School choice is in high demand and growing.
Twenty years ago, few states had policies or programs allowing
parents the freedom to make choices in their children's education.
Today, 11 states and the District of Columbia have state-funded
scholarship programs or provide tax relief for education expenses
or contributions to scholarship funds. Most states have
charter or magnet schools, dual enrollment programs are common, and
all 50 states allow parents to home school their children.
As of April
2005:
-
Students in six states-Florida,
Maine, Ohio, Vermont, Utah, and Wisconsin-and the District of
Columbia can receive government-funded scholarships to attend
a private school of choice.
-
Six states-Arizona, Florida,
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania-offer tax credits
or deductions for education expenses or contributions to
scholarship programs.
-
Forty states and the District of
Columbia have enacted charter school laws.
-
Fifteen states guarantee public
school choice within or between districts. (Other states have
choice programs that are optional for districts, target only
specific populations, and/or require parents to pay
out-of-district tuition.[1])
-
Twenty-one states have
comprehensive dual enrollment programs that enable high school
students to attend college classes for high school and
postsecondary credit at minimal or no expense to the
student.
-
Home schooling is legal in every
state.
The parental choice
movement has made progress during the state legislative sessions of
2005. On March 10, Governor John Huntsman signed the Carson Special
Needs Scholarships bill, making Utah the second state to have a
voucher program for students with disabilities.[2] Voucher
and tax credit programs have been proposed in Alabama,
Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire,
South Carolina, and Virginia, to name a few. State legislatures
voted on a record number of school choice bills.[3] In
Arizona, the legislature passed a bill that would have offered tax
credits to corporations for contributions to scholarship funds, but
Governor Janet Napolitano vetoed it.
Participation in existing
choice programs has likewise increased. More than 1 million
families home school, and the number increases every year.[4] Families of over 624,000
students use vouchers, tax credits, or tax deductions to attend a
school of choice.[5] A record number of students are
taking advantage of options to transfer from their assigned public
school.[6] There is a growing
recognition among parents that no one school, even a great
school, can serve all students equally well.
Ultimately, school choice
is about enabling all parents to enroll their children in the
schools- public, public charter, private, or home-that best meet
their individual needs. While legal and legislative obstacles
remain, parents across the country have persistently demanded more
educational freedom for their students.
Congress can support
parental choice by expanding federal choice programs such as the
D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program and by providing choice to
other cities through the $50 million Choice Incentive Fund, which
President George W. Bush has proposed in his fiscal year 2006
budget. In addition, Congress can increase parental freedom under
the No Child Left Behind Act. Under the act, children attending
schools that have failed to make adequate yearly progress toward
state standards for two consecutive years are eligible to transfer
to better-performing schools within the district.
However, even this limited
school choice option has not been fully implemented. A recent
Government Accountability Office report found that only 1
percent of eligible students have taken advantage of their transfer
options. The study said that many districts are not providing
parents with timely, clear information.[7] Congress should
ensure that districts inform parents about all of their options
under federal law. Meanwhile, it should pursue policy changes
that will allow additional options for parents across the
country.
Types
of Educational Choice Available
School choice has always
been available to those who can move their family to an area with a
desirable school or afford to pay for private schooling. While
new choice programs continue to grow, residential choice
(buying a home in a public school district of choice) and paying
tuition continue to be the primary methods by which families choose
schools. According to the U.S. Department of Education, 11
percent of students are enrolled in private schools.[8] Families exercising residential
choice account for 24 percent of public school students.[9] In both cases, families must
have the financial means to accommodate their choices, and families
without such resources do not have these options.
Public School
Choice. In the late 1960s, magnet
schools were developed to draw students of different ethnic
backgrounds to improve desegregation. Magnet schools offer
students a special academic focus or thematic environment. The most
recent U.S. Department of Education data indicate that there
are 1,736 magnet schools in 28 states. Illinois and California have
the most magnet schools (420 and 456, respectively), and 15
percent of Illinois students (the highest percentage of any state)
attend magnet schools.[10]
The first magnet school
created to reduce segregation was McCarver Elementary School
in Tacoma, Washington, founded in 1968. A performing and
visual arts school in Houston, Texas, coined the term "magnet
school" in the mid-1970s to describe how it attracted students.
