School Choice FAQs

EdChoice offers free, informative, printed resource guides, and we’ll ship them straight to you. Need a quick explainer of the types of school choice and how they work? Need a simple breakdown of what the research says about school choice programs? We’ve got you covered. For more information on how to get yours mailed to you for free, click the button below.

School choice allows public education funds to follow students to the schools or services that best fit their needs —whether that’s to a public school, private school, charter school, home school or any other learning environment families choose. We created a resource that defines and illustrates school choice in our organization’s view, and if you keep scrolling on that page, we provide you with definitions for the many other types of school choice that exist today. To visit that resource, click the button below.

There are 75 educational choice programs on the books in 34 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. For detailed information about each program, click the button below.

School choice has been around for nearly 150 years. Vermont’s town-tuitioning program has served families since 1869. In 1991, Wisconsin became the first state to create a modern school voucher program. In 1991, Minnesota became the first state to create a law allowing charter schools.

In America’s system of residentially assigned district schooling, those who have the financial means exercise school choice by purchasing homes in districts that have high-performing schools. School choice programs break the link between housing and access to a quality education with the goal of expanding educational opportunity to all children, especially the most disadvantaged. At present, the school choice programs currently operating in 34 states plus Washington, D.C. primarily benefit children from low-income families and students with special needs.

Test scores can only tell us so much about a child’s schooling experience. But if we look at test scores only, the vast majority of random assignment studies—the gold-standard method in social science—find school choice programs help improve students’ academic performance, especially over time.The studies that have found negative effects typically reflect only the first year or two of participating students’ test scores in their new schools.
Other credible non-random assignment studies also back up this trend.

In summary, we know:

1. These trends are normal when students switch schools, whether they are switching from public school to public school or public to private.
   School choice students tend to be among the most academically behind students in their public schools before using choice programs.
2. Their private schools of choice tend to turn their performance around in three to four years on average.
3. At the end of the day, researchers agree that more longitudinal studies are required to make any sweeping claims about school choice policies’ long-term effects on students. Most studies also find that school choice drives competition among schools, and public schools respond well to that pressure. Students who remain in public schools improve, too.

Lastly, test scores aren’t the only measure of a successful education—in public schools or private schools. Children excel in different areas and learn at different paces. School choice is about opening more opportunities for kids to find the right fit for their learning needs. For a fully cited list of studies, visit the link below.

According to nearly every empirical study on the topic, school vouchers lead to more ethnic and racial integration in schools, so there is virtually no evidence to support that vouchers, in practice, result in more racial or ethnic stratification.

Moreover, school choice breaks down the socioeconomic barriers to entry that have historically prevented many American students from accessing schools that work best for them.

A new international study found that Latin American countries with traditional district-based education systems have experienced increased social stratification; meanwhile, Chile’s free school choice system—a universal voucher system—has not significantly increased the degree of segregation in schools. In fact, Chile’s voucher system has mitigated the segregation trends seen in other countries with similar histories and cultures.

To be frank, rich people have always been able to practice educational choice: They either pay out of pocket for private schools, or they pay a premium to buy houses in neighborhoods with “good public schools.”

So, what happens to everyone else?

We know for a fact that our current ZIP Code-based public education system has kept too many low-income students and students of color out of quality schools.

And studies have shown today’s system also continues to contribute to the exacerbation of socioeconomic segregation in neighborhoods and, thus, public schools. Educational choice, on the other hand, is designed to help all children, regardless of their income or neighborhood.

Even in states where school choice programs are open to families of all incomes, the programs primarily help low- and middle-income families. That said, we should never presume to know every family’s unique circumstances or hardships, and neither should our country’s education policies. In all its forms, school choice gives low-income families more opportunities to access schooling options they might never have been able to access before—options that were formerly only available to the wealthy.

Choice and access level the playing field for everyone. And after all, wasn’t our great nation founded on the principles of liberty and equality—not just opportunity for those who can afford it?

A well-designed school choice program allows funding the state already allocates for an individual student’s K–12 education to follow that student to the schools and service providers that best meet their needs—whether that’s a public school, a school in another district, a charter school, a private school, online learning, learning at home or a customized learning experience. In practice, states have funded their school choice programs in many different ways. If you’re interested, our School Choice in America Dashboard allows you to navigate to all of the individual programs to see exactly how each of them is funded.

School choice programs affect public schools’ funding and resources in the same way they’re affected when a student leaves because their family moved to a new district—except with school choice programs, public schools get to keep almost all of the federal and local tax dollars and usually a portion of the state funds allocated for each child. Yes, public schools get to keep a significant portion of money for a student they no longer have the responsibility of educating.

In our opinion, when a student leaves a school—regardless of type—the school should no longer have to pay to educate that student. When any school gains or loses students, it must adjust accordingly. The most-used form of school choice in America is the one where families access a particular school by renting or buying a home in the district or utilize public-to-public transfer programs that allow them to attend a school outside the district where they live.

