The future of education is happening now. In Florida. And public school districts are pushing into new frontiers by making it possible for all students, including those on education choice scholarships, to access the best they have to offer on a part-time basis.
That was the message Keith Jacobs, director of provider development at Step Up For Students, delivered on Excel in Education’s “Policy Changes Lives” podcast A former public school teacher and administrator, Jacobs has spent the past year helping school districts expand learning options for students who receive funding through education savings accounts. These accounts allow parents to use funds for tuition, curriculum, therapies, and other pre-approved educational expenses. That includes services by approved district and charter schools.
“So, what makes Florida so unique is that we have done something that five, 10, even, you know, further down the line, 20 years ago, you would have never thought would have happened,” Jacobs said during a discussion with podcast host Ben DeGrow.
Jacobs explained how the process works:
Keith Jacobs, director of provider development at Step Up For Students
“I’m a home education student and I want to be an engineer, and the high school up the street has a remarkable engineering professor. I can contract with the school district and pay out of my education savings account for that engineering course at that school.
“It’s something that was in theory for so long, but now it’s in practice here in Florida.”
It is also becoming more widespread in an environment supercharged by the passage of House Bill 1 in 2023, which made all K-12 students in Florida eligibile for education choice scholarships regardless of family income. According to Jacobs, more than 50% of the state’s 67 school districts, including Miami-Dade, Orange, Hillsborough and Duval, are either already approved or have applied to be contracted providers.
That’s a welcome addition in Florida, where more than 500,000 students are using state K-12 scholarship programs and 51% of all students are using some form of choice.
Jacobs said district leaders’ questions have centered on the logistics of participating, such as how the funding process works, how to document attendance and handle grades.
Once the basics are established, Jacobs wants to help districts find ways to remove barriers to part-time students’ participation. Those could include offering courses outside of the traditional school day or setting up classes that serve only those students.
Jacobs said he expects demand for public school services to grow as Florida families look for more ways to customize their children’s education. That will lead to more opportunities for public schools to benefit and change the narrative that education is an adversarial, zero-sum game to one where everyone wins.
“So, basically, the money is following the child and not funding a specific system. So, when you shift that narrative from ‘you're losing public school kids’ to ‘families are empowered to use their money for public school services,’ it really shifts that narrative on what's happening here, specifically in Florida.”
Jacobs expects other states to emulate Florida as their own programs and the newly passed federal tax credit program give families more money to spend on customized learning. He foresees greater freedom for teachers to become entrepreneurs and districts to become even more innovative.
“There is a nationwide appetite for education choice and families right now…We have over 18 states who have adopted some form of education savings accounts in their state. So, the message to states outside of Florida is to listen to what the demands of families are.”
If education freedom were a hockey game, Florida just scored a Texas hat trick.
For the fourth consecutive year, Florida was ranked the No. 1 state for education freedom for K-12 students and families in The Heritage Foundation’s annual Education Freedom Report Card. The 2025 Heritage rankings come after a landmark year of state legislative sessions that delivered wins for students and families.
Florida leaders credited the state’s ranking to policies that give parents control over their children’s education dollars, offering a plethora of choices, including a la carte courses provided by school districts and charter schools.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signs HB 1, which offered families universal eligibility to Florida education choice scholarship programs.
“In Florida, we are committed to ensuring parents have the power to make the education decisions that are best for their child,” said Gov. Ron DeSantis, who in 2023 signed legislation that offered universal eligibility for K-12 state education choice scholarship programs that allow families to direct their dollars toward the best options for their children. “Florida offers a robust array of educational choices, which has solidified our state as a national leader in education freedom, parental power, and overall K-12 education.”
Commissioner of Education Anastasios Kamoutsas said earning the top ranking for four years affirms the state’s long-term commitment to families.
“Under Governor DeSantis’ leadership, Florida will continue honoring parents’ right to choose the best educational option for their child’s individualized needs. I am proud that Florida offers so many educational options that parents can have confidence in.”