Bolstered by desegregation orders and federal funding, magnet
schools opened in urban areas across the country.[11] While
other forms of choice have developed over the years, magnet schools
continue to provide families with education
options.
In the 1980s,
lawmakers began to enact laws to enable families to choose schools
within (intradistrict) or outside (interdistrict) their
district. Statewide open enrollment laws allow families to
choose any school in the state. In some states, the policy is
voluntary, and districts may or may not participate. In others,
interdistrict choice is mandatory, and all districts must allow
transfers. Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and
Wisconsin have mandatory interdistrict choice laws, while
California, Illinois, and Ohio have mandatory intradistrict
choice laws. Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, South Dakota, Utah, and
Washington have mandatory statewide open enrollment laws.
An increasing number of
families are taking advantage of public school choice programs. A
May 2003 survey by the U.S. Department of Education found that more
families, particularly those with lower incomes, are participating
in public school choice by sending their children to schools other
than those assigned by their district. The number of students
attending a public school of choice rose from 11 percent in 1993 to
14 percent in 1996 and 1999, and the National Center for Education
Statistics found that parents of students in private schools
or public schools of choice were "more likely to say they were
'very satisfied' with their children's schools, teachers, academic
standards, and order and discipline" than were parents of
students attending an assigned public school.[12]
States have enacted laws
that enable high school juniors and seniors to take college courses
at two-year and four-year higher education institutions and receive
high school and/or college credit. These programs provide
access to rigorous course work and ease the transition between high
school and college. According to the Education Commission of the
States, 47 states have dual enrollment programs.[13]
Public Charter
Schools. In the 1990s,
lawmakers conceived of a new form of parental choice: the
charter school. Since the first charter school law was enacted in
Minnesota in 1991, the number of charter schools has grown to
3,400.[14]
A charter school is a
public school sponsored by a local school board, university, state
board of education, or other state governing body and operated by
parents, teachers, other individuals, or a private organization.
Charter schools are granted more autonomy from district policies
than traditional public schools, but they also are more accountable
for student performance. (A charter school must close if it does
not meet the standards specified in its charter.) Because they are
granted greater flexibility, charter schools can differentiate
themselves from traditional public schools by employing a
curriculum that is different from the district curriculum,
adopting a thematic approach (arts and humanities, business,
mathematics and science, etc.), instituting a longer school day,
requiring parental involvement, or using innovative
technology. Like other public schools, charter schools are open to
all students and are funded through tax receipts.
Forty states and the
District of Columbia have enacted charter school laws. The degree
of flexibility afforded to charter schools varies by state.
Some states, such as Arizona and Minnesota, allow charter
schools significant freedom, while other states, such as Kansas and
Mississippi, are less accommodating.[15] Alabama,
Kentucky, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia do not have charter school
laws.
In general, charter
schools appear to have a positive effect on the academic
achievement of their students and the students of neighboring
public schools. A recently published study using data from nearly
99 percent of elementary charter school students in the U.S. found
that charter students are 5.2 percent more likely to be
proficient in reading and 3.2 percent more likely to be proficient
in math on state tests compared to their peers in the traditional
public schools that they would have most likely attended.[16] The author's earlier research
tracked the competitive effects of charter schools on surrounding
schools and found that increased school choice raises school
productivity and student achievement within the public school
system. The report found that competition from charter schools in
Michigan and Arizona, and from Milwaukee's voucher program, has
compelled public schools to be more productive as measured by
students' achievement gains.[17]
Private School Choice
Options. Laws that support
private education options take several forms: vouchers, tuitioning,
contracting, tax credits, tax deductions, and education savings
accounts.
Publicly funded
scholarships (vouchers) are certificates with a designated
dollar value that may be applied toward tuition or fees at a public
or private educational institution of choice. Vouchers are
similar to the federal government's Pell Grant program in that a
student receives a voucher to apply toward tuition at a chosen
public, private, or religious college or university of choice.
