power, the

power when it comes to deciding where a child goes to school? This

should be a one-word answer. Ms. Bennett.

Ms. BENNETT. The parents.

Mr. WALSH. Ms. Jackson.

Ms. JACKSON. I agree.

Mr. WALSH. Ms. Alvarez, who should have that power?

Ms. ALVAREZ. I agree with the parents.

Mr. WALSH. You are not going to dissent, are you, Mr. Holassie?

[Laughter.]

58

He wouldn’t dare.

Mr. HOLASSIE. Parents.

Mr. WALSH. Thank you. Thank you all four for coming. Thank

you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Walsh.

[Applause.]

Mr. GOWDY. The Chair would recognize the ranking member of

the full committee, the distinguished member from Maryland, Mr.

Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much.

As I listen to the witnesses, I am very impressed and I want to

thank all of you for being here. And I don’t want us to be confused

by what is happening here today. I think it is a disservice to a person like Ms. Holmes Norton for anybody to even remotely imply,

and for me and for others, that we don’t want people to have

choice. The only way that I am here today, as a son of two former

sharecroppers with less than a sixth grade education, is because of

an education. So we get that. We also get that this week $890 million from the general education budget is going to be slashed. That is real. And I think the

thing that we confuse is this: Mr. Holassie and Ms. Alvarez, we

want every single child to have the opportunity that you have,

every one. We want all 74,000 in D.C. to have that. I want them

in my community. I live in the inner city of Baltimore. I head a

school right. Right now I am the president of a public school. My

daughter went to charter school and I was on the board of that

charter school for 4 years. That charter school started out 10 years

ago and now it is one of the best schools in the entire city. I sit

on the board of the Kipp School. I know what can be done when

we put our heads together to help children achieve.

So let’s not be confused. It is not a question of whether folk don’t

want people to have choices. When it came to my daughter going

to school, I made sure she got a good education. And I applaud you,

Ms. Bennett, and I applaud you, Ms. Jackson, because we have to

be the No. 1 advocates for our children. And I have said it many

times: our children only have one chance. This is their turn. This

is their turn to get an education. So, I mean, as much as I appreciate the scholarship program, I want it for every kid.

Mr. Holassie, when you were asked the question about what happened to some of your friends who may have gone into the public

schools, stayed in the public schools, I know what you are talking

about. I live in the inner city. I see every day what happens. And

you are right, you want a safe environment. And you can bet your

bottom dollar that most Members of Congress, their kids go to

school in a safe environment. You can bet your bottom dollar that

they do have the choices.

Well, I think that what we should want, all of us, before we start

cutting $890 million from the education budget, we need to be concentrating on how do we make sure that every single child is properly educated. The greatest threat to our national security in this

country is our failure to properly educate every single child, every

one of them. And when we fail to do that, then we have the situation where we have young men in Baltimore prisons with less than

59

a sixth grade reading level. They look just as sharp and good as

you do, sitting behind some bars with a hat turned backward and

pants hanging down. And that is why I applaud you and that is

why you all are such an inspiration to me and to others to fight

for opportunity.

But sadly, in our country, not everybody has all those choices,

and I am just wondering. You know, I look at the charter schools

and D.C. has made some tremendous strides. And I am not saying

that those strides are being made fast enough. But I just want to

make sure that we don’t lose sight of the—somebody asked the

question, said are any of the same kids from the private school—

I think it was Mr. Davis, from the public school now going to the

private school, and the answer was no. And the fact is that for

every one of those children that get a chance to go these private

schools, there are probably I don’t know how many, but hundreds

of thousands, I guess, maybe hundreds, who don’t get that chance.

So if we are going to do anything, we need to be working together to make sure that every child has those opportunities so

that every one can become all that God meant for them to be.

I yield back.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Cummings.

The Chair would recognize the distinguished gentleman from

North Carolina, Mr. McHenry.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you and

congratulations on your first hearing as a subcommittee chair.

Thank you all for your testimony. I have been able to watch part

of it on TV and I was in for part of the remainder.

Mr. Holassie.

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes.

Mr. MCHENRY. You are a senior?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes, I am.

Mr. MCHENRY. Where are you going to college?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Well, I am waiting for decision letters to be

mailed back, so——

Mr. MCHENRY. Where did you apply to?

Mr. HOLASSIE. I applied to University of Central Florida, University of South Florida, University of Miami, Florida Atlantic University, Florida Institute of Technology—[laughter.]

A lot of Florida schools. [Laughter.]

Mr. MCHENRY. Was it because of Snowmageddon? Was it because of all the snow we had last year?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Somewhat. I just love the environment.

Mr. MCHENRY. Well, that is great. So how many colleges did you

apply to?

Mr. HOLASSIE. About six or seven. Bethune-Cookman is another

one I am applying to.

Mr. MCHENRY. OK.

Ms. Alvarez.

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes.

Mr. MCHENRY. Where do you want to go to college? I know it is

a little early, but I bet you know a couple places.

Ms. ALVAREZ. I know Mount St. Mary’s and, like he said, FIU,

Florida International. That is a nice school.

Mr. MCHENRY. Oh, excellent. Excellent. OK.

60

So, Mr. Holassie, so the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship, what has

it meant to you? Just sum it up for us.

Mr. HOLASSIE. Life-changing experience. I wouldn’t be the person

that I am right here before you all if it wasn’t for the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program.

Mr. MCHENRY. Life-changing?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes. It changed me as an individual, as a person.

Mr. MCHENRY. Why? Why? Why did it change you? It is just

money. How does this actually change your life?

Mr. HOLASSIE. As I stated in my testimony, it is not just what

this program does academically, but it is how it impacts an individual through education. And that is what it has done for me.

Mr. MCHENRY. OK.

Ms. Alvarez, you mentioned that you had parental involvement

that actually made this happen.

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes.

Mr. MCHENRY. Are there other folks in your family that have

been involved in your life and encouraged you?

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes, all of my family; my grandparents, my uncles,

my aunts. All of my family have always been encouraging me to

go for my future and make the best out of it.

Mr. MCHENRY. Mr. Holassie, is that your same experience, others in your family encouraging you?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes. Others in my family certainly encouraged

me.

Mr. MCHENRY. OK, OK. Well, it is interesting because——

So, Mr. Holassie, when you came in to sixth grade, you said you

had to repeat sixth grade.

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes, I had to because the public school system basically failed me. I wasn’t successful in the public school system.

Mr. MCHENRY. Are you now prepared to go to college?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes, I am.

Mr. MCHENRY. All right.

Ms. Alvarez.

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes.

Mr. MCHENRY. How long have you been receiving the D.C. Scholarship?

Ms. ALVAREZ. Since 2004.

Mr. MCHENRY. Since 2004. Was that first year——

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes.