Since the Education Freedom Report Card began in 2022, Florida has earned the top ranking every year. The report card uses five categories: school choice, transparency, regulatory freedom, civic education, and spending to rank states.
In addition to Florida receiving the overall top spot for Education Freedom, it also earned high rankings in the following categories:
Earlier this year, the Sunshine State also earned national recognition for putting dollars behind its policies. In January, the national advocacy group EdChoice put Florida first on its list of each state’s spending on education choice programs proportional to total education spending.
According to the EdChoice report, Florida became the first state to spend more than 10% of its combined private choice and public-school expenditures on its choice programs, rising from an 8% spending share in 2024.
Florida also reached a historic milestone when, for the first time, more than half of all K-12 students were enrolled in an educational choice option. During the 2023–24 school year, 1,794,697 students, out of the state’s approximately 3.5 million K-12 population, used a learning option other than their assigned district school.
Florida gives parents the ability to direct the education of their children. Today about half of all K-12 students in the state attend a school of choice, and 500,000 students participate in state educational choice scholarship programs.
Gov. Ron DeSantis accelerated these trends in 2023, when he signed HB 1 and made every student eligible for a scholarship. No school can take any student for granted, and state funding follows students to the learning options they choose.
Unfortunately, misleading claims amplified in the media have blamed this expansion of parental choice for school districts’ budget challenges.
Sarasota County Schools, for example, recently estimated that scholarships “siphoned” $45 million from its budget, a figure cited in a WUSF article. In reality, most of the $45 million represents funding for students that Sarasota was never responsible for educating, such as those already in private schools, homeschooling or charter schools. It also does not account for students who return to district schools after using a scholarship. Once those factors are considered, the actual impact is considerably smaller than the headline number suggests.
For the 2024-25 school year, Sarasota County lost just 330 public school students to scholarship programs, but only 245 of those students came from district-run public schools. If those students had stayed, they would have brought the district about $2 million, not $45 million. That figure still does not account for the students who returned to district schools after using a scholarship the prior year, so the real impact would be smaller.
Other districts have been vocal about their budget difficulties, often attributing them solely to growing scholarship demand, such as Leon County Public Schools, which in 2024-25 lost 240 students from district-run schools (0.8% of enrollment), and Duval County Public Schools, which lost 1,237 students (1.2% of enrollment).
Statewide, 32,284 students left public schools in 2024-25 to use a scholarship. That is only 1.1% of all public-school students in Florida, and even that total includes those who previously attended charter schools, university-affiliated lab schools, virtual schools, and other public-school options.
Looking at district-run schools alone, just 24,874 new scholarship students left for scholarship programs in 2024-25. Another 5,507 came from charters, and 1,897 came from virtual schools. In fact, as a percentage of their total enrollment, charter schools lost more students to scholarship programs (1.4%) than district-run schools did (1%).
This means that the expanded scholarship program may be having a bigger impact on charter schools than districts. Charter schools, however, haven’t been as vocal about vouchers, and that is likely because charters continue to grow enrollment while district schools have started to shrink.
Enrollment declines in some districts have been real, even if the blame on scholarships is misplaced.
Declining enrollment is being driven by parent preferences – but also by shifting demographics and the ebb of the post-Covid population boom. Florida is one of the few states where overall K-12 population is expected to continue growing, but the growth will be uneven, and every school will have to compete for students.
Even as they face intense competition and demographic headwinds, Florida’s charter schools have kept growing. Some innovative district leaders have signaled a willingness to hear the demand signals from parents and create new solutions to meet their needs.
Understanding what parents seek in private and charter schools, and how new public-school models can better meet those demands, would be a good place for districts to start.
Pre-K and Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten (VPK) have also been major feeders for Florida’s scholarship programs. In 2024-25, 53,825 new scholarship students came from pre-K — somewhere between one-third and nearly half of all VPK students statewide.
