Skip to content

PARENT POWER!

  • National Overview
  • Select Your State
  • About The Index
Menu
  • National Overview
  • Select Your State
  • About The Index

PARENT POWER!

  • National Overview
  • Select Your State
  • About The Index
Menu
  • National Overview
  • Select Your State
  • About The Index

PARENT POWER!

  • National Overview
  • Select Your State
  • About The Index
Menu
  • National Overview
  • Select Your State
  • About The Index

Iowa

U.S.
Rank

#39
Overall PPI Score:
61.8%
PPI Grade Key:
← Back to Iowa state overview
A
B
C
D
F
  • Opportunity
  • Innovation
  • Policy Environment

Charter Schools

Score:

55%

Grade:

F

Rank:

#46

A modest change in law enacted in May 2021 created more opportunities for charter schools in the state, but given the lack of funding certainly, independence and vital authorizers needed to make the state’s charter law truly conducive to opportunity, this change does not alter the sad score of F. 

Fast Facts:

Law passed: 2002

Most recently amended: 2021

Number of charter schools: 2

Number of charter students: 119

Cap on the number of schools allowed:? Yes. No caps on the number of charter schools, but the state board may approve no more than 10 innovation zone applications.

Virtual charters allowed? No

Charter Law Analysis:

AUTHORIZERS: Iowa’s original charter school law required school districts to first approve applicants, then go to the state board of education for approval.  On May 19, 2021 the state changed the law and now allows charter school applicants to bypass school districts and go directly to the state board of education for approvals. Applicants still have the option to follow the previous procedure of going through local school districts first if they choose. 

GROWTH: The recently passed HF 813 will allow the state board of education to approve charter schools established by independent founding groups, operating as a new attendance center independently from a public school district, so its more likely to yield fruit, but still too soon to tell.

OPERATIONS: Charter schools are subject to all the same regulatory restrictions as traditional district schools, but can apply for exemptions in their application as to  which statutes and regulations they do not intend to comply with. They are also automatically subject to collective bargaining agreements.

EQUITY: There is no parity with charters; districts control the funds.

Learn More:

Iowa Charter School Law

Choice Programs (Scholarships, Vouchers, Tax Credits, etc.)

Score:

65%

Grade:

D

Rank:

#24

A very modest tax-credit scholarship program which serves just under 11,000 students was enacted in 2006.

Fast Facts:

Law enacted: 1987 & 2006 (amended in 2021)

Number of programs: 2

Statewide Participation: 10,791

Types of programs: Tax Credit Scholarship, Individual Tax Credit / Deduction

Choice Laws & Analysis:

Tax-Credit Scholarship
School Tuition Organization Tax Credit
In May 2021, the state increased funding for the state’s tax-credit scholarship program enacted in 2006 by $5 million, from $15 million to $20 million as of January 2022.  The amendment also increases tax credits received for donations from 65% to 75%. This program traditionally serves low-income and working class households and may affect roughly 11,000  students in the state with an average scholarship amount of $1,614.

Individual Tax Credit/Deduction
Tuition and Textbook Tax Credit
Parents receive a very limited tax credit for qualified educational expenses including textbooks, materials for extracurricular activities and music rentals, uniforms, tuitions, and more, helping approximately 116,000 participating tax-payers.  While the most recent law (HF 847) doubles the tax credit amount students receive from $250 to $500 and makes homeschool families eligible for the program, it’s still negligible and makes little impact on a parent who needs to pay for their kids’ own education.

Learn More:

EdChoice Analysis on Iowa 

Federation for Children Choice Program Information

2019 ALEC Report Card on American Education

Teacher Quality

Score:

63%

Grade:

D

Rank:

#50

Neither has requirements for teacher content knowledge, nor performance metrics in evaluations.

TRAINING AND RECRUITMENT:  66%
General Teacher Preparation 65%
Elementary Teacher Preparation 60%
Secondary Teacher Preparation 65%
Special Education Teacher Preparation 68%
Alternate Routes 70%  

STAFFING AND SUPPORT: 58%
Hiring 55%
Retaining Effective Teachers 61%

TEACHER EVALUATION: 69%

TEACHER COMPENSATION: 58%

Learn More:

National Council for Teacher Quality State Teacher Policy Database

Charter Schools

Score:

55%

Grade:

F

Rank:

#46

A modest change in law enacted in May 2021 created more opportunities for charter schools in the state, but given the lack of funding certainly, independence and vital authorizers needed to make the state’s charter law truly conducive to opportunity, this change does not alter the sad score of F. 