Mr. MCHENRY [continuing]. Really tough?

Ms. ALVAREZ. No, it wasn’t.

Mr. MCHENRY. I think you are bragging, too.

Well, you know, not just having your parents involved makes

such a huge difference, but, Ms. Alvarez, you mentioned that Sacred Heart School is the only bilingual Catholic school in the D.C.

area.

Ms. ALVAREZ. Correct.

Mr. MCHENRY. How important is it for you to have that choice

of having a bilingual school?

Ms. ALVAREZ. It is important because at the same time I don’t

lose my background of Spanish from where I come from, but yet

I get the language of English. So I still have both languages in my

life.

61

Mr. MCHENRY. So I also asked Mr. Holassie this. Ms. Alvarez,

are you prepared—I asked if he was prepared to go to college. Are

you prepared to go to high school?

Ms. ALVAREZ. Yes, certainly.

Mr. MCHENRY. And where are you going to go?

Ms. ALVAREZ. I got two acceptance letters, one from St. John’s

and one from Carroll, but I am choosing Carroll.

Mr. MCHENRY. You think that is a good choice, Mr. Holassie?

Mr. HOLASSIE. Yes.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you for your testimony. I know it is tough

to sit before this committee and have folks lecture you or ask you

questions or both, but thank you so much for being an advocate for

opportunity. Thank you.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. McHenry.

The Chair would recognize the distinguished gentleman from

Connecticut, Mr. Murphy.

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and, again,

congratulations on your first hearing.

Congratulations to all of you, to Mr. Holassie and Ms. Alvarez

specifically. You have done a wonderful job this morning, and it is

a reflection on your commitment to not only your own education,

but the education of all of your friends and neighbors. And to Ms.

Jackson and Ms. Bennett, I appreciate you being here as well.

Let me just first reassure Ms. Jackson and Ms. Bennett there

has been some conversation about, given the uncertainty right now,

over the funding going forward, would there be a process in place

to make sure that children that are currently in the program now

would stay in the program; and we have gotten assurances from

the administration that within the debate going on in Congress

today that the administration is going to do everything in its power

to make sure that students that are currently in the program will

be able to stay. And I think many of us will be very interested in

continuing that conversation.

Let me just ask a simple question. When we talk about this program, this is clearly about continuing your commitment to your

education, but it is also about making the public school system better. That is the argument for this program. And I would just be interested in your assessment over the—now, you guys have only

been in it for a few years, but as parents and as advocates, you

have been watching this program for a series of years. I would be

interested as to your assessment as to what this program, over the

5-years that it has been in place, has meant to the D.C. public

school system. Have you seen the D.C. public school system get better as a result of this program? Simple question. Maybe I will go

first to Ms. Bennett and Ms. Jackson, then turn it over to you guys,

because you certainly have friends and neighbors that are still in

the D.C. public school system. I would be interested as to what you

think it has meant for that system.

Ms. BENNETT. To be honest, I see the D.C. public school system

is attempting to try, but to be frankly honest, from what I have

seen, and this is just a few schools, I can’t say for all, the few

schools in my area, Ward 8, no, they haven’t gotten better. They

are attempting, but no.

Mr. MURPHY. Ms. Jackson.

62

Ms. JACKSON. I agree as well. In certain wards the schools seem

to be I don’t want to say pushed aside, but they are not given as

much attention as in schools that would be in the wards where the

majority of these schools are attended by white children. The

schools in Ward 7, Ward 8, and some schools in Ward 6 are underperforming schools because they don’t get the attention that they

should, and that didn’t just happen; it has been that way for years.

I have lived in both Ward 8 and Ward 7, and those schools in those

wards where my daughter would have to attend now are still

underperforming schools. So I see that the D.C. public school system are making efforts to make that system better, but now, as it

stands, I still would not want my daughter to attend the D.C. public school system.

Mr. MURPHY. How about you guys? When you talk to your

friends who have been in the public school system, do you get the

sense that it has gotten better over the last 5 years? Ms. Alvarez.

Ms. ALVAREZ. I agree with Ms. Bennett and Ms. Jackson. I can

see that they are trying to make the schools better, but they are

not really putting their best foot forward to go all the way and

make them the best that they could be. But they are trying.

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Holassie.

Mr. HOLASSIE. I agree with Ms. Bennett and Ms. Jackson. It

seems that they are attempting, they are trying to make the public

school system better, but it is just not to the standards and expectations that it should be at that I would say, OK, I would go back

into the public school system and I would be successful, I would be

great.

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you for your comments. The idea, obviously,

behind a voucher system is that it pressures the public school system not just to try, but to actually get better in the end. And the

reason I asked that question is because the theory sometimes

doesn’t always match up to the reality. And as Mr. Cummings so

eloquently stated, the public school system in this Nation cannot

get better, no matter how many more vouchers that you put into

the system, if they don’t have the resources to do it, if they don’t

have the attention to the schools and the neighborhoods that need

to get better.

And why it is so maddening for some of us to be in Washington

today is that while this is, I think, a very, very useful debate, in

other rooms around this capital we are having a debate about sucking billions of dollars out of those very schools that we are asking

to get better, and it seems an impossible situation to put schools

across this city and across this country in.

And I really appreciate you guys being here. You have been incredibly eloquent and I look forward to the rest of the debate.

Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Murphy.

And on that I think everyone can agree. We cannot thank you

enough for your attendance, for your eloquence, as Mr. Murphy

cited, for your willingness to share your experience with us.

What I would propose at this point, selfishly, I would like to

come thank you in person, so we will take a short recess as the second panel comes forward, and I will be heading down toward you

63

to thank you in person and write notes so you two can go back to

school if you want to, OK? Thank you. We will be in short recess.

[Recess.]

Mr. GOWDY. We will now recognize our second panel. I will introduce them as a whole, then we will take the oath and begin the

questioning. Let me welcome you and thank you for not only being

here, but also for letting the children go first and perhaps go back

to school, or maybe not.

Mr. Kevin Chavous is the chairman of the Black Alliance for

Education Options. Mr. Chavous is also a former D.C. City Council

member and a former chairman of the Education Committee.

Dr. Patrick Wolf is a professor and 21st Century Chair in School

Choice, Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas. Dr. Wolf was the principle investigator for impact evaluation of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program through a contract with the U.S. Department of Education.

Ms. Betty North is the principal and CEO of the Preparatory

School of the District of Columbia.

Dr. Ramona Edelin is the executive director of the D.C. Association of Public Charter Schools.

Welcome to you all. And I will administer the oath. I would ask

you to please rise and raise your right hands.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. GOWDY. Let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in

the affirmative.

Thank you, and you may be seated.

Thanks to all four of you. I will recognize myself for 5 minutes

and then I will recognize Mr. Davis.

