Even Swedes have more school choice than most Americans

There's a nice write-up in USA Today on popular and well-established education alternatives to state schools in Sweden, of all places.

Before the reform, most families depended on state-run schools following a uniform national curriculum. Now they can turn to the "friskolor," or "independent schools," which choose their own teaching methods and staff, and manage their own buildings.

They remain completely government-financed and are not allowed to charge tuition fees. The difference is that their government funding goes to private companies which then try to run the schools more cost-effectively and keep whatever taxpayer money they save.

The article is a bit hazy on the details, but the Swedish program seems to more closely resemble American charter schools than vouchers, since the money apparently goes directly to the schools rather than to families to pay tuition.

Demand for the Swedish independent schools is growing. "In 1992, 1.7% of high schoolers and 1% of elementary schoolchildren were privately educated. Now the figures are 17% and 9%." By contrast, in Arizona, where charter schools are about as well-established as they are anywhere in the U.S. 8.7% of students attend charters and about 5% attend private schools (working from 2005 numbers). A good guesstimate is that a bit less than 4% are homeschooled.

Since the state remains closely involved in education under the Swedish (and charter) model, I view the approach as less than ideal. There's still plenty of room for officials to pick and choose providers and exercise influence over curriculum. But, by contrast with the one-size-fits-all model that previously prevailed the Swedish model is a vast improvement, since it expands the range of approaches and philosophies available to families. Before the 1992 reform, Sweden's state schools followed a uniform national curriculum. If you didn't like it, you could pay private tuition on top of (high) Swedish taxes. Now, some degree of choice is available to any family.

Arizonans enjoy the luxury of choices comparable to or exceeding the options offered in Sweden. Charter schools now make up one in four public schools in Arizona, homeschooling is unencumbered by red tape and private schools are relatively inexpensive. But most Americans still have to pay for whatever the state offers -- and then pay again for what they prefer if they don't like the state option.

If Sweden can expand the range of education options available to families, why can't more U.S. states do the same?