Fast Facts:

Law passed: 2002

Most recently amended: 2021

Number of charter schools: 2

Number of charter students: 119

Cap on the number of schools allowed:? Yes. No caps on the number of charter schools, but the state board may approve no more than 10 innovation zone applications.

Virtual charters allowed? No

Charter Law Analysis:

AUTHORIZERS: Iowa’s original charter school law required school districts to first approve applicants, then go to the state board of education for approval.  On May 19, 2021 the state changed the law and now allows charter school applicants to bypass school districts and go directly to the state board of education for approvals. Applicants still have the option to follow the previous procedure of going through local school districts first if they choose. 

GROWTH: The recently passed HF 813 will allow the state board of education to approve charter schools established by independent founding groups, operating as a new attendance center independently from a public school district, so its more likely to yield fruit, but still too soon to tell.

OPERATIONS: Charter schools are subject to all the same regulatory restrictions as traditional district schools, but can apply for exemptions in their application as to  which statutes and regulations they do not intend to comply with. They are also automatically subject to collective bargaining agreements.

EQUITY: There is no parity with charters; districts control the funds.

Learn More:

Iowa Charter School Law

Choice Programs (Scholarships, Vouchers, Tax Credits, etc.)

Score:

65%

Grade:

D

Rank:

#24

A very modest tax-credit scholarship program which serves just under 11,000 students was enacted in 2006.

Fast Facts:

Law enacted: 1987 & 2006 (amended in 2021)

Number of programs: 2

Statewide Participation: 10,791

Types of programs: Tax Credit Scholarship, Individual Tax Credit / Deduction

Choice Laws & Analysis:

Tax-Credit Scholarship
School Tuition Organization Tax Credit
In May 2021, the state increased funding for the state’s tax-credit scholarship program enacted in 2006 by $5 million, from $15 million to $20 million as of January 2022.  The amendment also increases tax credits received for donations from 65% to 75%. This program traditionally serves low-income and working class households and may affect roughly 11,000  students in the state with an average scholarship amount of $1,614.

Individual Tax Credit/Deduction
Tuition and Textbook Tax Credit
Parents receive a very limited tax credit for qualified educational expenses including textbooks, materials for extracurricular activities and music rentals, uniforms, tuitions, and more, helping approximately 116,000 participating tax-payers.  While the most recent law (HF 847) doubles the tax credit amount students receive from $250 to $500 and makes homeschool families eligible for the program, it’s still negligible and makes little impact on a parent who needs to pay for their kids’ own education.

Learn More:

EdChoice Analysis on Iowa 

Federation for Children Choice Program Information

2019 ALEC Report Card on American Education

Teacher Quality

Score:

63%

Grade:

D

Rank:

#50

Neither has requirements for teacher content knowledge, nor performance metrics in evaluations.

TRAINING AND RECRUITMENT:  66%
General Teacher Preparation 65%
Elementary Teacher Preparation 60%
Secondary Teacher Preparation 65%
Special Education Teacher Preparation 68%
Alternate Routes 70%  

STAFFING AND SUPPORT: 58%
Hiring 55%
Retaining Effective Teachers 61%

TEACHER EVALUATION: 69%

TEACHER COMPENSATION: 58%

Learn More:

National Council for Teacher Quality State Teacher Policy Database

Digital & Personalized Learning

Digital Learning:

Score:

72%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#35

Iowa has worked to improve internet connectivity and access to devices. The Iowa Communications Network (ICN) is a state agency that manages the fiber optic telecommunications network in the state. There are currently 498 K-12 public and private schools, 47 Higher Institutions, and 9 Area Education Agencies authorized to use the network to receive high speed internet. 

Iowa Learning Online was a statewide virtual school offering online courses to public school students, however ILO services ended June 30, 2020. The DOE made an announcement that after the 2019-2020 school year, “districts will either need to create their own online classes or work with a third-party vendor.”

In terms of access to devices, the Iowa DOE has been continuously increasing their 1:1 device per student goal over the past 10 years. The Iowa Digital Learning Plan is a roadmap for transitioning all schools to digital learning. The plan outlines “a vision for what digital learning could look like in Iowa.

