Poor families should be afforded the same opportunities others have, including the CTU’s own members, to superior private school alternatives to failing neighborhood schools
Poor families deserve the same opportunity to send their children to private schools as affluent families — a privilege enjoyed by many Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) leaders and their members. The Supreme Court’s landmark 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education affirmed the right to equitable educational opportunity, a right guaranteed by the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Yet, those in power in states like Illinois and cities like Chicago interpreted this right as exclusive to government-run schools. The Supreme Court has rejected that narrow interpretation.
Private schools have demonstrated extraordinary success, including in neighborhoods suffering economic hardship. According to an analysis by Kathleen Porter-Magee, an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute, “If Catholic schools were a state, they would be the highest performing in the nation on all four NAEP tests.” The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the “nation’s report card,” shows Catholic schools consistently outperform public schools by wide margins across all demographics.
Catholic schools, in particular, excelled during the COVID-19 pandemic. Across America, the pandemic exposed the public education system’s weaknesses, revealing how unprepared it was for such a crisis. In Chicago, public schools failed to adapt quickly, remaining closed for 78 consecutive weeks at the command of the teachers union. This prolonged closure had devastating academic, social-emotional, and physical consequences, including a spike in youth violence.
In contrast, Catholic schools demonstrated resilience and adaptability, reopening for in-person learning at the start of the next school year following the COVID outbreak. While most public schools remained closed, Catholic schools experienced little to no academic loss, and their students suffered far fewer social-emotional and health issues. In the Chicago area, Catholic schools exceeded performance expectations, particularly for students from economically disadvantaged communities.
The tale of two schools
Perhaps no two schools represent the importance of school choice better than Chicago Hope Academy and Manley High School on the Westside. This contrast highlights much of what’s broken in the Chicago Teachers Union’s (CTU) approach to education, particularly their relentless efforts to block competition and protect union jobs at the expense of students. This includes opposing any improvements to local schools that impact their members' numbers, workload, or job security. Never mind the kids.
Located in East Garfield Park, Hope Academy enrolls 299 students in grades 9–12 and receives five applications for every available freshman seat. Impressively, 90 percent of its graduates go on to attend a four-year college. In 2024, Hope received 400 applications for 74 available seats in its freshman class. The school ranks sixth out of 58 Christian high schools in Illinois, 25th out of 166 private schools in diversity, and is in the top 20 percent of all high schools statewide — a remarkable achievement given its location and the demographics it serves.
Just under a mile away sits Manley High School. A building with a capacity for 1,176 students, a mere 78 are currently enrolled. More troubling, 70 percent of Manley’s students are chronically absent, missing 10 or more days without excuse. The school has a staff of 26, a staff-to-student ratio of 5:1. Despite this, academic performance is dismal: Only three percent meet state standards in English Language Arts, zero percent meet the state benchmark in math, and four percent in science. Just 35 percent of Manley students graduate, only 10 percent are accepted to college.
The CTU shows little regard for the needs of low-income minority families searching for quality alternatives to often failing CTU member neighborhood schools. In 2017, the Illinois General Assembly (IGA) enacted the Invest in Kids Scholarship Tax Credit Program. A tax credit to individuals and businesses that contribute to qualified Scholarship Granting Organizations (SGOs), the CTU lobbied to end the program, denying some of Chicago’s neediest tuition assistance.
The union’s success in killing the state’s “Invest in Kids” private school scholarship program also had devastating effects — costing 138 Hope students their scholarships and displacing 9,000 low-income, mostly minority students across the state. It is worth noting that 45 percent of all CPS students are Black or Latino, and more than half come from families earning an average household income of just $36,000. Meanwhile, CTU President Stacy Davis Gates and as many as 40 percent of teacher union members with children send their own children to private schools.
In the CTU’s determination to strengthen its monopoly over public education the union has also sought to eliminate even public charter school competition, forcing the school district to cap not only the number of public charter schools but also charter school enrollment. They blocked the district from leasing any of the 50 near empty schools Mayor Rahm Emanuel closed which would have kept schools open in those communities and would have saved the district millions of dollars annually in building maintenance, while generating tens of millions of dollars annually in lease income.
Illinois is a bell weather state in blocking school choice
Despite private schools’ remarkable performance, Illinois became the only state in the nation to eliminate its state support for parents sending their children to private schools by not renewing the “Invest in Kids” scholarship program in 2023. By contrast, twelve states either created or expanded their state-funded support for private school families, bringing the total to 35 states with such programs.
The Constitution’s “equal protection” clause guarantees all children access to a free and equal education. It does not specify that education must come from the government. Public school districts routinely contract with private schools for special education and alternative programs. Meanwhile, federal programs like Head Start, Pell Grants, the GI Bill, and student loan programs (serving 54 percent of borrowers at private institutions) all support private education. Illinois’ Monetary Award Program (MAP) provides grants toward college tuition at participating institutions.
Nevertheless, national teachers’ unions and their supporters have intensified efforts to undermine school choice, often relying on inaccurate and misleading claims about the impact of direct funding and expanded choice on public education. The unions’ most common argument is that private school choice diverts money from traditional public schools, which is deeply misleading as there is a net savings from each diversion.
School choice “myth busting”
When a student attends a private school using state funds, the money simply follows the student to the school actually providing their education. This is the principle of student-centered funding. Moreover, taxpayers save money when students use vouchers, as the average voucher amount is about one-third less per pupil than the cost of educating a student in a district school. According to an Illinois Policy Institute estimate, public schools save $12,000 for every student they lose which is why the districts per pupil funding has risen dramatically as the district has lost enrollment.
