"Arizona is a national leader in school choice with both charter schools and tuition tax credits giving parents and their children more school choices than ever before"
About this Quote
“National leader” is the kind of civic chest-thumping that turns policy into identity: Arizona isn’t just trying something, it’s winning. Jane D. Hull’s line is built to make school choice feel less like a contested redesign of public education and more like a consumer upgrade. The phrase “more school choices than ever before” frames education as a marketplace, where the moral center is the parent’s purchasing power rather than the system’s obligation to serve everyone well.
The intent is coalition-friendly. Charter schools signal innovation and flexibility; tuition tax credits signal tax relief and private-sector involvement. Put together, they reassure business-minded conservatives, religious-school advocates, and suburban parents that the state is empowering families without saying outright that it’s re-routing public dollars away from traditional districts. That omission is the subtext: “choice” is a sunny word that dodges the harder questions about oversight, inequity, and what happens to schools left with fewer resources and higher needs.
Hull’s rhetoric also subtly reassigns responsibility. If “parents and their children” have “more choices,” then disappointment can be read as a failure to choose well, not a failure of policy design. It’s a neat political move: freedom becomes the metric, not outcomes.
Context matters. Arizona became an early laboratory for charters and tax-credit programs in the 1990s and early 2000s, amid national pushes for vouchers and market-based reform. Hull’s quote sits inside that era’s optimism - and its strategic ambiguity - where “choice” doubled as both a promise of opportunity and a euphemism for privatization by another name.
The intent is coalition-friendly. Charter schools signal innovation and flexibility; tuition tax credits signal tax relief and private-sector involvement. Put together, they reassure business-minded conservatives, religious-school advocates, and suburban parents that the state is empowering families without saying outright that it’s re-routing public dollars away from traditional districts. That omission is the subtext: “choice” is a sunny word that dodges the harder questions about oversight, inequity, and what happens to schools left with fewer resources and higher needs.
Hull’s rhetoric also subtly reassigns responsibility. If “parents and their children” have “more choices,” then disappointment can be read as a failure to choose well, not a failure of policy design. It’s a neat political move: freedom becomes the metric, not outcomes.
Context matters. Arizona became an early laboratory for charters and tax-credit programs in the 1990s and early 2000s, amid national pushes for vouchers and market-based reform. Hull’s quote sits inside that era’s optimism - and its strategic ambiguity - where “choice” doubled as both a promise of opportunity and a euphemism for privatization by another name.
Quote Details
| Topic | Learning |
|---|
More Quotes by Jane
Add to List