Future Ready Iowa: Iowa’s goal by the end of 2025 is for 70% of the workforce to have education or training beyond high school to meet evolving industry needs. Future Ready Iowa has resulted in various legislation, such as the Iowa Clearinghouse for WorkBased Learning. This program connects students and employers using virtual work-based learning projects.

The Iowa Digital Learning Plan aims to ensure that states “teacher preparation programs with a solid understanding of how to use technology to support learning. Effective use of technology is not an optional add-on or a skill that we simply can expect teachers to pick up once they get into the classroom.” Two examples reflecting this are happening now at The University of Iowa and Iowa State University: 

  • The University of Iowa’s The Baker Teacher Leader Center has the goal of cultivating digital literate teachers by developing mandatory digital learning coursework to graduate. “Through the Center, students are required to progress through a series of professional development workshops, community engagement experiences, and complete the Level 1 Google Educator Certification.” After graduating from this program, first year teachers are well-equipped with a Level 1 Google Educator Certification and a Chromebook. 
  • Iowa State University’s School of Education offers a minor in Learning Technologies, which prepares prospective teachers to enter the classroom adept in educational technology from day one. The benefits of ISU’s teacher preparation program are evident through their partnership with local K-12 school districts. “Roland-Story, Gilbert, and Colo-Nesco schools all maintain 1:1 device programs in their districts and hire ISU teacher candidates enrolled in the Learning Technologies minor to help support these programs.”

The Iowa City Community School District is a part of the Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools, giving over 13,000 students in the state access to digital learning opportunities. The League of Innovative Schools is a network of school leaders in 114 districts in 34 states that aim to enhance and scale digital learning opportunities for students across the nation. 

Bandwidth: “99.7% of students in Iowa can access the Internet at speeds of 100 kbps per student, and many students are connected at higher speeds. But there is still work to be done. 1,640 students still need more bandwidth for digital learning.”

Personalized Learning:

The state once had two promising programs to support personalized learning—Innovation Zone Schools and Competency-Based Education Grant—but they are no longer active. 

Learn More:

Iowa Communications Network (ICN)

Iowa Digital Learning Plan

Iowa Clearinghouse for WorkBased Learning

League of Innovative Schools

COVID-19 Response

In the wake of Covid, Iowa did much less than most other states to ensure continuity of learning. After closing schools on March 15, on. March 27, they provided guidelines for remote learning that discouraged continuous learning.

“Districts and accredited nonpublic schools may choose not to offer continuous learning, in which case the Department will follow up to ensure that missed days of instruction are made up. The total required hours or days of instruction will be reduced by those already waived by the legislature.”  Some resources for those that choose to offer remote learning were provided.

Iowa’s resource page is also very poor. It is not very interactive and provides little information catered directly for parents. Many links take users to outside web pages, which limits the effectiveness of the service for low bandwidth families, who need the resources the most.

Gov. Reynolds has made it clear that schools must provide in person instruction in the fall, as she is requiring 50% of time to be spent in the classroom across the state despite bipartisan criticism for this plan.

Fast Facts

4th Grade Math Proficiency:

41%

8th Grade Math Proficiency:

28%

12th Grade Math Proficiency:

24% (nat'l average)

4th Grade Reading Proficiency:

33%

8th Grade Reading Proficiency:

29%

12th Grade Reading Proficiency:

37% (nat'l average)

Graduation Rate:

92%

Average SAT Score:

1196/1600

Average ACT Score:

21.4/36

Public School Enrollment:

510.661

Percent Enrolled in Charter Schools:

0%

Average Student Funding:

$11,958.00
Digital & Personalized Learning
Digital Learning:

Score:

72%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#35

Iowa has worked to improve internet connectivity and access to devices. The Iowa Communications Network (ICN) is a state agency that manages the fiber optic telecommunications network in the state. There are currently 498 K-12 public and private schools, 47 Higher Institutions, and 9 Area Education Agencies authorized to use the network to receive high speed internet. 

Iowa Learning Online was a statewide virtual school offering online courses to public school students, however ILO services ended June 30, 2020. The DOE made an announcement that after the 2019-2020 school year, “districts will either need to create their own online classes or work with a third-party vendor.”

In terms of access to devices, the Iowa DOE has been continuously increasing their 1:1 device per student goal over the past 10 years. The Iowa Digital Learning Plan is a roadmap for transitioning all schools to digital learning. The plan outlines “a vision for what digital learning could look like in Iowa.

