No real education reform without school choice

Flooding public schools with more money won’t deliver educational opportunity for every student. Equitable opportunity requires that every student has access to the educational environment that best meets their needs. And the best people to decide the environment that best meets their needs are their parents.

This isn’t a distant ideal. It’s already a reality for an increasing number of students across the nation.

In March, Florida became the fourth state this year, following Arkansas, Utah, and Iowa, to create universal Education Savings Account (ESA) programs for students. ESAs provide educational resources to families, allowing parents to decide how best to spend funds (typically $7,000 to $8,000) on expenses, including private school tuition, home school curriculum, or special needs tutoring.

ESAs deliver opportunity for students who otherwise only have one option: their zip-code-assigned institution. In states with ESA programs, education funding follows students to the environment of their choice, rather than constraining students to a one-size-fits-all system.

Pennsylvania should join the rest of the nation in passing ESAs. Our state has an education crisis, but it’s not for lack of funding. Pennsylvania education funding far exceeds national averages, with public schools spending almost $20,000 per student, or $4,000 more than the national average.

Following a record $1.5 billion increase last year, state support of public schools is at nearly $15 billion annually. Gov. Josh Shapiro’s proposed state budget included an additional $900 million.

As highlighted by the Commonwealth Court in its recent education lawsuit ruling, there are some funding gaps between school districts. But these disparities are due to a lack of restraints on school districts’s spending and their ability to raise property taxes.

They’re increased by Pennsylvania’s “hold harmless” formula. That formula guarantees districts retain funding regardless of changing enrollment, demographics, or special needs students, rather than basing it on the number of students and their needs.

Still, the poorest districts in Pennsylvania get more per-student funding than wealthy districts in most states. Ohio, for example, ranks high for “equity” between high- and low-poverty school districts, even though those districts receive around $15,000 per student. In contrast, the 100 highest poverty districts in Pennsylvania receive more than $20,000 per student.

Our schools don’t suffer from a lack of funding, which is why the Commonwealth Court did not order a spending increase. The court did impart the principle that “every student receives a meaningful opportunity to succeed.” The only way for Pennsylvania to meet this obligation is to empower students with access to better educational options.

Students cannot have equal opportunity if their zip codes and income levels determine their education — and future.

While states across the nation adopt ESA programs, thousands of Pennsylvania students sit on waiting lists for charter schools and private school scholarships. That’s why state lawmakers have introduced a bipartisan proposal for Lifeline Scholarships.

Lifeline Scholarships give students trapped in the lowest-performing public schools a $7,000 ESA — and the educational opportunities they deserve. ESAs are popular in Pennsylvania, with a 2022 poll finding 84 percent of state voters in support.

Through the experience of other states, we know that ESAs and other school choice programs work. Research finds that school choice programs not only improve the academic outcomes of participants but also those of their peers in public schools.

School choice programs also save money. Because these programs cost significantly less per student, public schools retain funding even as students leave, resulting in billions in savings nationwide. Most importantly, school choice programs empower parents with the educational freedom to find better, safer, and more appropriate educational options for the needs of their children.

The state’s education crisis can’t be fixed by Shapiro’s proposed education budget alone, because more taxpayer money won’t fix a broken system. Students don’t need more money given to their schools. They need more educational opportunities, where the money will be better directed to meeting their individual educational needs.

Thankfully, there’s already a commonsense, bipartisan solution in front of us, and it’s one that’s catching fire across the nation.