HOUSTON – Most, if not all, parents would agree they want their children to get the best education. And school vouchers, otherwise known as “school choice” programs, which aim to help families pay for children’s private education, seem to allow parents the ability to do so, at least on the surface.
Recommended Videos
This hasn’t stopped school choice from soaring in popularity. Currently, nearly three dozen states have some form of private school choice.
In Arizona, for example, where school vouchers were passed in 2024, working-class parents initially expressed interest in the idea of sending their children to different schools if public schools weren’t adequately serving them.
EXPLAINER: School choice, vouchers and the future of Texas education
Back in March, former Arizona Governor Doug Ducey stood by Texas Governor Greg Abbott in Austin to boost support for school vouchers.
“Texas is on the cusp of game-changing legislation,” Abbott said in March during a press conference. “No one knows better than a parent about the power and importance of school choice for children. We must prioritize our students. As Governor, we will ensure Texas ranks No. 1 for educating our students. That starts by passing school choice this session.”
“This is not a partisan issue, this is an American issue,” Ducey added. “No state as big, impactful, and consequential as Texas has passed school choice yet. I am fully supportive of what you and your chambers are trying to do here with universal school choice. When Texas passes this, it will change everything for every child in this state and across the nation.”
However, the reality seemed to be much different when Arizona parents in low-income neighborhoods (according to ProPublica) factored in the distance, the high cost to send children to those schools, after learning there weren’t too many private schools near their homes.
RELATED: Under Texas House bill, value of education savings accounts would be tied to public school funding
And as the Texas House expects to vote Wednesday on a bill to create a $1 billion school voucher, a showdown is expected between optimistic supporters and critics hoping to sink the vote again, as they did in 2023.
To get a clearer picture of what may come about, KPRC 2’s Rilwan Balogun is set to speak with advocates and opponents of school vouchers in Arizona as the Texas House prepares its final vote.
David Griffith, the Associate Research Director at think tank Thomas B. Fordham Institute, discussed the school choice programs in Arizona and Texas.
He explained that Arizona’s program is essentially universal, with few limits and no real testing requirements, which makes it difficult to evaluate the program’s effectiveness. Griffith noted that such universal programs are likely to be a net loss for taxpayers, as they may end up subsidizing families who were already sending their children to private schools.
“We don’t really know how the kids are doing. And there’s essentially no limit on the amount of money that can be spent,” Griffith said.
SEE ALSO: Debate on House’s school voucher bill centers on a question: Should wealthy Texans be included?
In contrast, the proposed school choice programs in Texas aim to prioritize low-income families who are not already sending their children to private schools, which Griffith considered a positive development.
However, Griffith expressed concerns about the lack of research on education savings accounts (ESAs) and the mixed results of traditional voucher programs, which have shown negative effects in some larger statewide programs. He emphasized the importance of having a stronger testing requirement to evaluate the performance of students participating in these programs and to ensure that the market can function effectively with the necessary information.
Griffith advocates that those dollars would be better used at Charter Schools, which have more regulations than private.
“They are subject to very strict forms of accountability. They can be closed if they are not increasing students’ achievement in four subjects, like reading and math,” he said. “And there is a substantial body of evidence that these schools can boost achievement for low-income students.”
Overall, Griffith advocated for a more targeted and accountable school choice program that would better serve the needs of students, particularly those from low-income backgrounds.
Anais Ballesteros, VP of External Affairs at All in Education, agreed with Griffith’s lack of accountability of Arizona’s ESAs.
“There are no guardrails to truly hold state vouchers accountable,” Ballestero states. “So, what we have seen is that they are not being effectively used by populations that they were initially meant to serve.”
Ballestero said there are unforeseen barriers such as transportation and bullying.
“So, they don’t always cover enough for transportation. And that is a big thing here in Arizona, because there isn’t always access to public transportation to get students from point A to point B. [That’s a] good amount of time,” she said. “So, it’s like transferring busses, taking the light rail. It’s a lot of different things. So, when we talk to the families that we serve the role in education, transportation is the main issue.”
She suggests that instead of focusing on ESAs, the priority should be on improving the quality of community schools and empowering parents to engage with their local schools to enhance the resources and support available to students.