Dr. Edelin, were you present for the first panel?

Oh, I am sorry. I apologize. If you couldn’t tell, it is my first one.

And if you can’t tell yet, you will before it is all said and done. So

despite my overeagerness to ask questions, we really would rather

hear from you. So we will start with you, Mr. Chavous, and we will

go in order from my left to right. Thank you.

STATEMENTS OF KEVIN CHAVOUS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BLACK

ALLIANCE FOR EDUCATION OPTIONS; DR. PATRICK WOLF,

PROFESSOR AND 21ST CENTURY CHAIR IN SCHOOL CHOICE,

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REFORM AT THE UNIVERSITY

OF ARKANSAS; BETTY NORTH, PRINCIPAL AND CEO OF THE

PREPARATORY SCHOOL OF DC; AND DR. RAMONA EDELIN,

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DC ASSOCIATION OF PUBLIC

CHARTER SCHOOLS

STATEMENT OF KEVIN CHAVOUS

Mr. CHAVOUS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Davis and Congresswoman Norton, members of the

committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before you today. With your indulgence, I would like to use my time

this morning to offer some perspective about the importance of the

D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program not just for District residents, but also as it relates to the national fight to ensure that

each and every American school child receive a high quality education.

64

As you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, I served on the Council of the

District of Columbia for 12 years, and over half of that time I

chaired the Council’s Education Committee. I am proud of the fact

that during my chairmanship I was able to help usher school choice

into the District, first by way of charter schools and then through

the Opportunity Scholarship Program.

As to the creation of the Opportunity Scholarship Program, let

me be very clear. Mr. Chairman, this program was not forced upon

or foisted on the residents of the District of Columbia. I know; I

was there. The three-sector initiative was a collaborative undertaking between the city and the Federal Government. We insisted on

the three-sector approach, which provided equal funding for D.C.

public schools, D.C. public charter schools, and the OSP. We

worked very hard—and when I say we, I mean then-Mayor Tony

Williams, School Board President Peggy Cooper Cafritz, and I—we

worked very, very hard to develop a program that fit the unique

educational needs of the District, where not one dime was diverted

from public schools. Anyone who suggests otherwise is being fundamentally and practically dishonest about the history and origin

of the OSP.

Today, the students who testified have spoken directly about the

positive impact of the OSP on their lives. For them and thousands

of other District children, the OSP has been a lifeline for not just

them, but for their families. Without this program, as Ron Holassie

said, they wouldn’t have made it. It is just that simple.

The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program sends a clear message to families, to children, and to our community: If you are lowincome, if you are stuck in a school that is failing, that is unsafe,

and that no amount of money can fix right away, we are not going

to make an experiment of you, we are going to help you; and we

are going to do it not 5 years from today, but today. We are going

to give you a chance at success. And the essence of the program

is in its name, opportunity.

The D.C. OSP has provided scholarships along the lowest income

D.C. children to attend better schools, private schools that are

mere blocks away from the public schools that long ago stopped

serving their needs. The program is open to everyone; there is no

discrimination, there is no cherry-picking.

And the results are stunning. Graduation rates are 91 percent

for those who use the scholarships. That is 42 percent higher than

traditional public schools. Improved reading scores for students, parental satisfaction is overwhelming. And the U.S. Department of

Education, as you will hear from Patrick Wolf, said that the program was one of the most effective programs they have ever studied. By any measure, by any test, by any rational standard, this

hearing should be about how we can expand this program not in

Washington, DC, but in other parts of the Nation. Instead, by a

cruel twist of political fate, we are here trying to save the very program that should be a model for our country.

Which leads me to the final point I need to make during this testimony: the importance of the OSP in the larger national educational reform landscape. Since leaving the Council, I have been

deeply immersed in the national education reform movement. InVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:57 Jul 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\67175.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
65

deed, I have become a student of what ails our schools and what

does or what does not work for our kids.

The truth is we know how to educate children; we know what

works for them. But often we don’t have the will or courage to truly

put our children first when we make policy that affects them. Plus,

our over-allegiance to a one-size-fits-all approach to system reform

has blinded us to the reality of many of today’s kids’ lives. Yes, we

need to fix D.C. public schools, and many other school districts

around the country. But we also need to save individual children

today, children who can’t wait for the 3 to 5 year reform plan du

jour.

During the civil rights movement, Dr. Martin Luther King talked

about the fierce urgency of now. People should not have to wait to

get their freedom, he argued; they are entitled to those freedoms

now, not in the distant future.

Today we are engaged in a similar freedom fight, one involving

ensuring that all American children receive the education that they

deserve. Like Dr. King’s battle cry, our children are entitled to receive a quality education today, not tomorrow.

The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program has responded to

that clarion call by offering a quality education to children in this

city who otherwise would be trapped in failing schools. I applaud

those of you on this committee who support its reauthorization, and

urge all of you to join us in this fight to educate each and every

child by any means necessary. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Chavous follows:]

66

67

68

69

70

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Chavous.

Dr. Wolf, we will recognize you now for your 5 minute opening

statement.

STATEMENT OF PATRICK WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Chairman Gowdy, Ranking Member Davis, distinguished members, I am pleased to be with you today to discuss my

professional judgment regarding what we know about the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program [OSP]. I served as the principle investigator of the research team hired by the U.S. Department of

Education to conduct an independent evaluation of the OSP.

Since lotteries determine if eligible students did or did not receive an Opportunity Scholarship, we were able to use a gold

standard experimental research design to determine what impact

the OSP had on participants.

What did we find? The students in our study graduated from

high school at significantly higher rates as a result of the OSP. As

portrayed in exhibit 1, using an Opportunity Scholarship increased

the likelihood of a student graduating by 21 percentage points,

from 70 percent to 91 percent. In scientific terms, we are more

than 99 percent confident that access to school choice through the

Opportunity Scholarship Program was the reason why OSP students graduated at these much higher rates. Students who applied

to the program from public schools that had been labeled in need

of improvement were the highest service priority of the OSP. They

graduated at a rate that was 20 percentage points higher as a result of using a scholarship.

Evidence that students achieved higher test scores due to the

OSP is somewhat less conclusive than the evidence that they graduated at higher rates. Our analysis of test score data across all

years of the study suggests that OSP students likely benefited academically from the program in reading, but probably not in math.

The statistical probability that the OSP reading gains we observed

were somehow false discoveries of mere statistical noise was 9 percent after 2 years, 1 percent after 3 years, and 6 percent after 4

years. We had set 5 percent uncertainty, or 95 percent confidence,

as the critical level for judging an observed difference to be a conclusive impact of the program. The reading gains from the OSP exceeded that high bar in year three of the study, but failed just

short, by 1 percentage point, in the final year, when hundreds of

students had graduated out of the study and, therefore, shrunk our

sample.