Future Ready Iowa: Iowa’s goal by the end of 2025 is for 70% of the workforce to have education or training beyond high school to meet evolving industry needs. Future Ready Iowa has resulted in various legislation, such as the Iowa Clearinghouse for WorkBased Learning. This program connects students and employers using virtual work-based learning projects.

The Iowa Digital Learning Plan aims to ensure that states “teacher preparation programs with a solid understanding of how to use technology to support learning. Effective use of technology is not an optional add-on or a skill that we simply can expect teachers to pick up once they get into the classroom.” Two examples reflecting this are happening now at The University of Iowa and Iowa State University: 

  • The University of Iowa’s The Baker Teacher Leader Center has the goal of cultivating digital literate teachers by developing mandatory digital learning coursework to graduate. “Through the Center, students are required to progress through a series of professional development workshops, community engagement experiences, and complete the Level 1 Google Educator Certification.” After graduating from this program, first year teachers are well-equipped with a Level 1 Google Educator Certification and a Chromebook. 
  • Iowa State University’s School of Education offers a minor in Learning Technologies, which prepares prospective teachers to enter the classroom adept in educational technology from day one. The benefits of ISU’s teacher preparation program are evident through their partnership with local K-12 school districts. “Roland-Story, Gilbert, and Colo-Nesco schools all maintain 1:1 device programs in their districts and hire ISU teacher candidates enrolled in the Learning Technologies minor to help support these programs.”

The Iowa City Community School District is a part of the Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools, giving over 13,000 students in the state access to digital learning opportunities. The League of Innovative Schools is a network of school leaders in 114 districts in 34 states that aim to enhance and scale digital learning opportunities for students across the nation. 

Bandwidth: “99.7% of students in Iowa can access the Internet at speeds of 100 kbps per student, and many students are connected at higher speeds. But there is still work to be done. 1,640 students still need more bandwidth for digital learning.”

Personalized Learning:

The state once had two promising programs to support personalized learning—Innovation Zone Schools and Competency-Based Education Grant—but they are no longer active. 

Learn More:

Iowa Communications Network (ICN)

Iowa Digital Learning Plan

Iowa Clearinghouse for WorkBased Learning

League of Innovative Schools

COVID-19 Response

In the wake of Covid, Iowa did much less than most other states to ensure continuity of learning. After closing schools on March 15, on. March 27, they provided guidelines for remote learning that discouraged continuous learning.

“Districts and accredited nonpublic schools may choose not to offer continuous learning, in which case the Department will follow up to ensure that missed days of instruction are made up. The total required hours or days of instruction will be reduced by those already waived by the legislature.”  Some resources for those that choose to offer remote learning were provided.

Iowa’s resource page is also very poor. It is not very interactive and provides little information catered directly for parents. Many links take users to outside web pages, which limits the effectiveness of the service for low bandwidth families, who need the resources the most.

Gov. Reynolds has made it clear that schools must provide in person instruction in the fall, as she is requiring 50% of time to be spent in the classroom across the state despite bipartisan criticism for this plan.

Fast Facts

4th Grade Math Proficiency:

41%

8th Grade Math Proficiency:

28%

12th Grade Math Proficiency:

24% (nat’l average)

4th Grade Reading Proficiency:

33%

8th Grade Reading Proficiency:

29%

12th Grade Reading Proficiency:

37% (nat’l average)

Graduation Rate:

92%

Average SAT Score:

1196/1600

Average ACT Score:

21.4/36

Public School Enrollment:

510.661

Percent Enrolled in Charter Schools:

0%

Average Student Funding:

$11,958.00

Leadership

Your governor:

Kim Reynolds (R)

First term began in 2017 (no term limit)

Newly re-elected Gov. Kim Reynolds has been a steady supporter of parent power since her days as Lt. Governor.  In her response to President Biden’s State of the Union address, Governor Kim Reynolds spoke out strongly for parents. During her speech, Governor Reynolds made one message crystal clear: “Parents Matter.” Under Reynolds’ leadership, Iowa was the first state to reopen school after the COVID-19 pandemic – and as she said, “Keeping schools open is only the start of the pro-parent, pro-family revolution.”

In 2021, she pushed hard for the Student First Scholarship which passed the Senate and now needs to redouble her efforts on her party allies in the House to put the bill on her desk to sign.

State Legislature:

Iowa’s legislature recently has been more aggressive in providing parents more options with charter and choice expansion bills.  Obviously when a Governor boldly leads, a legislature will respond.

