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

Pennsylvania

U.S.
Rank

#14
Overall PPI Score:
72.7%
PPI Grade Key:
← Back to Pennsylvania state overview
A
B
C
D
F
  • Opportunity
  • Innovation
  • Policy Environment

Charter Schools

Score:

75%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#23

One of the earliest states to adopt and grow charters has seen state-imposed obstacles year after year, compromising their ability to grow and prosper.  Envious school boards and politicians influenced by special interests however can’t stop the demand of teachers and parents who flock to the Keystone State’s almost 200 schools annually, with more on waiting lists.

Fast Facts:

Law passed: 1997

Most recently amended: 2017

Number of charter schools: 179

Number of charter students: 163,625

Cap on the number of schools allowed:? No

Virtual charters allowed? Yes

Charter Law Analysis:

AUTHORIZERS: Local school boards only for brick-and-mortar charter schools; two or more local school boards for regional charter schools; the state Board of Education only for virtual charters schools. Appeals for denied applications go to the State Charter School Appeals Board (CAB). If approved by the state CAB, the chair must sign the written charter if the local school board still refuses to grant the charter.

GROWTH: There are no caps on charter schools in the law, but several districts have imposed their own caps on the number of schools and/or number of students they will authorize. Larger districts like Philadelphia must contend with hostile bureaucracies that limit charter seats and funding.

OPERATIONS: Charter schools have a blanket waiver from most state and district regulations. However, many districts strictly regulate the charters they authorize. 

EQUITY: Charters receive no less than the budgeted total expenditure for each student enrolled minus certain categories of funding. Because districts make these calculations, Charter Schools often end up with inequitable funds. Districts also receive impact aid from students who go to charters in the first year. The state can intervene if districts are not making scheduled payments to charter schools. A lawsuit resulted in Philadelphia having to make up underfunding charters but the impact has not stuck. Gov. Tom Wolf, an opponent, is seeking to lower the special ed reimbursement dollars and reduce payment to virtual schools to a flat $9,500 per student. Charters receive approximately 27% less than other, comparable public schools.

Learn More:

Pennsylvania Charter School Law

Pennsylvania Coalition Of Public Charter Schools

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

Score:

72%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#7

Since 2018, there has been more than 20% increase in participation in the Educational Improvement and Opportunity Scholarship tax credit programs, with over 60,000 students.

Fast Facts:

Law enacted: 2001 and 2012

Number of programs: 2

Statewide Participation: 60,000

Types of programs: Tax Credit Scholarship

Choice Laws & Analysis:

Tax-Credit Scholarship
Educational Improvement Tax Credit Program
The Educational Improvement Tax Credit Program was launched in 2001 to help low and middle-income families receive private school and pre-kindergarten scholarships. In 2021 the program funding was increased by $40 million, for a total of $175 million. This expansion will provide an estimated 13,000 students with scholarship opportunities regardless of their ZIP code. Individual Scholarship amounts could increase as well under the new legislation. Under this program, corporations can receive tax credits equaling 75% for contributing one year, or 90% for contributing two consecutive years. The income limit is households that earn less than $90,000 plus $15,842 per child, and this program has no enrollment cap.


Tax-Credit Scholarship
Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit Program
This tax credit scholarship program began in 2012, and gives corporations tax credits for donating to Opportunity Scholarship Organizations. Students that live in low-achieving school zones and meet income requirements can apply for a scholarship to attend private schools. The income limit is families that earn less than $90,000 plus $15,842 per child. The program has a budget cap of $55 million, and no enrollment cap.

Learn More:

EdChoice Analysis on Pennsylvania

Federation for Children Choice Program Information

2019 ALEC Report Card on American Education

Teacher Quality

Score:

72%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#30

Student performance data is counted in “50 percent of a teacher’s overall evaluation rating”; districts have the freedom to set teacher pay scales but does not require teacher effectiveness to be a factor in compensation.

TRAINING AND RECRUITMENT: 70%
General Teacher Preparation 65%
Elementary Teacher Preparation 62%
Secondary Teacher Preparation 90%
Special Education Teacher Preparation 58%
Alternate Routes 75%  

STAFFING AND SUPPORT: 72%
Hiring 70%
Retaining Effective Teachers 73%

TEACHER EVALUATION: 79%
Teacher and Principal Evaluation

TEACHER COMPENSATION: 65%

Learn More:

National Council for Teacher Quality State Teacher Policy Database

Charter Schools

Score:

75%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#23

One of the earliest states to adopt and grow charters has seen state-imposed obstacles year after year, compromising their ability to grow and prosper.  Envious school boards and politicians influenced by special interests however can’t stop the demand of teachers and parents who flock to the Keystone State’s almost 200 schools annually, with more on waiting lists.