Skeptics might claim that the positive impacts of the Opportunity Scholarship Program on reading achievement in the final

analysis are not real, but there is only a 6 percent chance that we

would have observed such test score gains for the OSP students if

in fact the program had no effect. Parents were more satisfied with

their child’s school as a result of the OSP. The proportion of parents who assigned a high grade of A or B to their child’s school was

10 percentage points higher based on scholarship use by their

child. We can be 99 percent confident this was a true impact of the

program. Parents also viewed their children as safer in school if

they participated in the OSP.

71

The U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Evaluation [NCEE], has sponsored a total of 14 experimental studies of education programs, including our study of the

OSP. Nine of the other 13 evaluations of such interventions as student mentoring, reading programs, and teacher training reported

no statistically significant impacts of the program on any student

outcome in any year.

Another student of an after-school initiative found that the program had negative effects on student reaching achievement that

balanced out positive effects on math. The clear positive impact of

the OSP on high school graduation makes it one of only four educational programs to demonstrate effectiveness in an experiment

sponsored by the NCEE, and it generated the second largest positive impact uncovered to date.

Moreover, the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program has proven

effective at boosting the outcome that matters most: educational attainment. President Obama, in a speech to the U.S. Chamber of

Commerce 1 year ago today, stated emphatically that graduating

from high school is an economic imperative. Both the President and

Secretary Duncan have stressed the importance of raising the graduation rate, because graduating from high school is closely associated with a variety of positive personal and social outcomes, including higher lifetime earnings and lower rates of unemployment and

crime.

Since each additional high school graduate saves the Nation an average of $260,000 due to increased taxes on higher earnings and

lower law enforcement costs, the 449 additional high school graduates due to the operation of the OSP will save our Nation over

$116 million, meaning the program more than pays for itself.

The research record on the first federally sponsored K–12 scholarship program is filled with good news: the students definitely are

graduating at much higher rates; they appear to be reading better;

parents are more satisfied and live in less fear for their child’s safety. Now it is up to Congress and the President to decide if additional disadvantaged families in our Nation’s capital should receive

access to the benefits from this demonstrably successful education

program.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wolf follows:]

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Dr. Wolf.

Now we will recognize Ms. North for her 5 minute opening statement.

STATEMENT OF BETTY NORTH

Ms. NORTH. Hello, distinguished members of the committee. My

name is Betty Fenwick-North, and I am the Founder of Preparatory School of the District of Columbia.

The Preparatory School of the District of Columbia is a licensed,

non-profit, private educational institute. We opened our doors in

1984 as a child development center and, over the last 26 years, as

a result of the needs of our parents and students, have expanded

from now to then to the 10th grade.

Our mission is to give our students the academic foundation that

would allow them to be successful in life in a safe, caring, and

structured environment that utilized the small classroom learning.

We provide the intimate attention that a lot of today’s youth require in order to reach the educational aptitude necessary for success. Our wonderful staff is able to adopt to each student’s unique

cognitive learning style, while placing emphasis on analyzing, reading, language, articulation, and writing. In addition to the academics, it is the aim of The Preparatory School of D.C. to assist the

character building, developing the ability to preserve, integrity, and

respect for themselves and their community.

The Preparatory School of D.C. is a family first school. We strive

to instill good family values in each of our students. A majority of

our students come from low income families. A number of our families have multiple children close to school age who would not have

the opportunity to receive an education from a private institute if

it were not for the Opportunity Scholarship. The Opportunity

Scholarship Program has made it possible for many low income

families to have more options to achieve and acquire quality education.

Over 150 students have been able to attend The Preparatory

School of D.C. solely because of the Opportunity Scholarship Program, an opportunity that has provided a sound and enriching educational experience. Students who attend The Preparatory School

of D.C. range from those taking AP courses to those students who

have been diagnosed with learning disabilities, as well as those

who have been documented disciplinary problems that have involved the courts.

And as many parents, if they were able to testify, would all tell

you, as they have constantly told us and we have heard from them,

if it were not for the Opportunity Scholarship Program, many of

these students would not have been able to experience and discovery that they are not just a statistic; they are individuals with

needs that can and will be met.

Today’s children are our future. Let us help you guide them and

prepare them for the next level. The more options we provide these

parents and their families, the better choices they can make for

their situations; and the better choices they make, the better their

chances of success.

In closing, I would like to say that I believe the Opportunity

Scholarship has opened doors for parents to have choices for their

85

children’s education, has empowered parents with the necessary financial sources to become more involved and influential in their

children’s education, and the Opportunity Scholarship has provided

students and exposed the experience and the academic culture that

private, religious, secular schools offer. At the end of the day, parents of youth who come from financially stable families have

choices in which schools they would like to attend. Why can’t parents of youth who come from low income homes also have the same

choices provided to them through the Opportunity Scholarship?

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. North follows:]

86

87

88

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Ms. North.

We will recognize Dr. Edelin for her 5 minute opening statement.

STATEMENT OF RAMONA EDELIN

Ms. EDELIN. Thank you, Chairman Gowdy, Ranking Member

Davis, Congresswoman Norton, other members of the committee. I

am Ramona Edelin, executive director of the D.C. Association of

Chartered Public Schools, the membership organization that represents the interest of public charter schools in D.C. I am honored

to come before you today to share the progress and the promise of

public charter schools in Washington, DC.

You may be well aware that the U.S. Congress helped to create

the environment for charter schools in D.C. with the passage of the

School Reform Act of 1995. The number of students enrolled in

D.C. charter schools has grown steadily from a few hundred students in 1996 to one of the largest concentrations in any city in the

country. Currently, our charter schools serve about 28,000 students, which comprises 38 percent of all of the public school children; and this number is expected to increase in the fall.

D.C. charter schools serve students of all ages and abilities, from

3 years old to adult learners. During the 2009–10 school year, 87

percent of charter school students were African-American, 9 percent were Latino, 3 percent were Caucasian, 65 percent were low

income, 10 percent were special needs students, and 3 percent were

English language learners.

Families in Washington, DC, have the choice to choose from 52

unique programs at 93 locations throughout the city. Offerings include school programs focusing on bilingual immersion; math,

science and technology; the performing arts; public policy; character and leaders; Latin and the classics; virtual and online learning; media arts; Montessori; college prep; and a boarding program;

among many other options.

Every charter school offers open enrollment to any D.C. resident,

regardless of their neighborhood or previous academic achievement.

Spaces are available on a first-come, first-served basis; and when

there are more students interested in a school than there are

spaces available, charter schools must hold a lottery so that every

student has an equal opportunity for those spaces.

