Overview of National School Choice Week

• Established in 2011, it celebrates parental choice in education through proclamations, rallies, seminars, and fairs.
• School choice includes many forms:
  • Public school choice: Moving into preferred school zones (“school choice by mortgage”), inter- and intra-district choice, magnet schools, and charter schools.
  • Private school choice: Government programs supporting families to enroll children in private schools, via tuition vouchers, tax-credit scholarships, tax deductions/credits, and Education Savings Accounts.
• Private school choice has dramatically expanded in the U.S., now present in 32 states plus DC and Puerto Rico, with nearly 1 million students participating.

The Regulatory Debate for Private School Choice

Heavy Regulation Advocates Say:

• Since public funds support private schools, those schools should be held to similar accountability standards as public schools, including:
  • Open enrollment: Accept all choice students who apply.
  • Limits on expulsion: Restrict ability to expel students for academics or behavior.
  • No extra fees: Prohibit additional payments beyond the voucher/scholarship.
  • Mandatory state tests and reporting: Ensure transparency and performance accountability.
  • Cutoff enrollment: If test scores are poor, limit enrollment of new choice students.
• The goal is to protect students and taxpayer dollars.

Light Regulation Advocates Say:

• Parental choice drives accountability better than regulations; parents “vote with their feet” to support good schools.
• Private schools should:
  • Use normal admissions standards to ensure a good fit for students.
  • Be able to counsel out or expel students not meeting school norms.
  • Require additional family contributions when vouchers cover less than full public school spending (~60%).
• Requiring private schools to take public tests is problematic because private curricula often differ, forcing schools to conform to public models they aim to avoid.
• Heavy regulations risk pushing away quality private schools.

Evidence & Case Studies

• Research shows three regulations are major deterrents for private school participation:
  1. Open admissions requirements.
  2. Prohibiting additional charges to parents.
  3. Mandatory state accountability testing.
• High-quality private schools especially resist these restrictions, meaning heavy regulation risks losing the best providers.

State Examples:

• Louisiana (Heavy regulation):
  • Over two-thirds of private schools declined participation.
  • Negative effects on test scores and declining enrollment.
• Arizona (Light regulation):
  • Popular programs but no data transparency on effectiveness.
• Florida (Smart regulation):
  • Schools can set admissions standards and choose aligned tests.
  • Parents with higher income may supplement funding.
  • Programs have grown annually and shown improved student outcomes, including test scores, college enrollment, and benefits to public schools via competition.

Conclusion

• The key question is which regulatory framework best balances fairness, effectiveness, and quality participationwithout deterring strong private schools.
• Florida’s approach demonstrates a successful model of “smart regulation” balancing accountability and flexibility.
• As private school choice grows nationally, more policymakers might look to Florida as a model.

‍