Fast Facts:

Law passed: 1997

Most recently amended: 2017

Number of charter schools: 179

Number of charter students: 163,625

Cap on the number of schools allowed:? No

Virtual charters allowed? Yes

Charter Law Analysis:

AUTHORIZERS: Local school boards only for brick-and-mortar charter schools; two or more local school boards for regional charter schools; the state Board of Education only for virtual charters schools. Appeals for denied applications go to the State Charter School Appeals Board (CAB). If approved by the state CAB, the chair must sign the written charter if the local school board still refuses to grant the charter.

GROWTH: There are no caps on charter schools in the law, but several districts have imposed their own caps on the number of schools and/or number of students they will authorize. Larger districts like Philadelphia must contend with hostile bureaucracies that limit charter seats and funding.

OPERATIONS: Charter schools have a blanket waiver from most state and district regulations. However, many districts strictly regulate the charters they authorize. 

EQUITY: Charters receive no less than the budgeted total expenditure for each student enrolled minus certain categories of funding. Because districts make these calculations, Charter Schools often end up with inequitable funds. Districts also receive impact aid from students who go to charters in the first year. The state can intervene if districts are not making scheduled payments to charter schools. A lawsuit resulted in Philadelphia having to make up underfunding charters but the impact has not stuck. Gov. Tom Wolf, an opponent, is seeking to lower the special ed reimbursement dollars and reduce payment to virtual schools to a flat $9,500 per student. Charters receive approximately 27% less than other, comparable public schools.

Learn More:

Pennsylvania Charter School Law

Pennsylvania Coalition Of Public Charter Schools

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

Score:

72%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#7

Since 2018, there has been more than 20% increase in participation in the Educational Improvement and Opportunity Scholarship tax credit programs, with over 60,000 students.

Fast Facts:

Law enacted: 2001 and 2012

Number of programs: 2

Statewide Participation: 60,000

Types of programs: Tax Credit Scholarship

Choice Laws & Analysis:

Tax-Credit Scholarship
Educational Improvement Tax Credit Program
The Educational Improvement Tax Credit Program was launched in 2001 to help low and middle-income families receive private school and pre-kindergarten scholarships. In 2021 the program funding was increased by $40 million, for a total of $175 million. This expansion will provide an estimated 13,000 students with scholarship opportunities regardless of their ZIP code. Individual Scholarship amounts could increase as well under the new legislation. Under this program, corporations can receive tax credits equaling 75% for contributing one year, or 90% for contributing two consecutive years. The income limit is households that earn less than $90,000 plus $15,842 per child, and this program has no enrollment cap.


Tax-Credit Scholarship
Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit Program
This tax credit scholarship program began in 2012, and gives corporations tax credits for donating to Opportunity Scholarship Organizations. Students that live in low-achieving school zones and meet income requirements can apply for a scholarship to attend private schools. The income limit is families that earn less than $90,000 plus $15,842 per child. The program has a budget cap of $55 million, and no enrollment cap.

Learn More:

EdChoice Analysis on Pennsylvania

Federation for Children Choice Program Information

2019 ALEC Report Card on American Education

Teacher Quality

Score:

72%

Grade:

C

Rank:

#30

Student performance data is counted in “50 percent of a teacher’s overall evaluation rating”; districts have the freedom to set teacher pay scales but does not require teacher effectiveness to be a factor in compensation.

TRAINING AND RECRUITMENT: 70%
General Teacher Preparation 65%
Elementary Teacher Preparation 62%
Secondary Teacher Preparation 90%
Special Education Teacher Preparation 58%
Alternate Routes 75%  

STAFFING AND SUPPORT: 72%
Hiring 70%
Retaining Effective Teachers 73%

TEACHER EVALUATION: 79%
Teacher and Principal Evaluation

TEACHER COMPENSATION: 65%

Learn More:

National Council for Teacher Quality State Teacher Policy Database

Digital & Personalized Learning

Digital Learning:

Score:

68%

Grade:

D

Rank:

#40

In March 2020, Pennsylvania offered the Digital K-12 Course Platform to schools that wanted to establish online course offerings, “This voluntary resource is available to schools and districts without a current system in place, or, for schools and districts looking to supplement their current systems.” 