Constitutional Issues

Iowa does not have a Blaine Amendment, but its constitution contains a Compelled Support Clause, “which the Iowa Supreme Court has interpreted as prohibiting direct payment of public funds to religious schools. In general, however, the Court has noted that the Compelled Support Clause seeks to achieve the same end as the federal Establishment Clause and should be interpreted in line with federal Establishment Clause precedent.” (Institute for Justice)

Learn More:

Institute for Justice: Iowa School Choice and State Constitution

Transparency

School report cards are featured on the main page of Iowa’s DOE website under Features, and clicking Iowa School Performance Profiles. Reports are displayed in a clear format, and give a summative rating of overall performance and a state average score,which is a useful feature for parents. The report includes detailed information on learning measures such as achievement, graduate rate, and postsecondary readiness. The report also includes important non-academic data to demonstrate school environment and culture. Educational options are easily accessible on the main DOE page by clicking PK12 –> Options for Educational Choice.

School board elections are not at the same time as general elections, which usually means lower voter turnout.

Leadership
Your governor:

Kim Reynolds (R)

First term began in 2017 (no term limit)

Newly re-elected Gov. Kim Reynolds has been a steady supporter of parent power since her days as Lt. Governor.  In her response to President Biden’s State of the Union address, Governor Kim Reynolds spoke out strongly for parents. During her speech, Governor Reynolds made one message crystal clear: “Parents Matter.” Under Reynolds’ leadership, Iowa was the first state to reopen school after the COVID-19 pandemic – and as she said, “Keeping schools open is only the start of the pro-parent, pro-family revolution.”

In 2021, she pushed hard for the Student First Scholarship which passed the Senate and now needs to redouble her efforts on her party allies in the House to put the bill on her desk to sign.

State Legislature:

Iowa’s legislature recently has been more aggressive in providing parents more options with charter and choice expansion bills.  Obviously when a Governor boldly leads, a legislature will respond.

Constitutional Issues

Iowa does not have a Blaine Amendment, but its constitution contains a Compelled Support Clause, “which the Iowa Supreme Court has interpreted as prohibiting direct payment of public funds to religious schools. In general, however, the Court has noted that the Compelled Support Clause seeks to achieve the same end as the federal Establishment Clause and should be interpreted in line with federal Establishment Clause precedent.” (Institute for Justice)

Learn More:

Institute for Justice: Iowa School Choice and State Constitution

Transparency

School report cards are featured on the main page of Iowa’s DOE website under Features, and clicking Iowa School Performance Profiles. Reports are displayed in a clear format, and give a summative rating of overall performance and a state average score,which is a useful feature for parents. The report includes detailed information on learning measures such as achievement, graduate rate, and postsecondary readiness. The report also includes important non-academic data to demonstrate school environment and culture. Educational options are easily accessible on the main DOE page by clicking PK12 –> Options for Educational Choice.

School board elections are not at the same time as general elections, which usually means lower voter turnout.

Download State Rankings

State Organizations

PPI Resources

Evaluate Your Schools

Stay Informed

Select Your State

Alabama

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

District of Columbia

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Charter Schools

Charter schools are public schools, open by choice, free from most rules and regulations that hamper traditional public schools and held accountable for results.

Since 1991, when charter schools were first established in Minnesota, the principle has remained the same — increased operational autonomy in exchange for increased accountability for outcomes. This freedom to innovate allows academically excellent charter schools to flourish.

As of 2020, there were more than 7,300 charter schools across the country with more than 3.3 million students, with demand higher everywhere they are located. Forty-six states, including Washington, D.C. have charter school laws. West Virginia enacted the most recent law in 2019. All charter laws are not created equal, however, and in fact, many are so flawed that they allow for only minimal opportunity for parents. PPI draws from CER’s newest Charter School Law Rankings and Scorecard, produced in the summer of 2020. For the US as a whole, the glass is more empty than full when it comes to meaningful charter choices.

Since 1996, CER has researched, analyzed, and ranked charter school laws, taking the content of each law into consideration as well as how it impacts charter schools on the ground. This Parent Power Index looks at four main areas of each state’s law:

If it allows for multiple authorizers, and if applicants have the ability to appeal a denial; whether it allows for growth, particularly with no caps on number of schools or enrollment; if schools and teachers have freedom to innovate; and if there is equitable funding of schools, including for facilities and transportation.