Elementary and secondary education voucher programs are
available to eligible students in Florida; Cleveland, Ohio; Utah;
Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Washington, D.C.
Voucher-like "tuitioning"
laws in Maine and Vermont enable school districts or towns
without public schools to pay for the cost of sending students
to private or public schools in another district or
state.
Contracting with private
schools to serve at-risk students or students with disabilities
occurs across the country. When services are unavailable in a
public school, students with disabilities are educated at
private schools with public funding under the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act. Private schools are also used to
educate high school dropouts and other at-risk students, as well as
to alleviate overcrowding.[18]
A growing body of evidence
shows that students participating in public and privately funded
voucher programs-especially at-risk students- can improve their
academic performance; that parents of these students are more
satisfied with their child's education; and that voucher programs
foster accountability within public school systems.[19]
Vouchers
Six states and the
District of Columbia have voucher and tuitioning
programs.
District of
Columbia. Congress passed
legislation creating the District's first publicly funded
scholarship program on January 22, 2004. Similar to a program
proposed in 2003 (H.R. 684 and S. 4) by Representative Jeff Flake
(R-AZ) and Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH),[20] the $13 million
program provides low-income students with vouchers to attend a
private school of choice. Every student from a family with an
annual income at or below 185 percent of the federal poverty line
is eligible. The vouchers are worth up to $7,500, a little more
than half of the approximately $12,000 spent per pupil in District
public schools.
Researchers from
Georgetown University and Westat, who will evaluate the District's
program over the next five years, found in the baseline study that
parents of children attending private schools were much more
satisfied with their children's school than were public school
parents.[21] In September 2004, 1,027
students were placed in 53 private schools through the voucher
program.[22]
Florida. Florida has two voucher
programs, one for children with disabilities and one for children
in poorly performing schools. The A+ Plan provides Opportunity
Scholarships to students in schools that have failed to achieve
state assessment benchmarks twice in a four-year period.
During the 2003-2004 school year, more than 650 students received
vouchers worth an average of $3,900.[23] During the same
year, approximately 13,000 students with disabilities used
McKay Scholarships to attend another public or private school.[24] The McKay Scholarship program,
enacted as a pilot program by the Florida legislature in 1999 and
expanded statewide in 2001, provides vouchers to special-needs
students.[25]
Maine. Maine has been paying for
students to attend private schools for over 200 years. A century
ago, the state enacted a tuitioning law that is still in place.
Under the law, school districts without public schools allow
students to attend public schools in other districts or
nonsectarian private schools.[26] In 1981, the
legislature enacted a law preventing students from selecting
religious schools.[27]
Ohio. Enacted in 1995, the
Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program provides elementary
school students with vouchers worth up to $3,000 for tuition at a
private elementary school or $2,700 for a high school of choice.[28]
Vermont. Since 1869, Vermont has
operated a tuitioning program for students in school districts
without a public school.[29] Students may attend a public
school in another district or an approved nonsectarian private
school. As in Maine, Vermont students could attend religious
schools during the program's first 100 years, but this provision
was overturned by the state supreme court. An estimated 7,147
students participated in the program during the 2001-2002 school
year.[30]
Wisconsin.
More than 14,000
students participated in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program
during the 2003-2004 school year.[31] Established in
1990 and expanded in 1995, the program provides vouchers to
Milwaukee families with incomes that are at or below 175 percent of
the poverty level to enable their children to attend private or
religious schools of choice. The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the
program in 1998, and the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review
the Wisconsin court's decision.[32]
Utah. On March 10, 2005,
Governor John Huntsman signed H.B. 249, the Carson Special
Needs Scholarships bill, making Utah the second state with a
voucher program for students with disabilities.[33] The
program will provide vouchers of up to up to $5,700, beginning in
the 2005-2006 school year.[34]
Tax
Incentives
Tax incentives date back
to 1955, when Minnesota enacted the first tax deduction for
educational expenses. Tax credits and deductions allow parents to
claim a credit or deduction against their taxes for approved
educational expenses (e.g., private school tuition, books, tutors,
and transportation) or give individuals or corporations a tax
credit for contributions to tuition scholarship
organizations.