The D.C. Public Charter School Board, the city’s independent

charter authorizer, recently accepted 19 applications to open new

charter schools for fall of 2012. Although parent interest and demand remain high, the growth in charter school opportunities may

have begun to plateau. There are fewer waiting lists now than

there were in years past; however, several of our schools still have

hundreds of students on their waiting lists.

Charter school performance and accountability from the beginning was clear that the greater autonomy afforded charter schools

came with a price of greater accountability for performance. We see

the evidence of what these charter school options have meant: the

students that would otherwise be restricted to their neighborhood

schools. We have seen students come from one, two, or three grade

levels behind in one school year. We have seen students excel far

beyond their grade level and take part in experiences they never

imagined possible.

89

We have heard testimony from young African-American and

Latino male students who have said they would not be alive, much

less graduating from high school and going on to college with tens

of thousands of dollars in scholarships. Every June we witness at

least 90 percent of the seniors at Thurgood Marshall Academy in

Southeast; Washington Math, Science & Technology, Friendship

Collegiate and Cesar Chavez in Northeast; and Maya Angelou and

Hospitality in Northwest graduate from high school. Last year, more than 750 students accepted more than $15 million in college scholarships. Many of them were the first in their

families to go to college and many took with them more than

$100,000. These are statistics we can support and perpetuate for

generations to come.

I see my time running out, so I will point out that there are consequences to lack of performance. This is mentioned in my written

testimony. I would like to mention, before closing, that under the

able leadership of our new mayor, Vincent Gray, we are now coming together as one city to leverage the strengths and address the

weaknesses of both sectors of public education in this city as a

whole. These are an array of life-changing options, and performance accountability going along with it, that we certainly hope this

Congress will choose to continue to support.

Thank you for the opportunity to share.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Edelin follows:]

90

91

92

93

94

95

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Dr. Edelin.

Mr. Chavous, you were clear, but I want to give you another

chance to be absolutely clear so we can shatter this facade that

supporting the OSP diverts public moneys away from the public

school system and the charter school system. In your opening statement you addressed that. Can you do it one more time? Does this

program divert any money from the public school system or the

charter school system?

Mr. CHAVOUS. No, it does not. When we were in discussions

about this program, there were a couple of things that are relevant

to that question. One is we wanted to make sure that we lifted all

boats. We recognized that we had to proceed on two tracks; that

while D.C. public schools were struggling and the D.C. charter

school movement was improving, we wanted to make sure that this

Federal partnership, this unique Federal partnership provided

funding for those two sectors at the same time that we provided

money for the Opportunity Scholarship Program.

We also recognized the argument that some people were making

that it would take money away. So we held D.C. public schools

harmless. So for every child that they lost that went to the program, they still got the per pupil funding dollars to D.C. public

school. So at the end of the day they did not lose dollars when this

program was started.

Mr. GOWDY. Which raises the very interesting question that my

colleague from Illinois, Representative Walsh, asked this morning,

which is who are the opponents of this program and what is their

motivation? And I know I am asking you to assign motives to other

people, but you have an experience with this program in the District of Columbia that some of us do not. So if it not going to divert

money and the parents want it and the students want it, where is

the opposition?

Mr. CHAVOUS. Well, one other thing about diversion of money, at

the end of the day, the students will be forced to go back to D.C.

public schools, it would add money to the bottom line. We have to

be mindful of that. And in terms of the opposition, look, people

don’t know what they don’t know, and there is a lot of fear, and

there is a lot of other interests, to me, that trump the interests of

what is best for individual children; there is politics, there is socioeconomic dynamics, there is this notion of supporting only what we

know, what we are used to.

I am of a mind, and I took this position when I became a public

official chairing the Education Committee on the Council, that I

would support anything that would help a child or a group of children learn; anything. Because, at the end of the day, when we have

an achievement gap in this country between African-American children and children of color and white children that over 30 years

has yet to be closed, in spite of all the investment we have put into

education, we have to proceed on those two tracks.

On the one track we need to do what we can to improve our public schools, our traditional public schools so that all children benefit, but, on the other hand, we need to make sure that these individual children, like the two you heard from earlier today, that

they have a shot at this piece of American pie.

96

And I am struck by the testimony, when we had a hearing, a

City Council hearing on the voucher proposal, scholarship proposal,

when I was on the Council several years ago, by a women who testified who said she had one child—she said, Mr. Chavous, we have

seen you hire some of these new superintendents, and when you

hired the previous superintendent my oldest son was entering seventh grade and the superintendent said they needed 3 to 5 years.

Well, the schools didn’t get better and I lost my oldest son because he was in a bad school. Now my youngest son is about to

enter seventh grade and you have another new superintendent saying, give us another 3 to 5 years. I need this program for that reason, because I need help with my child today.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you.

Dr. Edelin, I want to commend you on the work you have done

with the charter school system and again apologize for my lack of

familiarity with all things District of Columbia, but there were opponents to that program when it began too, weren’t there?

Ms. EDELIN. Yes, sir, there were some opponents to that program, and one of the reasons was that home rule and respect for

local political and policy leaders and educators in D.C. seemed to

have been abrogated by some of the earlier proponents who went

over their heads and went out of their way, in some instances, to

speak disrespectfully to and about them, and came to the Congress;

and that did result in some resentment among the local people in

D.C., political figures, policy figures, and educators to the fact of

the way that it was done.

I am happy to say that today much of that early resentment has

been ameliorated because the successes are so stunning in some of

our schools with the same population of young people everybody in

the country is so desperately concerned about. That achievement

gap has been removed. Those young people do have new chances

in a public school setting, a public charter school setting.

Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Wolf, my time is up, so I am going to ask the

question as quickly as I can, and you can answer quickly or not,

if you want. My colleague this morning cited another example of

an elected official who was given the opportunity, responsibility to

make a decision for his children. And I am not going to name any

names, but lots of high ranking government officials, including

Members of Congress, have to make the decision on private school,

public school, home school. Why should that only be a decision that

rich folk get to make?

Ms. NORTH. Well, personally, I don’t think that, as a parent, you

should be able to make the decision where you want your child to

go, and through the funding sources that a low income parent will

be able to receive through the Opportunity Scholarship opens that

door for them to make that same decision, that choice that he

made, where his child can go.

Mr. GOWDY. All right, thank you.

I will now recognize the distinguished gentleman from Illinois,

Mr. Davis.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and let me

thank each one of our witnesses. I find this discussion to be quite

intriguing. I have always believed and have always understood that

the greatest equalizer that has ever existed in this country is someVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:57 Jul 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\67175.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
97

thing called public education, that public education is the greatest

equalizer that has existed in this country.

Mr. Chavous, I am very familiar with your record. I have

watched you and observed your work as you were a member of the

D.C. Council. I have also been aware of your work in terms of national education reform and the efforts to provide opportunities

outside even the District of Columbia, and I commend you for it.