To prepare students for entering the 21st century workforce, the PAsmart initiative was launched by Gov. Tom Wolf with the “goal to improve the number of Pennsylvanians with a certificate or degree to 60 percent by 2025.” As a result of this initiative, in January 2020, $5.7 million of PAsmart Target Grants were awarded to 163 school districts and charter schools across the state to increase computer science curriculum.

Pennsylvania has seven school districts that are members of the Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools, giving over 20,000 students in the state 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: “99.6% of students in Pennsylvania 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. 6,447 students still need more bandwidth for digital learning.”

Personalized Learning:

Pennsylvania has yet to meaningfully promote policies that customize learning for all students, but there are a few grassroots efforts in promoting personalized learning in districts. Districts in southwestern Pennsylvania have a personalized learning network and are implementing new instructional approaches.

Learn More:

Digital K-12 Course Platform

PAsmart

Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools

COVID-19 Response

Schools were initially closed March 13 for the 2019-20 school year and remained closed for the rest of the school year. Governor Wolf banned any online learning even in charter schools early on. While that was later retracted, it had an effect on continuity of education for many potential new online students. Although Pennsylvania eventually allowed remote learning for students, it was not until mid-April, and many were not doing any instruction until then. Philadelphia schools did no instruction for nearly two months.

The state also did not take steps to ensure all had access to devices and the internet though it did develop a website with information and resources for students, parents, teachers, and administrators.

Reopening guidelines for the 2020-21 school year were criticized by superintendents and others as too vague, and clarification was requested. More details were provided, including a tiered approach to reopening, and districts must submit plans to the state for approval. Philadelphia schools will not reopen for in-person instruction until at least November 17. Districts are permitted to offer in-person, online, or a combination of the two.

Fast Facts

4th Grade Math Proficiency:

41%

8th Grade Math Proficiency:

27%

12th Grade Math Proficiency:

24% (nat'l average)

4th Grade Reading Proficiency:

34%

8th Grade Reading Proficiency:

30%

12th Grade Reading Proficiency:

37% (nat'l average)

Graduation Rate:

87%

Average SAT Score:

1091/1600

Average ACT Score:

24.4/36

Public School Enrollment:

1,739,452

Percent Enrolled in Charter Schools:

8.6%

Average Student Funding:

$17,142.00
Digital & Personalized Learning
Digital Learning:

Score:

68%

Grade:

D

Rank:

#40

In March 2020, Pennsylvania offered the Digital K-12 Course Platform to schools that wanted to establish online course offerings, “This voluntary resource is available to schools and districts without a current system in place, or, for schools and districts looking to supplement their current systems.” 

To prepare students for entering the 21st century workforce, the PAsmart initiative was launched by Gov. Tom Wolf with the “goal to improve the number of Pennsylvanians with a certificate or degree to 60 percent by 2025.” As a result of this initiative, in January 2020, $5.7 million of PAsmart Target Grants were awarded to 163 school districts and charter schools across the state to increase computer science curriculum.

Pennsylvania has seven school districts that are members of the Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools, giving over 20,000 students in the state 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: “99.6% of students in Pennsylvania 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. 6,447 students still need more bandwidth for digital learning.”

Personalized Learning:

Pennsylvania has yet to meaningfully promote policies that customize learning for all students, but there are a few grassroots efforts in promoting personalized learning in districts. Districts in southwestern Pennsylvania have a personalized learning network and are implementing new instructional approaches.

Learn More:

Digital K-12 Course Platform

PAsmart

Digital Promise League of Innovative Schools

COVID-19 Response

Schools were initially closed March 13 for the 2019-20 school year and remained closed for the rest of the school year. Governor Wolf banned any online learning even in charter schools early on. While that was later retracted, it had an effect on continuity of education for many potential new online students. Although Pennsylvania eventually allowed remote learning for students, it was not until mid-April, and many were not doing any instruction until then. Philadelphia schools did no instruction for nearly two months.

The state also did not take steps to ensure all had access to devices and the internet though it did develop a website with information and resources for students, parents, teachers, and administrators.

Reopening guidelines for the 2020-21 school year were criticized by superintendents and others as too vague, and clarification was requested. More details were provided, including a tiered approach to reopening, and districts must submit plans to the state for approval. Philadelphia schools will not reopen for in-person instruction until at least November 17. Districts are permitted to offer in-person, online, or a combination of the two.