Parents in Illinois, Iowa,
and Minnesota benefit from the first type of credit, while families
in Arizona, Florida, and Pennsylvania can use the second type.
Parents in all 50 states may take advantage of education savings
accounts to save up to $2,000 annually in tax-free accounts for
K-16 educational expenses. Six states have education tax
credits.
Arizona.A 1997 Arizona law allows
a tax credit of up to $500 for individuals and $625 to married
couples for donations to private tuition scholarship programs.
Individuals can also receive a credit of up to $200 for donations
to public school extracurricular activities.[35]
On January 26, 1999, the
Arizona Supreme Court upheld the tax credit plan, finding that it
was neutral with regard to religion and beneficial to low-income
families who have been "coerced into accepting public education."[36]
Approximately 19,000
students attend schools of choice with support from this
program.[37] More than 80 percent of the
scholarship recipients are from lower-income families. A Cato
Institute report found that the credit is revenue-neutral
because the scholarships cost less than the per-pupil expenditure
at the public schools. The system saves money when students
transfer to less costly private schools, offsetting the revenue
loss of the tax credit.[38]
Florida. Under this program, which
the state legislature passed in 2001, corporations can receive tax
credits of up to 75 percent of their corporate income tax bill for
donations to scholarship funds. Tuition scholarship organizations
can provide low-income students with tuition scholarships worth up
to $3,500 to attend a private school or a $500 voucher to attend a
public school in another school district.[39] During the
2003-2004 school year, approximately 13,000 students received
scholarships under this program.[40]
Illinois. In 1999, the Illinois
legislature approved a tax credit plan for education
expenditures that provides an annual tax credit of up to 25
percent of education-related expenses (e.g., tuition, book fees,
and lab fees) in excess of $250, up to a maximum of $500 per
family.[41] In 2001, 189,055 families took
this education tax credit.[42]
Opponents have brought two
lawsuits against the credit. The plaintiffs lost in both circuit
and appellate courts, and in 2001, the Illinois Supreme Court
upheld the credit by refusing to review the lower court rulings.[43]
Iowa. In 1987, the Iowa
legislature enacted a law providing tax credits and deductions for
education expenses. Under the original law, families earning less
than $45,000 could deduct up to $1,000 per child from their state
income taxes for education expenses. Taxpayers using the standard
deduction could take a tax credit of up to $50 for education
expenses for each child.[44] The law was amended in 1996
and 1998 to allow all families to take a tax credit of 25 percent
of the first $1,000 spent on their children's education.[45] In 2000, 141,500 families
took an education tax credit.[46]
Minnesota.
Since 1955,
Minnesota families have been able to deduct education expenses from
their state taxes.[47] In 1997, the legislature
enacted a measure giving Minnesota families who earn $33,500 or
less a refundable tax credit of up to $1,000 per student (up to
$2,000 per family) for education expenses, excluding tuition. The
law increased the maximum deduction to $1,625 for expenses
associated with elementary school education, including
tuition, and up to $2,500 for junior high school and senior high
school expenses.[48] In 2001, 200,000 families took
the deduction, and 56,414 families took the education tax credit.[49]
Pennsylvania.
In 2001, the
Pennsylvania legislature passed an education tax credit
program that permits corporations to receive credits of up to
$200,000 for contributions to organizations that provide
scholarships to private schools or grants to public schools
for innovative programs. Scholarship recipients must meet income
eligibility guidelines.[50] During the 2003-2004 school
year, more than 15,000 students received support through this
program.[51]
Home
Schooling
Home schooling is the
fastest growing form of school choice. From 1994 to 2003, the
number of home-schooled students tripled, from 345,000 to
1,100,000.[52] On average, home school
students have higher academic achievement than students in public
or private schools. Home-schooled elementary school students
tend to perform one grade level higher than their peers in
traditional schools. By high school, they are four grade levels
above the national average.[53] Nearly all
home-schooled students participate in at least two
extracurricular activities such as dance, sports, music, and
volunteerism. In fact, the average home school student
participates in five such activities.[54]
Although home schooling is
legal in all 50 states, laws vary. Some states heavily regulate
home schooling. In others, there is no contact between the state
and the parents.