Charter schools are the most analyzed public school reform in decades. Since 1996, CER has studied their impact, their environment, and their practice and made recommendations for how to improve each law. The Parent Power Index charter score is based on whether the law allows for freedom and flexibility that can ensure parents, teachers and the general public are able to build vibrant, successful charter schools without undue interference from flawed state regulators, with equitable funding and parents in the driver’s seat. More about how this works can be found in CER publications, most notably Charting a New Course and The Future of School.

In addition, past rankings document how states have grown or confined charter schools and what best practices should be followed. Finally CER has provided a model charter school law for policymakers that is the standard bearer for advocates who believe that parents, not systems, should drive education.

Choice Programs

Educational choice is best defined as the availability of a multitude of public programs that provide parents with the ability to include private and religious entities – schools, tutoring, and other organizations – in their choices. Those programs are enacted at the state level, allowing in a wide variety of ways that the funds allocated for education in a state either follow the student to the institution the parent chooses or, as in the case of tax credits, public funds are redistributed to support the choices parents make, rather than automatically going to government based school districts.

These options are often referred to as scholarship programs, vouchers, tax credits, education accounts and more.

The existence of a higher degree of educational choice in a community or state, particularly for lower income students, has been found to be a significant factor in improving education and ensuring all students have access to the best school that meets their individual needs. Where once private options were only available to the more advantaged, most choice programs today ensure that those without resources have the power to shape their student’s education and invest in their future.

PPI 2020 assesses the extent to which every state gives families better and more abundant educational options through various mechanisms. Choice programs are analyzed and evaluated on their potential to reach all children across a state and for the degree to which they can actually support the full choice of parents, as opposed to only providing a modest amount of financial support. Programs where a significant population of parents can obtain scholarships or vouchers to send their children to the school of their choice score higher than those that have limitations based on geography, income, and student eligibility constraints.

To determine scores, PPI relies on well-established organizations which study, advance and support such programs. The scores were developed with this lens, and on information and ratings from EdChoice’s School Choice in America Dashboard, American Legislative Exchange Council’s Report Card on American Education: 23rd Edition, and American Federation for Children’s School Choice Interactive Map.

Teacher Quality

Teacher Quality is an equally important facet of ensuring greater educational opportunity. There is a direct correlation between quality teachers and student achievement, and teachers have the power to foster highly effective learning environments and leave a lasting impact on the future of their students. State teacher policies are critical in ensuring that students have the opportunity to receive the best education possible. Without schools full of well-prepared teachers who are held accountable either directly to the parent or to taxpayers for student achievement, opportunity can be meaningless. Most states vary widely in the criteria used to train, hire, retain, evaluate, reward and advance teachers, and local rules also influence that criteria greatly, as do teachers unions. PPI looked again to the expert analysis of the National Council of Teacher Quality, and from several aspects of their work PPI extrapolated final teacher quality scores. (NCTQ does not grade each state.)

Relying solely on the rich data collected from the National Council on Teacher Quality, states are measured by across a wide range of policy categories: Training and Recruitment, Staffing and Support, Evaluation, and Compensation. The score is by no means comprehensive about teacher quality across every community and state, but it is based on the extent to which states rigorously expect, manage and measure different aspects of teacher training, hiring, evaluation and compensation. States score higher when they have strong, data-driven, performance-based accountability systems that ensure teachers are rewarded, retained, and advanced based on their effectiveness. Likewise, states that establish rigorous teacher preparation programs and offer alternative licensing programs earn higher scores.

For more information about the Teacher Quality landscape, please see the National Council on Teacher Quality’s detailed analysis in their State Teacher Policy Database.

Innovation

States are measured on their increasing commitment to and practice of innovative approaches to education that include digital learning models and pathways, full or in part, encouraging personalized learning through focus on competency and mastery – even on a pilot level – or by allowing flexibility in schools and school districts that want to do it. Personalized learning models value mastery of material over traditional subject matter time tests, and competency over end of course grades. While these practices are best decided locally, closest to the student, states can motivate, incentivize, fund, discourage or encourage.

To determine scores, the PPI drew heavily from ExcelinEd’s 2019 State Progress Toward Next Generation Learning, Aurora Institute’s 2020 Future-Focused State Policy Actions to Transform K-12 Education, and KnowledgeWorks’ 2019 State Policy Framework for Personalized Learning.