Fast Facts

4th Grade Math Proficiency:

41%

8th Grade Math Proficiency:

27%

12th Grade Math Proficiency:

24% (nat’l average)

4th Grade Reading Proficiency:

34%

8th Grade Reading Proficiency:

30%

12th Grade Reading Proficiency:

37% (nat’l average)

Graduation Rate:

87%

Average SAT Score:

1091/1600

Average ACT Score:

24.4/36

Public School Enrollment:

1,739,452

Percent Enrolled in Charter Schools:

8.6%

Average Student Funding:

$17,142.00

Leadership

Your governor:

Josh Shapiro (D)

First term begins in 2023 (two-term limit)

In a surprising turn for a union backed Democrat in the Keystone state, Governor-elect Josh Shapiro “favors adding choices for parents and educational opportunity for students and funding lifeline scholarships like those approved in other states and introduced in Pennsylvania, moving Pennsylvania forward. He says “This is not an either-or, I think this is a both-and. I think we can invest in public education and empower parents to put their kids in the best opportunity for them to succeed, and I don’t think we have to harm public schools in the process.” Lifeline scholarships would give parents who live in districts in the bottom 15% of state performance metrics the ability to choose an alternative academic setting that meets their child’s individual learning needs. The money would follow the student at the parent’s discretion.

State Legislature:

Control of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives appears to be undetermined but with the potential for a split straight down the middle with equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, run by a speaker who is now Independent, and reportedly pro-education choice.  It will be interesting to see how both chambers work with Governor Josh Shapiro on his campaign promise to support the Lifeline Scholarship program.

Constitutional Issues

“The Pennsylvania Constitution contains a Compelled Support Clause and a Blaine Amendment,” which “restricts the use of funds ‘raised for the public schools’. Case law follows the federal Establishment Clause” (Institute for Justice) precedent permitting a looser interpretation of Blaine. However, a challenge could be made to the state’s restrictions on funding.

Learn More:

Institute for Justice: Pennsylvania School Choice and State Constitution

Transparency

Pennsylvania has a relatively new dashboard, futurereadypa.org, which can be accessed from the main state DOE website.  The user can access school performance, district performance, and school fast facts and educational options are also easily accessible under Schools on the main page, by clicking “Types of Schools.” However, the grading of the schools doesn’t reflect wide variations in student body or other factors so parents may be misled by what appears to be comparable data but is not.

The state allows parents to vote in school board elections during the general election cycle, making it easier for their voices to be heard.

Leadership
Your governor:

Josh Shapiro (D)

First term begins in 2023 (two-term limit)

In a surprising turn for a union backed Democrat in the Keystone state, Governor-elect Josh Shapiro “favors adding choices for parents and educational opportunity for students and funding lifeline scholarships like those approved in other states and introduced in Pennsylvania, moving Pennsylvania forward. He says “This is not an either-or, I think this is a both-and. I think we can invest in public education and empower parents to put their kids in the best opportunity for them to succeed, and I don’t think we have to harm public schools in the process.” Lifeline scholarships would give parents who live in districts in the bottom 15% of state performance metrics the ability to choose an alternative academic setting that meets their child’s individual learning needs. The money would follow the student at the parent’s discretion.

State Legislature:

Control of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives appears to be undetermined but with the potential for a split straight down the middle with equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, run by a speaker who is now Independent, and reportedly pro-education choice.  It will be interesting to see how both chambers work with Governor Josh Shapiro on his campaign promise to support the Lifeline Scholarship program.

Constitutional Issues

“The Pennsylvania Constitution contains a Compelled Support Clause and a Blaine Amendment,” which “restricts the use of funds ‘raised for the public schools’. Case law follows the federal Establishment Clause” (Institute for Justice) precedent permitting a looser interpretation of Blaine. However, a challenge could be made to the state’s restrictions on funding.

Learn More:

Institute for Justice: Pennsylvania School Choice and State Constitution

Transparency

Pennsylvania has a relatively new dashboard, futurereadypa.org, which can be accessed from the main state DOE website.  The user can access school performance, district performance, and school fast facts and educational options are also easily accessible under Schools on the main page, by clicking “Types of Schools.” However, the grading of the schools doesn’t reflect wide variations in student body or other factors so parents may be misled by what appears to be comparable data but is not.

The state allows parents to vote in school board elections during the general election cycle, making it easier for their voices to be heard.

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.