As a matter of fact, I was at one of the schools that you have

been involved with 2 weeks ago and had a great time with the students and some of the faculty there. And let me agree with your

point when you say that we don’t have the will or the courage, because I think that the best way to really improve failing schools,

especially schools that are underperforming, is to not only provide

a certain amount of resource that they need, but also to promote

something that I call serious parental and community involvement.

I have a school in my congressional district where just yesterday

we honored the principal because they have something called a 90–

90–90 school. All of the kids live in what is called the North

Lawndale community. All of them, more than 90 percent of them,

are not only low income, but 90 percent or more qualify for food

subsidies and free breakfasts and subsidized lunch. They, right

now, happen to be the best performing school in the State of Illinois. I used to live on the block where they are located, as a matter

of fact. The houses on one side of the block were torn down to build

the school. I lived in a house on the other side of the block.

Some of the fear that some of us have when you start talking

about all of the different approaches to education, we don’t want

to diminish public education, because every person has to go

through the public systems; they don’t have any options about not

going to the public systems. So I appreciate providing opportunities

for some students. But I don’t want to take away the effort to make

sure that every student, no matter where he or she might live,

have this opportunity for the best education that we can provide

for them.

So when you talk about, Mr. Chairman, why some people might

appear to be opposed, they are not opposed to education, but they

are afraid that there might be some retraction, that there might be

some going backward; that diminishing of focus on all to the benefit of the few or some may have a tendency to produce that kind

of trend.

Do either one of you have any feeling about that?

Mr. CHAVOUS. First of all, ranking member, thank you so much

for those comments and your work in terms of helping with schools

in Chicago. You and I know about some of the things you have

helped with for those children, and that is much appreciated.

On that point, this is the analogy I like to use. It pains me what

I see happening not just in D.C. public schools, but traditional public schools around the country. We need to focus on that. But the

analogy I use is the house on fire and we have to proceed on different tracks. There are firemen who have to go put that fire out

and there are firemen who have to go inside that burning building

and pull some of those kids out. And you know what? You may not

pull everyone out of that building, but you are going to pull out as

many as you can to stabilize the situation and to save lives.

98

The dire deficits of our children, particularly children of color in

this country, particularly African-American men in this country,

when some cities like the city I grew up in, Indianapolis, 80 percent of the Black boys in their high school drop out; in Baltimore

it is 70 percent. Because of those deficits that exist, I think, yes,

we have to put the fire out and do what we can to restore and improve our traditional public schools.

But by goodness, Mr. Ranking Member, we need to support any

and all means that are going to educate even one child. And I don’t

care if it is charter schools, traditional public schools, if it is scholarship programs, if it is tax credits, if it is Magnet schools, if it is

specialty schools. I don’t care what it is. I really believe that by any

means necessary should be by any means necessary when it comes

to the children that we are trying to save. And that is my view.

And I tell you I think that these parents you hear from, they

have that view, because when it comes to individual children and

individual parents who want the best for their child or their children, they should not be penalized based on zip code. And I think,

unfortunately, that is the reality.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Ms. NORTH. Mr. Davis, I must say that we, as—well, I guess

speaking for the non-public school sector, we do ask for and get assistance from the D.C. public schools through the Federal entitlement for the kids who attend our schools. So, in return, because

some of the service, because we are small and private, that we

can’t provide these students, we are still getting assistance through

the D.C. public school.

So we are not saying that we don’t need the D.C. public schools;

we are just saying that we need each other. We need each other

to find out how and ways of bringing our children and raising our

children as a community, and not just sometimes as an individual;

we have to do it as a group. And through this effort all of us can

make it possible for some children. And like he said, we might not

get all of the kids, but the kids that we do provide the services for,

we try to do the best that we can at those given times.

Thank you.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, can I briefly address the ranking

member’s question?

Mr. GOWDY. Sure.

Mr. WOLF. Ranking Member Davis, there is a substantial

amount of evidence that the pressure of competition from school

choice programs actually leads traditional public schools to improve

in response and generate positive outcomes for students, thus creating a rising tide that lifts all boats. So, really, the idea of expanding choice and improving public education is really a false choice.

The two can, and often do, work in close tandem.

Ms. EDELIN. If I could also, Mr. Chairman, just quickly. The

charter schools in D.C. explicitly, through our Association, seek to

find out what works, for whom, under what conditions, and to

share best practices with DCPS and with other urban public school

systems around the country. That is one of our explicit goals, to

benefit all of the children.

Mr. GOWDY. Yes, ma’am. Thank you.

99

I thank the gentleman and I would recognize now the gentleman

from Arizona, Dr. Gosar.

Dr. GOSAR. Yes. Thank you very, very much.

I hear a common denominator here involving parents, and making that a success story. With that being said, Dr. Edelin, do you

support the multi-prong aspect that is currently going on in D.C.

wholeheartedly in the education of our children?

Ms. EDELIN. Dr. Gosar, I am here as executive director of the

D.C. Association of Charter Public Schools and my message is

about the charter schools here today.

Dr. GOSAR. When we are talking about the education of children

and being science-based, outcomes are everything. Wouldn’t we acknowledge that we have a fundamental mechanism that is actually

working here, and wouldn’t we want to acknowledge support for

that scholarship type program?

Ms. EDELIN. We support everything that is working to bring a

quality education to the children of D.C. The only evidence I can

speak to directly is that of the charter public schools.

Dr. GOSAR. If you are trying to get results based from the charter

schools, have you not reached out to the private schools to find out

what is working for them?

Ms. EDELIN. Actually, I did. In my first year in this role, I

reached out to the independent and private schools to find out how

they do evaluation and assessment, because improving school quality is one of the primary pillars of the work with our Association.

So I have reached out to them. I have also reached out to high performing DCPS schools and to other sources around the country for

information about best practices.

Dr. GOSAR. Would you say, then, in a followup, that they are a

success model?

Ms. EDELIN. That, I cannot attest to myself. I can attest to the

quality of the charter schools myself. And I also have reached out

to our public charter school board, the authorizer, to get data they

can stand behind with respect to the excellence of the schools and

the shortcomings of the schools. So I can speak to charter schools.

Dr. GOSAR. Well, I am finding this frustrating because, as a dentist, I am working on the premise of treatments that work and repetitions. So I am frustrated by seeing the modalities of vertical

learning, and not going horizontally to instill and work with parts

of education systems that are working. And I find it frustrating

that I see your educational model going vertical and not including

those in the dialog horizontally with all the rest of the educators.

Is that a fair assumption?

Ms. EDELIN. With all respect, sir, I would say no. I have reached

out and I think the charter schools singularly seek collaboration in

D.C. across all lines as far as quality and best practices are concerned. We have made every effort to form what I call a seamless

collaboration across all the sectors so that all the children of D.C.

can get the benefit of the best of what is known. It is not always

reciprocated, but we will keep trying.