Remaining
Challenges
Despite the growing
popularity of parental choice programs, legal barriers
remain.
Although the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that voucher programs do not violate the Constitution,
even when participating schools are overwhelmingly religious,
some state provisions, such as Blaine Amendments, threaten choice
programs.[55]
Blaine Amendments have an
anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant history. After the Civil War, the
emerging public schools were predominantly Protestant in
character, often requiring that the King James Version of the Bible
be read in classrooms. U.S. Representative James Blaine (R-ME)
attempted to prevent the funding of non-Protestant,
"sectarian" institutions, many of which were founded by Catholics,
with a constitutional amendment.[56] Although he
failed, he and similarly minded individuals successfully promoted
the adoption of constitutional provisions in 37 states prohibiting
the funding of faith-based institutions.
As choice programs have
developed in the 20th century, opponents have attempted to strike
them down under Blaine and other constitutional provisions. In
the past two years, opponents of choice prompted the Colorado
Supreme Court to nullify its nascent voucher program. Other
programs- like those in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Arizona-have survived
legal scrutiny.
The fate of others, like
the Florida A+ Program and Maine's tuitioning program, remains
undecided. In August 2004, the Florida First District Court of
Appeal ruled by a vote of two to one that Florida's program was
unconstitutional. The full 15-member court also ruled against the
program. The program continues while the state Supreme Court is
reviewing the case.[57] The decision could affect
Florida's other school choice options, as well as higher education
scholarships and faith-based state social services
programs.
On March 24, 2005, a
federal district court dismissed a suit by the Arizona Civil
Liberties Union challenging the state's education tax credit. The
case was dismissed initially under the federal Tax Injunction Act,
which requires that such cases be adjudicated in state court.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the case must be heard
in federal court. The program has already been upheld by the
Arizona Supreme Court.[58]
In Georgia and Maine,
parents have gone on the offensive to gain options. In January
2005, three parents sued the state of Georgia, arguing that
its education system is unconstitutional because it does not
provide equal educational opportunities for families who are not
wealthy. The plaintiffs suggest several solutions, including
statewide public school choice and publicly funded vouchers,
although the suit does not use the term "vouchers."[59]
In March 2005, the
Institute for Justice presented oral arguments before the
Maine Supreme Judicial Court on behalf of Maine families seeking to
overturn a 1981 law that bars parents from choosing faith-based
schools under the state's voucher-like tuitioning program.[60] The case was filed shortly
after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Zelman v.
Simmons-Harris that voucher programs do not violate the
Constitution, even when participating schools are
overwhelmingly religious.
What
Congress Should Do
The 109th Congress will
have the opportunity to allow parents more freedom to make choices
for their children's education. Members can build on the D.C.
Opportunity Scholarship Program by supporting President Bush's
Choice Incentive Fund proposal, a $50 million fund included in the
President's budget that enables cities to create innovative
parental choice programs.[61]
In March, the Washington
Scholarship Fund (WSF), which administers the District's program,
the first federally funded voucher program in the United States,
announced that 2,702 families have applied for scholarships for the
2005-2006 school year. Over half of these applicants currently
attend schools in need of improvement under the federal No Child
Left Behind Act or will be enrolling in kindergarten in the
2005-2006 school year. The WSF expects to double the previous
year's program participation of 1,000 students.[62]
Specifically, Congress
should:
-
Support the $50 million Choice
Incentive Fund. This would enable other cities to create innovative
programs like the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program.
-
Support the D.C. Opportunity
Scholarship program, which is increasingly popular with D.C.
residents, in 2006 appropriations legislation.
-
Hold hearings and enact
legislation to improve and expand implementation of the choice
provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act.