It is also unfair to claim that voucher systems “rob” school districts of money. No school — district, charter, private, or otherwise — is entitled to students. Families have the right to choose where to send their children, and schools are funded based on the students they actually serve, not those they might have served. Contrary to claims that school choice reduces funding, overall funding increased between 2000 and 2019 in districts where charter and private schools are prevalent. School choice broadens public support for funding schools
Another familiar talking point often harnessed by the CTU is, instead of funding families to “escape” to private schools, all resources should be focused on improving public schools. This is a false dilemma. Policymakers and advocates can — and should — work to improve traditional public schools while also expanding choice programs. The two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, school choice can spur positive change and innovation in public schools.
Unions also consistently argue that private schools have an unfair advantage because they are not required to enroll the most challenging students, unlike public schools. However, most large districts, including Chicago, operate selective enrollment magnet schools and magnet clusters that offer specialized, often selective, programs. Evidence overwhelmingly shows that competition benefits public schools.
Traditional public schools are not fragile ecosystems that can only serve students in the absence of competition. A 2021 essay by Pedro Enamorado for the Fordham Institute found that 26 of 28 studies on the effects of choice programs showed positive or neutral effects. Research indicates public schools improve communication with parents, replace ineffective staff, and try new interventions when faced with competition. Benefits go beyond test scores, including higher graduation rates, increased college enrollment, and greater college completion — especially for Black students.
An opportunity for Catholic schools to transforming education opportunities
If the Chicago Archdiocese is searching for a blueprint to transform educational opportunity through parochial schools, look no further than Buenos Aires, Argentina, in the early 2000s. At that time, the city faced a severe educational crisis: The public school system was failing, and the quality of education was widely regarded as abysmal. Archbishop Jorge Mario Bergoglio — the late Pope Francis — responded with a bold, visionary initiative to make Catholic schools the best educational option in the city, ultimately attracting around half of Buenos Aires’ students.
Bergoglio's time as Archbishop was characterized by his deep commitment to the impoverished neighborhoods, known as the villa miseria (or just villa) slums, where he became known as the "villero bishop" or "slum bishop.” While Bergoglio's plan for Buenos Aires was characterized by a strong focus on evangelization and community building, he saw education an integral part of serving those on the margins of society through education.
This holistic approach fostered not only academic excellence but also inclusivity, community, and values-driven education. By focusing on the whole child and the whole community, Bergoglio’s Catholic schools became a refuge and a beacon of hope for families across all income levels. Bergoglio’s initiative demonstrates that, with vision and commitment, parochial schools can rise to meet the needs of more children in its host city—especially its most vulnerable citizens.
Pathways forward to create school choice in Chicago
The City of Chicago should lobby Illinois to opt in to the federal government’s new Tax Credit program for those who donate to qualified non-profit organizations that award K-12 private school scholarships. While the tax credit pales in comparison to the expired “Invest in Kids” private school tax credit program, a substantive private school scholarship program could be constructed combining federal credit with the restoration of the state Invest in Kids program and the city creating its own scholarship program using a portion of the school district TIF surplus
Chicago can also move forward to fully empower parents on its own. The district can create its own “Invest in Kids” private school scholarship program, funded from the district’s annual property tax surplus generated by the city’s Tax Increment Financing (TIF) program. Since 2019, the district has received $1.3 billion in additional property tax revenues above its 54 percent share of the tax levy, yet not one dollar has gone to supported parents who send their children to private schools.
Longer term, the city could invite state-recognized parochial and private schools to become “contract schools,” allowing the district to count parochial students in the state aid formula. As mentioned, school districts have historically contracted with private schools for special education and alternative programs, including those for at-risk students. Catholic schools facing closure for financial reasons could also apply to become charter schools.
When this author was CEO of the CPS, I invited 18 financially struggling private alternative community schools for high school drop outs to form the Youth Connection Charter. That charter, which today has 15 campuses, has graduated over 25,000 students including over 1,300 last year. I also offered the late Cardinal Francis George the opportunity to avoid closing dozens of financially challenged neighborhood Catholic schools by the schools becoming district charters. To my great regret, he declined to accept the offer.
Most Chicago parents cannot afford private school tuition. Of the 330,000 CPS students, 85 percent are considered economically disadvantaged. In Chicago, a household earning just below $38,000 would find that the average annual private elementary school tuition for one child amounts to nearly a fifth of their income. Moving to a higher-performing suburban district is often out of reach, given the higher home prices. Without private school scholarships, poor families are essentially held hostage.
Catholic schools continue to demonstrate academic strength and positive outcomes for students across all demographics, particularly in graduation rates and college readiness. They have shown adaptability, as evidenced during the pandemic, and a commitment to inclusion. Drawing on the example of Archbishop Bergoglio’s Buenos Aires, we also see that with vision, leadership, and public support, parochial schools can become engines of transformation for entire communities.
Parents cannot wait for the district to improve, as school choice opponents suggest. It’s unfair to ask families to risk their child’s future on the hope that their neighborhood school will someday improve. Families want something better for their children now. Poor families should be afforded the same opportunities as others, including CPS public school administrators and teachers, to send their children to a private school, if it better meets their needs. The time to act is now!
