Education reform fixates on Pennsylvania’s urban centers (i.e., Philadelphia and Pittsburgh). Yet, the state’s troubled education system isn’t only a big-city problem; rural families also struggle to find the right schools.
Rural Pennsylvania faces unique challenges that limit families’ access to great schools. Lower population density, transportation challenges, and fewer schools narrow their educational options. For many Pennsylvanian families, charter schools and cyber charter schools are the only tuition-free alternatives. Yet, these schools face persistent threats from Harrisburg.
The traditional solution by many lawmakers is to throw more money at the problem. The result: State support for Pennsylvania public schools has grown about 54 percent over the past decade.
This funding continues to grow, regardless of student populations or how adequately the public school system serves kids. Pennsylvania public schools educate fewer students each year—with enrollment now at its lowest level in state history.
Rural districts have become increasingly reliant on “hold harmless” provisions that guarantee more annual funding regardless of how many students their schools enroll. On top of this, school districts can raise local taxes to cushion their budgets, and many hold large cash reserves.
Despite increased investment, less than half of Pennsylvania students read at grade level. Student achievement data—state and national—show Pennsylvania public schools have made no meaningful improvement in reading or math over the last 10 years. Most states outpacing Pennsylvania on the latest National Center for Educational Progress (NAEP), or Nation’s Report Card, have larger class sizes, serve more high-need students, spend less taxpayer money per pupil, and offer more choices to students and families when it comes to finding the best schools.
Pennsylvanians are hungry for better schools. If money weren’t an issue, about 49 percent of those surveyed say they would enroll their children in private schools. Meanwhile, only 20 percent opted to stay in assigned district schools.
Unfortunately, money is an issue. More than 200,000 students remain trapped in the state’s lowest-performing public schools. About 4,400 of those students live in the rural areas. Most of these students come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Many families can’t move to a ZIP Code with better public schools or pay tuition at a private school.
To help these students, lawmakers must embrace school choice. In 39 other states, school choice initiatives are closing the equity gaps regarding universal access to great schools, even in rural areas.
School choice offers a cornucopia of policy options. Some states have increased support for charter and cyber charters. Others have enacted open enrollment, meaning families can attend public schools outside their immediate zip code. Other states have adopted tax-credit scholarships and education savings accounts.
Pennsylvania has two such programs: the Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) and the Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit (OSTC). Last year, EITC and OSTC helped 85,000 low- and middle-income students assigned to Pennsylvania’s lowest-performing public schools attend a high-quality school of their choice. These programs currently serve families in 66 of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties.
But waiting lists and student need keep growing. Notably, more than four thousand students across rural Pennsylvania, who qualify for a tax-credit scholarship, are stuck in the state’s lowest-performing schools (including over 350 students in Northumberland County). To supplement EITC or OSTC, Lifeline Scholarships would offer education savings accounts to students assigned to a school ranked in the bottom 15 percent of performance. These funds would cover “qualified education expenses,” including tuition, school-related fees, and special education services fees associated with attendance at a nonpublic school.
The more options we provide students, the better. EdChoice reviewed 75 studies on the nationwide fiscal effects of current school choice programs. Of those studies, 87 percent showed school choice programs saving money for school districts. Four of five studies measuring the academic impact of school choice initiatives found improved test scores for all students—even those remaining in district schools. School choice programs save money, increase parental satisfaction, and improve academic achievement.
School choice refocuses resources toward kids, not systems. For many rural families, school choice programs are their only chance to secure a better education for their children. ZIP Codes can’t be the referees of educational success. Students residing in failing school districts—everywhere from Turkeyfoot Valley to Philadelphia—deserve better options.