Conclusion
Parental choice programs
are spreading throughout the country. Eleven states and the
District of Columbia have publicly funded voucher or tax credit
programs, and 40 states and the District of Columbia have charter
school laws. Other states and Congress may yet adopt parental
choice legislation before the end of the year. The principles
of parental empowerment and educational opportunity are
shaping the education policy debate as more policymakers realize
the benefits that choice holds for the nation's
children.
Krista
Kafer is Senior Policy Analyst for Education at
The Heritage Foundation.
[1]In
these states, laws require districts to allow students to enroll in
other schools within (intradistrict choice) or outside of
(interdistrict choice) their home district. Capacity, racial
balance policies, and other rules may limit transfers. In other
states, state law allows public school choice, but districts are
not required to participate. See Todd Ziebarth, "School Choice:
State Laws," Education Commission of the States, updated May 2003,
at www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/13/75/1375.htm (April 13,
2005).
[2]H.B.
249, Utah Legislature, 2005 General Legislative Session, at
www.le.state.ut.us/~2005/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0249.htm (March
3, 2005), and Ronnie Lynn, "State School-Voucher Program Is Under
Way," The Salt Lake Tribune, March 11, 2005, at
www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2604538 (April 13, 2005).
[3]See
The Heritage Foundation, "Choices in Education" Web site, at
www.heritage.org/schoolchoice.
[4]U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
National Household Survey Data, 1994 and 1996; National Household
Education Survey, 1999; and Parent and Family Involvement in
Education Survey, in National Household Education Survey,
2003.
[5]In
the 2003-2004 school year, the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program
enrolled 14,000 students, the Cleveland Scholarship and
Tutoring Program enrolled more than 5,000 students, Florida's McKay
Scholarships for Children with Disabilities enrolled approximately
13,000 students, Florida's A+ Opportunity Scholarship Program
enrolled more than 650 students, Florida's Step-Up for Students
Scholarship Program enrolled approximately 13,000 students,
Washington, D.C.'s Opportunity Scholarship Program enrolled
more than 1,000 students, Arizona's Tuition Tax Credit Program
benefited more than 19,000 students, and Pennsylvania's Education
Improvement Tax Credit Program benefited more than 15,000 students.
Alliance for School Choice, "School Choice Facts," at
www.allianceforschoolchoice.org/facts.php (April 11, 2005).
An estimated 7,147 students attended private schools under
Vermont's tuitioning program, and more than 5,900 attended private
schools under Maine's tuitioning program during the 2001-2002
school year. Marya DeGrow, "Educational Vouchers and Tax Credits,"
School Reform News, February 1, 2003, at
www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=11498 (April 7, 2005).
In 2000, 141,500 Iowa families took an education tax credit. In
2001, 189,055 Illinois families took a tax credit for education
purposes and 200,000 Minnesota families took a deduction. Nina
Manzi and Lisa Larson, "Income Tax Deductions and Credits for
Public and Nonpublic Education in Minnesota," Minnesota House of
Representatives Research Department, December 2003.
[6]U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
National Household Education Surveys Program, "Trends in the Use of
School Choice 1993-1999," May 2003.
[7]U.S.
Government Accountability Office, No Child Left Behind Act:
Education Needs to Provide Additional Technical Assistance and
Conduct Implementation, GAO-05-7, December 2004, p. 14, at
www.gao.gov/new.items/d057.pdf (April 13, 2005).
[8]Thomas
D. Snyder, Digest of Education Statistics, 2002, U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics, NCES 2003-060, 2003, p. 12, Table 3, at
nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003060a.pdf (April 13,
2005).
[9]U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
The Condition of Education 2004, NCES 2004-076, 2004,
Indicator 25, at nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004077.pdf (April 18,
2005).
[10]Lee
McGraw Hoffman, "Overview of Public Elementary and Secondary
Schools and Districts: School Year 2001-02," U.S. Department of
Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of
Education Sciences, NCES 2003-411, May 2003, at
nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003411.pdf (April 18,
2005).
[11]See
Dr. Donald Waldrip, "A Brief History of Magnet Schools," Magnet
Schools of America, at www.magnet.edu/about.htm (April 7,
2005).