COVID-19 Response

When COVID-19 reached our shores in early 2020, states were forced to close their schools for in-person instruction. Whether and how to continue teaching and set expectations for continued learning outside of the classroom was a big debate. Many states and schools quickly pivoted to delivering education remotely, either through technology enabled tools or with low-tech paper packets and phone calls, or a combination of both. The response from schools and school districts varied widely, with some being willing to adapt and some actually discouraging both teaching and learning. CER tracked those responses (and continues to do so, given the fluidity of the situation). States that were encouraging, set expectations, and demanded that schools figure out whatever they could to keep moving students forward, tended to have more schools and districts that responded well and worked to deliver education regardless of challenges. Many states that had digital or virtual learning programs in place were able to make a more seamless shift. Innovative leaders at local and state levels rose to the occasion. But many states and localities dragged their feet and, in some cases, outright discouraged schooling to keep going, including forbidding teachers in some areas to be required to do any face to face teaching via technology.

States were evaluated based on reviewing their official notices and declarations, and by reviewing a broad array of surveys and data many groups have been maintaining. This score also factors in states’ prior commitments to expanding broadband and internet access and how they worked to provide devices to keep students learning and engaged.

What was, and is, a challenging and unprecedented time for schools, teachers, and parents was also an opportunity to look at states’ and schools’ abilities to adapt, be flexible, and innovate.

For more on Education Innovation, check out the CER ACTION Series:

  • Virtual Events & Videos
  • Key Data
  • Resources
  • Publications

Leadership

Improving education opportunity and innovation requires leaders who boldly and courageously push forward to create or expand successful programs that allow a wide variety of educational choice and individualized programs to thrive. Governors and state legislators are the most important entities in each state to pave the way, or deter, expanded parent power. Some leaders pay lip service to issues, while others wake up with a fire in their belly to ensure that they are doing what they can every day to push through conventional wisdom and demand 21st century schooling opportunities for all students.

Whether or not your governor is the bold, fire-in-the-belly kind, or a passive applauder of others’ efforts, is evaluated to help you push or prod or applaud. PPI looks at their positions AND actions on charter schools, choice programs, innovation, and commitment to increasing educational opportunities for all students at every level and summarizes it for you here. You have the power to elect leaders who prioritize parents and students!

Constitutional Issues

The ability for states to enact educational change can be significantly limited depending on certain provisions in state constitutions.

The most common clause that limits educational opportunity in most states are “Blaine Amendments” – named after 19th century Congressman James Blaine nearly 150 years ago. Historically, these provisions in 37 state constitutions were either interpreted to restrict educational choice programs that include private schools or have been a deterrent for many programs being considered, let alone enacted.

This issue received a great deal of press leading up to and following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 30, 2020 decision in the case of Espinoza vs Montana Department of Revenue, a case that dealt with Montana’s Blaine Amendment. That landmark decision found that the U.S. Constitution “forbids states from excluding religious schools as options for families participating in educational choice programs, including through Blaine Amendments.”

As a result, most states have a new path to enact programs that provide options for families, including religious schools. Their individual versions of Blaine Amendments can either be nullified with attorney generals’ opinions, with legislation or with both. Additional restrictions on expanded opportunity are often dedicated by what is called a Compelled Support Clause where dated constitutional language restricts public funding to government entities.

We look at each state’s particular constitutional issues, utilizing a number of sources, CER attorney analysis and the Institute for Justice’s research as our guide. Additional information about Espinoza and Blaine Amendments can be found here.

In addition, if states have other constitutional barriers to more opportunity, they are evaluated in this area.

Transparency

Transparency is a key element of providing great opportunities for students. Every parent needs and deserves full transparency of school-level data to allow them to make informed decisions and drive changes in how their students are educated. School report cards empower parents in their decision making by giving them access to meaningful and quality education data about a particular school or district. Report cards often provide information on student performance, student growth, attendance, graduation rates, demographics, teacher quality, school environment, assessments, and more. States that have greater transparency and accountability provide the public with data that is current, readily available, and easy to understand.

States are measured based on the transparency and accessibility of data for the average person looking to learn about their child’s school. States have more gas in the tank when school report cards are easily accessible from their state DOE homepage; report cards are comprehensive, user-friendly, and easy to understand; and information about educational options are readily available. Additionally, states score higher when they hold School Board Elections during the General Election cycle, as opposed to off-times of the year when turnout is low, because this tends to afford parents more power in their decision-making.