THE TRUTH: Parents use private school choice programs to choose private schools that meet their kids’ needs. Those schools are directly accountable to the parents who choose them.
BUSTING THE MYTH: Private schools are accountable to parents, who are both primary education decision-makers for their children as well as taxpayers. Within a private school choice program, this accountability often is enhanced by balanced measures that promote fiscal integrity and academic growth.
Most U.S. states allow parents to use state funding or tax-credit donations to pay for private school tuition. But how can we be sure those schools are helping students achieve? The truth is that private schools are highly accountable to an informed and interested set of stakeholders: parents. When parents can choose the schools their children attend, accountability looks different from top-down standardized systems used to rate public schools.
Beyond ensuring basic safety and welfare concerns, sound choice policy incorporates safeguards and procedures to ensure fiscal integrity. Model choice policy further balances academic accountability and flexibility by measuring and reporting student achievement on an approved norm-referenced test or, in some cases, teacher-reviewed portfolios.
PEOPLE ALSO ASK: Why support more government oversight for public schools and less for private schools and homeschooling? Not all schools or schooling systems are the same, so we must ensure we are applying the regulatory framework that works best for each type. Read our blog post to learn more.
THE TRUTH: Research consistently finds that private school choice programs benefit students who remain in nearby public schools.
BUSTING THE MYTH: Out of 29 studies, 26 identified a positive effect from private school choice on achievement results for public school students. This is called a competitive effect. Results from some studies show more pronounced effects in public schools where there is greater competition in terms of the numbers of private options and students exercising choice nearby.
Recent research on Florida’s tax-credit scholarship program bears out these findings over the long term. Over a 15-year period, public school students in schools that faced the most private competition experienced the greatest improvements both in academic achievement and behavioral measures.
PEOPLE ALSO ASK: What are some of the reasons parents choose private schools over public schools? There are myriad reasons why families choose the schools they do for their students. This Washington Post story covers a few of them.
THE TRUTH: School choice programs can save the state money.
BUSTING THE MYTH: A 2021 report found that educational choice programs generated an average of between $1.80 to $2.85 in estimated fiscal savings for each dollar spent on the programs. The 40 choice programs examined in the study generated an estimated $12.4 billion to $28.3 billion in cumulative net fiscal savings for state and local taxpayers.
That said, we know that choice policy design matters. The savings are a function of most students switching from public schools, where they generated more taxpayer funds, to private schools with smaller scholarships.
As eligibility dramatically expands in most choice programs, fairness and continuity of learning require that states abandon prior public school enrollment quotas; students need not be forced into a school that doesn’t work for them just to attend a school that does. In the short run, this likely means funding more current private school students and thus creating fiscal liability. These effects diminish over time. This should be factored into a thoughtful analysis that includes both costs and savings, giving more consideration to creative approaches to phase in program eligibility.
PEOPLE ALSO ASK: Public schools lose students to other public schools all the time. How do they work out the math on that? Most states fund public schools according to the number of students enrolled. When students leave (whether to move to another state, another district or a private school), variable costs (like staffing and supplies) change, and schools adjust their budgets accordingly. Some portion of the budget covers costs, including utility bills and building maintenance, that remain fixed regardless of enrollment levels. Schools can adjust those costs over time.
THE TRUTH: Vouchers and similar programs level the playing field for low-income students so they can also have access to educational options that always have been available to more affluent students.
BUSTING THE MYTH: Our public school system was set up to serve kids based on where they live, not what they need, creating systemic inequity that has placed generations of low-income students and students of color at a disadvantage because they are assigned to schools that do not meet their needs.
Some critics claim that school choice programs only appear to succeed due to “cream-skimming,” a phenomenon where the least disadvantaged and highest achievers are more likely to accept scholarships. If true, this would make the competitive improvements for public schools even more remarkable. But the highest achievers tend to be more content with their current schooling and are less likely to leave for other options.