The biggest question policymakers have to answer when it comes to K–12 funding is whether the money set aside to educate children should follow them to the people and places that educate them—whether that’s in their district, outside their district, in a private setting, online or at home.

We believe it should.

Read more about the fiscal effects below.

According to five different surveys conducted in 2017, most of the American public supports school choice, though many still don’t know about the issue. Opposition to school choice is weak and continues to decrease, especially as more people learn about how school choice works.

Gallup, the Associated Press-National Opinion Research Center (AP-NORC), Education Next (EdNext), Phi Delta Kappa (PDK) and EdChoice all measured the opinions of a representative sample of Americans on K–12 education, our public schools and different schooling options, such as charter schools and private school choice programs.

Most of the polling organizations found support and/or recent gains in support for school choice.

It is important to note that question wording and the definitions used to describe school choice differ from poll to poll. We encourage everyone to examine these surveys’ topline and related questionnaire documents to best inform their opinions on the quality of each survey.

Head to our blog for all our recent polling.

If a program expands educational options for kids beyond their ZIP Code-assigned school, EdChoice supports it, though we do have a preference based on what we know parents want. For more than two decades, EdChoice has been a national leader advocating for and studying private educational choice programs, including education savings accounts (ESAs), school vouchers, tax-credit education savings accounts, tax-credit scholarships and individual tax credits and deductions. For definitions of all of the different types of school choice we support, click the button below.

There is no consensus among teachers about school choice. Some are passionately for it. Some are vehemently against it. Many are simply unsure and need more information.

Our team is dedicated to engaging with teachers wherever and whenever we can, and we recognize that all schooling types—public, private or otherwise—require strong, competent educators to succeed.

A 2019 national survey of teachers by Harvard’s Education Next found that non-union public school teachers are much more likely to support school choice than their union counterparts. That’s no surprise as teachers’ unions are the strongest lobbyists against expanding educational opportunities for parents. After all, teachers’ unions run on membership fees from educators who teach in traditional district schools. Families that are empowered to send their children to different schooling options outside of that traditional district system would affect their bottom line.

Head to our blog to read more polling from teachers.

School choice is constitutional at the federal level and in most states, as long as policies and programs are designed properly. The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that public funding can be allocated to a family to spend on a child’s K–12 schooling, including for faith-based education. Some states have constitutional language prohibiting the use of taxpayer dollars to support children who attend faith-based schools, but those provisions have been challenged federally and at the state level.

Read more about our legal work by clicking the button below.

Accountability is best left in the hands of families, not bureaucrats, and we know that parents care far less about test scores than they do about students having access to quality instruction in safe, nurturing schooling environments that reflect their values. That said, state policymakers have the ability to design school choice programs that represent the will of their citizens, and those programs can include state-based or national testing, health and safety requirements and other regulations. Ultimately, we trust families to know what’s best for their kids.

For more than 20 years, we’ve seen opponents of private school choice attempt to chip away at what makes each school unique by imposing top-down regulations in the guise of “accountability.” Every child deserves the chance to access the educational setting that works for him or her, which means turning all schools into the same type of school simply won’t work.

Bottom line: More regulations do not always mean more accountability. What gives the concept of accountability teeth is a parent’s ability to freely choose a school or schooling type that works for their student.

Studies show school choice programs generally have a positive effect on a student’s character. Students in school choice programs are more tolerant than their public school peers, and they are more likely to vote, volunteer and engage in other civic activities.

To be exact: six of the available studies found school choice had a positive effect; five found no effect; none found a negative effect.

It’s important to note that those studies don’t compare all of the students in public schools to all of the students in private schools. They compare two groups of students whose families are demographically, academically and socioeconomically similar with one factor setting them apart from each other: school choice. How?

Some of the studies were conducted using a random-assignment method. So all of the kids being compared were applicants of a school choice program. Some got a voucher, some didn’t, based on a random selection or lottery process. The other studies were conducted using a matched method, where a random sample of voucher students was compared to a sample of area public school students of the same demographic, socioeconomic and academic proportions as the voucher student sample.

With both methods, researchers were able to more effectively rule out any potentially skewed factors, such as parents’ affluence or level of involvement.

The Founding Fathers’ vision of a free and democratic nation depends on having educated citizens, but that vision never required we depend only on government-run schools to educate them. Indeed, as Neal McCluskey wrote, “the only system of education that can effectively support a free society is one that is itself grounded in freedom.”

School choice empowers families with students who have special needs to find what works for them. In fact, many school choice programs across the United States have been designed specifically to serve students with special needs because they often get left behind when they are simply assigned to a school under the traditional system. It’s important to note that families of students with special needs are informed of their rights when they opt into non-traditional programs. It’s also important to note that education savings accounts or ESAs, which allow families to tailor schooling options beyond tuition—for example, with specialized therapy or tutoring—represent the next wave of school choice and can be particularly helpful for students with special needs who require customized learning opportunities.