Dr. GOSAR. Last question for you. Have you benefited from the

voucher system to the charter schools and has there been a financial, as well as educational, uplift based upon that program?

100

Ms. EDELIN. I am not aware of any financial implications for

charter schools. I may be wrong about that, but I am not aware of

any financial implications. And I have not been the recipient of,

though I have asked, any best practices or any information about

what is working with particular groups of people as we are sorting

out within the charter schools with the express intention of sharing

that information with all of the school systems involving our children.

There is a crisis in this country with children of color from impoverished backgrounds and their learning, and we are actively engaged in finding out what works and sharing it, and I cannot say

that we have been the recipient of similar kind of outreach.

Dr. GOSAR. Well, have you not received $104 million in regards

to that because of the three-sector approach?

Ms. EDELIN. From the Federal funding?

Dr. GOSAR. Yes.

Ms. EDELIN. Over 3 years would that be a figure? I am not aware

of 1 year’s worth.

Dr. GOSAR. Since its inception.

Ms. EDELIN. I don’t have that figure since its inception. I do

know charter schools, as a part of the three-sector approach, have

received funding at least for the 3-years I have been with the organization. Yes, sir, they have.

Dr. GOSAR. Thank you very much.

I yield my time.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Dr. Gosar.

We will now recognize the gentlelady from the District of Columbia, Representative Holmes Norton.

Ms. NORTON. My questions are mainly directed to Dr. Wolf. I do

want to thank everyone for your testimony, very important testimony for our record.

I want to correct the record, Mr. Chavous, where you said that

somehow there was double funding, that D.C. public schools were

held harmless. To the contrary. That money travels with the child,

so if a child leaves the D.C. public school system and goes to a

charter school, that per pupil funding goes to the charter school.

And that, Mr. Wolf, is the only circumstance in which competition occurs, because then the public schools are competing not only

for the child, but for the same funding. That is not the case with

private schools. There is no competition with private schools because you don’t have that nexus of funding.

To my colleagues, I want to say the mantra on the other side

that you have said to my constituents every child deserves a private school choice. If that is your view, why have you not brought

a private school bill to the floor of the House so that every child,

including the children in your district, can get a private school

choice? Instead, you are ripping money from the public schools of

the District of Columbia and of the United States of America.

Mr. Wolf, according to the Department of Education’s final report

on the Opportunity Scholarship Program, 2010 June, that is 2

months ago issued, ‘‘There was no evidence that the Opportunity

Scholarship Program affected student achievement as measured by

standardized reading and math tests.’’ If that is the case, how can

101

you claim that education attainment was enhanced, given this official report from the government?

Mr. WOLF. Representative Norton, educational attainment is distinct from educational achievement. Educational achievement refers to performance on assessments and test scores. Educational attainment refers to how far a child goes in the educational system,

their attainment of years of schooling, their attainment of educational degrees. That is the important distinction.

Ms. NORTON. Well, I can understand that distinction, but you do

understand—first let me say, do the children in the private school

program take the same standardized tests as the students at

DCPS?

Mr. WOLF. Representative Norton, for purposes of our evaluation,

they did take the same test. That was central to our evaluation.

Ms. NORTON. They did not take the same tests, performance tests

that the children in the D.C. public schools have to take every

year?

Mr. WOLF. Representative Norton, they did initially; it was written into the law that we had to use the same assessments used by

D.C. public schools at the year of enactment of the law, and that

was the SAT–9. Later, DCPS changed and adopted a criterion reference test. But we continue to administer the specified test to both

the OSP students and the control——

Ms. NORTON. Well, the answer to my question is no, they do not

take and have not taken the same standardized tests. The charter

schools do take the same standardized tests. So when you hear

comparisons, the comparisons I have made, those are real comparisons with real students and, indeed, with students who were often

of a lower economic level than the students in the D.C. public

schools.

Now, you say that there was, in your testimony, 12 percentage

points higher graduation rates of students in the private schools

from students in the public schools. Are you aware that the charter

school students have a 25 percent better graduation rate than children in the D.C. public schools? How would you account for that

difference?

Mr. WOLF. Representative Norton, I am not familiar with that

particular study, but one-third of the students in our control group

were actually in D.C. charter schools, and they contributed to the

overall average graduation rate of 70 percent for our control group.

The OSP students, when you factor out those who never used their

scholarships, graduated at a 91 percent rate.

Ms. NORTON. Figures don’t lie and, if I was going to find a place

for my kid, I would look at these figures very carefully. Could I ask

you what percentage of children were sent back or left the private

schools to return to the D.C. public schools?

Mr. WOLF. Representative Norton, by the end of our evaluation,

which was 6 years into the initial launch of the program, about

half of the students offered scholarships in the first 2 years were

still in a private schools.

Ms. NORTON. So there was a 50 percent dropout rate.

Mr. WOLF. That is correct, from the program, yes.

102

Ms. NORTON. What percentage of the students in the schools

were from the lowest performing schools in the District of Columbia?

Mr. WOLF. Representative Norton, 44 percent of the students in

the sample that we studied were attending schools in need of improvement at the point of applying to the OSP.

Ms. NORTON. So where were the rest from?

Mr. GOWDY. The gentlelady’s time has expired.

Thank you, Dr. Wolf.

We will now recognize the ranking member of the full committee,

the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. First of all, I want to thank all of you for your

testimony.

Dr. Edelin, having served on a charter school board in my daughter’s school, I have people come up to me quite often and ask about

charter schools and should they start one, how do they start one,

and I tell them that it is not a simple process and that they need

to have certain elements on that board or else they are going to

fail.

And I think a lot of people underestimate all that it takes. You

have to have some business people; you have to have some fundraising people; you have to have some people who know that it is

a corporation; you have to have some people who know something

about education. So how do you all maximize the likelihood that

your charter schools will be successful?

Ms. EDELIN. Thank you, Mr. Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. And be brief, because I have a number of questions.

Ms. EDELIN. You are absolutely right. The D.C. Public Charter

School Board has learned a lot in its 11-year life as the authorizer,

and the processes for making application, going through the review

process, having the public meetings, and having a charter agreement accepted or not have undergone great change based on precisely what you are saying. Governance is key. Fiscal management

is absolutely crucial. These are all nonprofit organizations that

enter into a contract with their authorizer, which is called a charter.

But there are lots of other parts, including getting right down to

the curriculum and the scope and sequence, and who will be performing this work and what are the qualifications of the leadership, as well as those they will be bringing in to teach. It is very

much a serious business.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Now, you heard Mr. Chavous, and, Mr. Chavous,

I want to thank you for your testimony because it is very compelling. And I understand the individual; I understand everybody else

too.