[12]Stacey
Bielick and Christopher Chapman, "Trends in the Use of School
Choice, 1993-1999," U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics, NCES 2003-031, May 2003, at
nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003031.pdf (April 18,
2005).
[13]See
Education Commission of the States, "Choice," at
www.ecs.org/ecsmain.asp?page=/html/issue.asp?issueID=22
(April 7, 2005).
[14]Center
for Education Reform, "Charter Schools," at
www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=stateStats&pSectionID=15&cSectionID=44
(March 30, 2005).
[16]Caroline
M. Hoxby, "Achievement in Charter Schools and Regular Public
Schools in the United States: Understanding the Differences,"
Harvard University and National Bureau of Economic Research,
December 2004, at www.heritage.org/research/
education/upload/hoxbycharter_dec2.pdf (April 18,
2005).
[17]
[19]See
The Heritage Foundation, "Research," in "Choices in Education" Web
site, at www.heritage.org/Research/education/
schoolchoice/schoolchoice_research.cfm.
[20]Spencer
S. Hsu, "How Vouchers Came to D.C.," Education Next, Fall
2004.
[21]Press
release, "Scholars Help Evaluate DC School Choice Program,"
University News, August 2, 2004, at
lumen.georgetown.edu/explore/documents/?DocumentID=1033
(September 20, 2004); Patrick Wolf, Babette Gutmann, Nada Eissa,
Michael Puma, and Marsha Silverberg, "Evaluation of the DC
Opportunity Scholarship Program: First Year Report on
Participation," U.S. Department of Education/Institute of
Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and
Regional Assistance, April 2005, at
www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/choice/dcchoice-yearone/choice.pdf
(April 18, 2005).
[22]Wolf
et al., "Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship
Program," p. xiv.
[23]Alliance
for School Choice, "School Choice Facts," at
www.allianceforschoolchoice.org/facts.php (April 18,
2005).
[24]Marya
DeGrow, "Educational Vouchers and Tax Credits," Heartland Institute
School Reform News, February 1, 2003, at
www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=11498 (April 7, 2005),
and Alliance for School Choice, "School Choice Facts."
[25]Lisa
Fine, "Florida's 'Other' Voucher Program Taking Off," Education
Week, August 8, 2001.
[26]Institute
for Justice, "The Case for School Choice: Raymond, Maine,"
Litigation Backgrounder, 1997, at www.ij.org/
schoolchoice/maine/backgrounder.html (April 18,
2005).
[27]John
Gehring, "Legal Battle Over School Vouchers Returns to Maine,"
Education Week, September 25, 2002.
[28]Alliance
for School Choice, "School Choice Facts."
[29]Libby
Sternberg, "Lessons from Vermont: 132-Year-Old Voucher Program
Rebuts Critics," Cato Institute Briefing Paper No. 67,
September 10, 2001, at www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp67.pdf
(April 18, 2005).
[30]DeGrow,
"Educational Vouchers and Tax Credits."
[31]Alliance
for School Choice, "School Choice Facts."
[32]
Jackson
v. Benson,
578 N.W.2d 602 (Wis. S. Ct. 1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S.
997 (1998). See also Institute for Justice, "Milwaukee School
Choice: Jackson v. Benson, Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds
Expanded Milwaukee School Choice Program," at
www.ij.org/schoolchoice/milwaukee/index.html (April 18,
2005), and DeGrow, "Educational Vouchers and Tax
Credits."
[33]H.B.
249, Utah Legislature, and Lynn, "State School-Voucher Program Is
Under Way."
[34]Tiffany
Erikson, "Huntsman Signs Special-Needs Bill," The Deseret
News, March 11, 2005, at deseretnews.com/dn/view/
0,1249,600117819,00.html (April 18, 2005).
[35]DeGrow,
"Educational Vouchers and Tax Credits."
[36]
Kotterman
v. Killian,
972 P. 2d 606, 615 (1999).
[37]See
Alliance for School Choice, "School Choice Facts."