There’s a common misconception that if students leave a public school using voucher funds, those who choose to stay will have less money and fall behind academically. School choice programs affect public schools’ funding and resources in the same way they’re affected when a student leaves because their family moved to a new district—except with school choice programs, public schools get to keep almost all of the federal and local tax dollars and usually a portion of the state funds allocated for each child. Yes, public schools get to keep a significant portion of money for a student they no longer have the responsibility of educating. When you look at student performance, the research shows public school students perform no worse, and sometimes better, because the voucher program encourages public schools to improve to meet students’ needs.

Contrary to popular belief, the United States has far less school choice than many other countries. For example, some European nations actually give students a constitutional right to attend any private school at public expense. Many developing countries also find ways, even with more limited resources, to give parents and students choice.

International evidence from these countries supports the positive qualities asserted by school choice advocates in the United States and invalidates the claims of harm made by some American commentators.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) surveyed its 34 member countries and partner countries in 2008 and 2009 for its annual Education at a Glance reports. As “the authoritative source for accurate and relevant information on the state of education around the world,” the OECD’s reports show that, of the 53 participants, 25 countries’ governments (nine of which have top 20 PISA scores overall) provide vouchers and/or tuition tax credits for students to attend private schools.

Scholar Charles Glenn noted that “governments in most Western democracies provide partial or full funding for nongovernment schools chosen by parents; the United States (apart from a few scattered and small-scale programs) is the great exception, along with Greece.” Or as Diane Ravitch pointed out in a 2001 article, “The proportion of students in government-funded private schools is sizable in countries such as Australia (25 percent), Belgium (58 percent), Denmark (11 percent), France (16.8 percent), South Korea (21 percent), the Netherlands (76 percent), Spain (24 percent), and the United Kingdom (30 percent).”

In Finland, the government provides funding for basic education at all levels, and instruction is free of charge. In Sweden, schooling is “free,” and parents are able to choose their children’s schools; funding even follows the student when they change schools. In Portugal, the Ministry of Education finances the public sector in its entirety, and the state subsidizes each student in private schools. In Germany, the Netherlands, England, Northern Ireland, and Sweden, “public funding is provided so that families can choose to send their children to schools with a religious character.”

In several European countries, such as Belgium, the Netherlands, and Ireland, school choice is a constitutional right. Article 24 of the Belgian constitution, for example, provides “all pupils of school age have the right to moral or religious education at the Community’s expense.” Belgium enacted universal school choice in 1958 in what it termed the “School Pact”; school choice was seen as a way of avoiding strife between Catholic and Protestant schools.

Other European nations’ experiences with robust school choice refute the canards that are raised against vouchers in the United States. Some have argued, for example, that vouchers lead to balkanization and to the funding of extremist schools. This has not been the case in Europe. As Charles Glenn points out, “The Dutch example is particularly telling since there is a constitutional guarantee of freedom of the religious or philosophical character of schools…and two-thirds of pupils in the country attend nonpublic schools. Surely in the Netherlands, if anywhere, we might expect to find weird or divisive education. But in fact the rich variety of publicly funded schools…has neither divided Dutch society nor resulted in groups of children being poorly educated.”

The evidence is clear. Much of Europe supports school choice.

However, even some non-European democracies have embraced school choice. For instance, Chile has both municipal and private subsidized schools financed through vouchers. In South Korea, government funding of private schools has been present since the end of the Korean War. The first nine years of education are compulsory schooling “free” of charge, and the finance of private schools is almost entirely dependent upon the government. Recently, this has also been extended in part to private high schools.

Increasingly, developing countries are also experimenting with school choice. India, a country of over a billion people, supports private schools at taxpayer expense. As of 2012, private schools made up 21.2 percent of India’s schools, and more than one in four of these schools (5.16 percent of total schools) were publicly supported. India’s neighbor, Pakistan, also supports private schools. The Punjab Education Foundation, which exists as an independent organization separate from the Ministry of Education, is charged with improving education through the development of public-private partnerships. Its most successful project has been the Education Vouchers Scheme which, as of 2008, supported over 10,000 students at 52 different schools.

Other developing countries have tried various voucher or voucher-like programs, especially to draw in poor students who might not otherwise attend school at all. In Côte d’Ivoire subsidies are given to private schools per student enrollee. Students may attend the school of their choice if they can make it over the entrance restrictions. Cameroon provides subsidies to faith-based private schools for accepting poor students. Bangladesh has a program which covers 80 percent of teacher salaries in private schools. Vouchers or various other financial support structures from the government appear to be widely available in and embraced by developing countries as a means of increasing enrollment at the bottom end of their socioeconomic ladders.

EdChoice is funded by individuals and organizations who share our mission to make sure all K–12 students in the United States have the opportunity to access the schooling options that work for them, whether that’s public, private, public charter, homeschooling or another type.

We are proud of the work we do, and we respect the privacy of those who support our work unless they tell us they want to be recognized for their generosity.

When it comes to research that is funded by others, we are committed to transparency. That’s why we are a charter member of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) Transparency Initiative. AAPOR is the leading professional organization of public opinion and survey research professionals in the country; its membership includes academia, media, government, the non-profit sector and private industry. We disclose outside, direct funders of our research.