Dr. Edelin, when you hear the testimony of Mr. Chavous and you

heard the testimony of the parents and the young people earlier,

what do you say to them? I know you are here with regard to charter schools, but what do you say to them when Mr. Chavous says,

you know, this kid—and I have used that argument myself, that

this kid has one chance to be in the first grade, this is it, and one

chance to be in the second grade; and if they fail to get what they

need, it is not just for that moment, but it is for a lifetime that

103

they can be held back. So what do you say to that? I am just curious.

Ms. EDELIN. I say that in the District of Columbia we have 53

charter schools on 93 campuses that are working very, very hard

every day to provide a quality education for every child that can

get in. I do realize that not every child gets in in a given year, but

our chances of growing and our viability and our sustainability create enormous potential, and I am doing everything, Mr. Cummings,

in my power to make them the best schools they can possibly be.

Mr. CUMMINGS. So we have waiting lists at most of those

schools?

Ms. EDELIN. Actually, we do not have waiting lists at most of

those schools at this moment in time; we have had. But we are now

beginning just about to plateau. There are some schools that have

hundreds of students on the waiting lists, but, for the most part,

it is not the case that most of our charter schools have waiting lists

right now. There is room in charter schools for most of the children

in D.C. to get a good public school education.

Mr. CUMMINGS. There is no doubt about it that parental involvement is very significant in any school in the achievement of young

people. At the charter school where our kids went, there was a requirement that each parent had to volunteer at least something

like 70 hours per year. That is a lot of time, and the kids had a

real advantage in having a Congressman because I taught politics,

so they got a course in politics and law. But I am just wondering

do you have those kinds of requirements in——

Ms. EDELIN. Many of the charter schools ask parents to sign a

pledge of commitment, and the students as well, because creating

a culture in a building is key to its success. I can’t say, though, Mr.

Cummings, I have known any child or parent to be dismissed from

a school for failure to do that, but there is an expectation there,

a very high standard there that they are asked to buy into, yes.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Just one quick thing. I would suggest that you

all take a look at that, because I found, Mr. Chairman, that involvement is so significant. I mean, having parents in the school

makes a humongous, I mean, just a tremendous difference. Thank

you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Cummings. It might be well if you

would go teach politics and law at all the schools in all of our jurisdictions. I, for one, would love to have you in South Carolina.

We will now recognize the distinguished gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for

conducting this hearing. I would also like the ranking member to

come to my district to teach politics too.

Let me talk about my district first, Missouri, the St. Louis public

schools. Right now a debate is raging in the Missouri legislature

about private school vouchers and just how much we take from

public schools to create these private school vouchers. And we can

get into the issue of whether that is fair or not; whether it is a viable option for parents and students, and we can talk about that if

we have time. But I know it would take thousands of dollars from

each students and would have a devastating effect on the St. Louis

public schools.

104

Let me start off with Dr. Edelin. Thank you for your excellent

testimony regarding the history and growth of D.C. charter schools.

I am interested in several parts of your testimony. One is, doctor,

can you give us your assessment and examples of graduation rates

at some of the area charter schools?

Ms. EDELIN. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Clay. And I did included

some of that in the testimony. What I did was average it out in

some of our schools in every sector of the city, Southeast, Northeast, Northwest. We have at least 90 percent. But I want you to

know that some of those schools are as high as 96 and 97 percent,

well above the national average of high school graduation, and

going to school with millions of dollars in college scholarships.

Mr. CLAY. OK, so they do go on to college.

Ms. EDELIN. Yes, sir.

Mr. CLAY. And they are prepared for college. How are the reading levels and the math levels?

Ms. EDELIN. This is something I would like to make very clear.

The District of Columbia has some excellent traditional public

schools, particularly in the affluent wards. We also have schools

that are selective in that you have to audition and you have to

have a certain grade point average in order to get in. But if you

take those off the table, the affluent schools and the selective

schools, and you just look at the schools that serve poor children

of color, the charter schools outperform DCPS two to one with respect to reading and math by the time they get to middle and high

school.

Mr. CLAY. And you know that through the assessment?

Ms. EDELIN. The only thing we have to go by is the year-end

tests. I don’t think that is adequate. I personally am a proponent

of looking at growth gains in children, and I hope that the ESEA

reauthorization will look more at growth gains, but right now that

is all we have to look at, yes.

Mr. CLAY. Now, would you be able to supply the committee with

statistics on matriculation and college acceptance?

Ms. EDELIN. Yes, sir. I would be happy to. I can’t do it here and

now, but I would be happy to, yes, sir.

Mr. CLAY. I know. In writing. We would appreciate it.

Ms. EDELIN. Certainly.

Mr. CLAY. Let me ask Mr. Chavous. Tell me about how D.C.

charter schools stack up to D.C. public schools. If you had to choose

one or the other for your children, which one would it be?

Mr. CHAVOUS. Well, what I did for my children was looked at individual schools. I wasn’t focused on the system, or private versus

public, as much as what fit the best educational needs of my individual children. And I think that is what parents look to have happen for them as well.

Traditionally, I hear all this talk about charter schools. I have

to say, parenthetically, that scholarships and vouchers are charter

schools’ best friends, because when I was chairing the Education

Committee and I started charter schools or helped push charter

school funding, I was getting worn out by a lot of people who now

are talking about charter schools like they are doing great work.

And I think that is progress because people now understand that

providing options and choice matters.

105

I think, as Dr. Edelin knows, charter schools have generally outperformed D.C. public schools across the board. But at the end of

the day, when it comes down to parents having choices, you know,

in this global, multifaceted, technological age, we need to give more

choices to parents, not less. More matters. I mean, this is a situation where we need to recognize that children respond to different

learning modalities.

But the problem is that rubs us against our historical perspective

where we are locked into this one-size-fits-all paradigm that is a

cookie cutter approach that you matriculate a certain way according to age and divide it according to class size and all this stuff.

Well, at the end of the day, the learning that we know is going to

take place over the next 20, 30 years, is going to be wholly unlike

anything any of us in this room can relate to.

So, to answer your question, I think charter schools are generally

done well because they look at things more with a forward lens and

is more innovative and creative in its output. And in terms of how

it relates to this hearing, that is why we promoted this three-sector

strategy, so that we would have a whole host of options for parents

to choose from.

Mr. CLAY. OK, thank you for your response.

I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GOWDY. Yes, sir. I thank the gentleman.

On behalf of all of us, I want to thank this panel for your professionalism, for your expertise, frankly, for your collegiality toward

one another and toward this subcommittee.

We will be adjourned.

And I would ask the four if you can linger for about 30 seconds;

I know some of us would like to come thank you in person.

This meeting is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 12:14 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

[The prepared statements of Hon. Dan Burton and Hon. Elijah

E. Cummings follow:]

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

Æ