[38]Carrie
Lips and Jennifer Jacoby, "The Arizona Scholarship Tax Credit:
Giving Parents Choices, Saving Taxpayers Money," Cato Institute
Policy Analysis No. 414, September 17, 2001, at
www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa414.pdf (April 18, 2005).
[39]Manhattan
Institute for Policy Research, Education Research Office,
"Corporate Tax Credit Scholarships," 2003, at
www.miedresearchoffice.org/corporatetaxscholarships.htm
(April 18, 2005).
[40]Alliance
for School Choice, "School Choice Facts."
[41]S.B.
1075, Illinois Senate, 91st General Assembly.
[42]Manzi
and Larson, "Income Tax Deductions and Credits for Public and
Nonpublic Education in Minnesota."
[43]
Griffith
v. Bower,
319 Ill. App. 3d 993 (5th Dist.), app. denied, 195 Ill. 2d,
577 (2001); Toney v. Bower, 318 Ill. App. 3d, 1194 (4th
Dist.), app. denied, 195 Ill. 2d 573 (2001).
[44]Tom
Mirga, "Tuition Tax Credits Are Challenged in Iowa," Education
Week, October 28, 1987.
[45]"Legislative
Update," Education Week, June 5, 1996, and Robert C.
Johnston, "Despite Talk, Lawmakers Slow to Copy Tax Credits,"
Education Week, June 3, 1998.
[46]Manzi
and Larson, "Income Tax Deductions and Credits for Public and
Nonpublic Education in Minnesota."
[47]See
Minnesota House of Representatives Research Department,
"Minnesota's Public School Fee Law and Education Tax Credit and
Deduction," Information Brief, January 2003, at
www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/feelaw.pdf (April 7,
2005).
[49]Manzi
and Larson, "Income Tax Deductions and Credits for Public and
Nonpublic Education in Minnesota."
[50]DeGrow,
"Educational Vouchers and Tax Credits."
[51]Alliance
for School Choice, "School Choice Facts."
[52]U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
National Household Survey Data, 1994, 1996, 1999, and 2003;
National Household Education Survey, 1999; and Parent and Family
Involvement in Education Survey, in National Household Education
Survey, 2003.
[53]Lawrence
M. Rudner, Ph.D., "The Scholastic Achievement and Demographic
Characteristics of Home School Students in 1998," Home School Legal
Defense Association, 1999, at
www.hslda.org/docs/study/rudner1999/FullText.asp (April 18,
2005).
[54]Home
School Legal Defense Association, "Home Education Across the United
States: Family Characteristics, Student Achievement, &
Longitudinal Traits," at
www.hslda.org/docs/study/ray1997/17.asp (April 18,
2005).
[55]
Zelman
v. Simmons-Harris,
536 U.S. 639 (2002).
[56]SeeBecket
Fund for Religious Liberty, "Blaine Amendments," at
www.blaineamendments.org (April 7, 2005).
[57]See
Institute for Justice, "Florida School Choice: Holmes v.
Bush,Institute for Justice and Parents Defend Florida's
Groundbreaking Statewide School Choice Program," at
www.ij.org/schoolchoice/florida/index.html (April 7,
2005).
[58]See
Institute for Justice, "Arizona School Choice: Winn v.
Hibbs, Arizona Tax Credits (Federal Court Case)," at
www.ij.org/ schoolchoice/az_taxcredits2/index.html (April 7,
2005).
[59]Paul
Donsky, "Fed-Up Father Joins Suit for Better Schools," The Atlanta
Journal-Constitution, January 28, 2005, p. D1.
[60]See
Institute for Justice, "Maine School Choice: Anderson v. Town of
Durham, Institute for Justice and Maine Parents Challenge
State Law Barring Religious Options from School Choice Program," at
www.ij.org/schoolchoice/maine2/index.html (April 7,
2005).
[61]Office
of Management and Budget, "FY 06 Budget Priorities:
Department of Education," at www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
fy2006/education.html (April 7, 2005).
[62]Press
release, "High Demand for School Choice," Washington Scholarship
Fund, March 23, 2005.