The best research shows “cream-skimming” is negligible or non-existent in programs aimed at students from disadvantaged backgrounds. In fact, a 2017 report found that students enrolled in the nation’s then-largest choice program were “triply disadvantaged” — by family poverty, low school quality, and poor individual performance. The likely small “cream-skimming” effects of a universal eligibility program could be offset by designing a policy that prioritizes and weights funding for lower-income students.
THE TRUTH: Public school enrollment zones often wind up limiting access to quality options for students of color or low-income students. Private choice programs protect students from racial discrimination and offer all students more options to access quality education that aligns with their needs and values.
BUSTING THE MYTH: Comparing an individual private school funded in part through a choice program with the entire public school system is a faulty approach. Not every public school is open to serve every student; districts are only obligated to enroll students who live within assigned boundaries. Private school choice provides every participating student with more options instead of just one assigned school.
If the goal of school choice broadly is to ensure all students have a chance to “get in where they fit in,” we should lift up programs that increase opportunity instead of limiting it by ZIP code or income. It’s true that not every school may be accessible to every student, as the culture or program of a private school may not always be a good fit, or there simply might not be space—a challenge for all schooling types. Federal law protects students from discrimination based on race or ethnicity in both public and private school settings.
THE TRUTH: Public schools have been growing more segregated over the past four decades. In contrast, most high-quality research shows school choice leads to increased integration.
BUSTING THE MYTH: As of 2022, more than 18 million American students attended K-12 public schools where most students are of one race or ethnicity.
Sound choice policy gives students more opportunity, not less, to attend school with peers from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. The residentially based public school system assigns students to schools according to their ZIP codes. These boundaries often sort students into buildings with others of the same race or socioeconomic status.
Seven out of eight high-quality studies find that private school choice increases either racial or economic integration, or both. It’s been 70 years since the U.S. Supreme Court discarded the “separate but equal” standard in Brown v Board of Education, and private school choice programs offer one path for families to choose from more schools based on their diversity, among other important factors.
THE TRUTH: Students with disabilities have fewer procedural rights in private schools than in public schools, regardless of who funds their enrollment there. But most parents who exercise choice are more satisfied with their new private options.
BUSTING THE MYTH: The federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) offers students with unique abilities substantive and procedural rights if they are enrolled in a public (district or charter) school. Even with those rights, some parents face tremendous or even insurmountable barriers to get their kids access to promised services through their IEP.
Regardless of who helps to fund a child’s enrollment in a private school, that placement results in forfeiting some of those protections. Instead, the school serving the student with unique abilities is directly accountable to the parent.
Nearly all rigorous studies find that participation in private school choice increases parent satisfaction, including in multiple programs that specifically serve special-needs students. Families that are dissatisfied with a private option retain the right to re-enroll in a public school and resume access to IDEA’s procedural rights.
PEOPLE ALSO ASK: Are there private schools designed solely to serve students with special needs? Yes. Some school choice programs are established to serve special needs students, and many states boast private schools that are designed to serve those students. Check out this blog post to learn more about a school in Florida for students with moderate to severe development and behavioral needs.
THE TRUTH: Well-established legal precedent upholds the right of parents under federal and state constitutions to use public funds or tax benefits to make neutral choices between various religious and secular private educational options.
BUSTING THE MYTH: In nearly every state, no legal obstacles remain that could prevent a parent from using public funds to choose a school under an approved choice program. The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2002 Zelman decision upheld, under the First Amendment, publicly funded programs that give parents a neutral choice between various religious and non-religious schools. A series of later Supreme Court rulings – most notably Espinoza and Carson – struck down state “Blaine amendments” used to deny families access to scholarship funds based on a school’s religious affiliation or programming.
PEOPLE ALSO ASK: Don’t voucher and scholarship programs enable public funds to support schools that teach violent or extreme ideologies? Such an outcome might be theoretically possible in some states with choice programs. But roughly a million students are enrolled in these programs, and evidence of such schools is scant or nonexistent. Scare tactics concerning the remotest of possibilities should not stand in the way of expanding opportunities for students and families who seek them.