Public schools have limited Pre-K offerings. Statewide, there are less than one-third as many Pre-K students as kindergartners enrolled in public schools. Private schools, by contrast, have used it as a key pipeline to recruit future students.
Districts have other avenues to respond to changing parent demands. Since 2014, when the Family Empowerment Scholarship for Students with Unique Abilities (FES-UA) was introduced as the Personal Learning Scholarship Accounts, districts have been allowed to offer classes and services to scholarship students.
The passage of HB1 in 2023 transformed every state scholarship into an education savings account. K-12 families now have more flexibility to use scholarships for “a la carte learning,” in which they pick and choose from a variety of educational options. By offering part-time instruction, tutoring, therapy, and other services, districts can win back students and the associated funding. So far, 21 of Florida’s 67 districts have taken advantage of this opportunity, with 10 more in the pipeline.
Florida’s enrollment shifts are real, but data shows the “voucher drain” narrative overstates the impact. The real challenge for districts is not money being “siphoned;” it is families choosing other options. Districts that adapt and compete for students will keep both enrollment and funding – leaving students, families and taxpayers better off.
By Ron Matus and Dava Cherry
Florida’s choice-driven education system is the most dynamic and diverse in America, but it’s facing new tests. This year, 41,000 Florida students were awarded school choice scholarships but never used them.
We wanted to know why, so we surveyed their parents.
The 2,739 who responded had a lot to tell us. Not only about supply-side challenges, but about the extent to which families are migrating between different types of schools, and their expectations for finding just the right ones.
As education choice takes root across America, we thought other states could learn from these parents, which is why we boiled their responses down into a new report, “Going With Plan B.”
We saw three main takeaways:
A third of the respondents (34.7%) said there were no available seats at the school they wanted. This, even though the number of Florida private schools has grown 31% over the past 10 years. Meanwhile, a fifth of the respondents (19.7%) said the scholarship amount wasn’t enough to cover tuition and fees.
Even without scholarships, a third of the respondents (36.5%) switched school types (like going from a traditional public school to a charter school). And between their child’s prior school and the school they ended up in, more experienced a positive rather negative shift in satisfaction (20.4% to 10.5%). We didn’t see that coming.
Two thirds of the respondents said they’d apply for the scholarships again, including 63% of those who switched school types, and 55.5% of those who were satisfied after doing so.
Things got better, it seems, but not better enough.
Perhaps as choice has grown, so too have parents’ expectations.
See the full report here.
Dava Cherry is the former director of enterprise data and research at Step Up For Students, and a former public school teacher.
In 2022 I wrote a piece here at Next Steps declaring myself President of the “Religious Charter Schools Should Be Permitted, Mandatory and Non-existent” club. Every other group under the sun operates charter schools and infuses the curriculum with their point of view, which is fine because charter schools should be viewed as state contractors, as they are out here in the 9th Circuit. Moreover no one is ever forced to attend.
In that context, telling Lutherans etc. that they are some kind of menace to society that we must protect children from seems both bigoted and silly. It is also contrary to the principle of religious neutrality. Moreover, the equivalents of religious charter schools operate in Europe, and while it may not be optimal, it is hard to argue that such a prospect is catastrophic.
I also attempted to explain that the charter movement of today is not the movement of decades past. We’ve spent a couple of decades passing charter school laws perfectly designed not to open many actual charter schools. When states passed laws perfectly designed not to pass many charter schools, national charter groups sang the praises of the new laws.
This is not as strange as it sounds. This is not to say that it isn’t pathetic — it is in fact entirely pathetic — but it is not unheard of. Public choice economists long ago identified a Baptist and Bootlegger problem whereby sincere opponents (Baptists in this case are the unions and their groupies) and opportunistic incumbents (in this case charter management organizations with a legal team that can file a 900+ page application etc.) team up to throttle competition…err…I meant ensure quality charter authorizing.
Actually, I had it right the first time.
If you’ve been keeping half an eye on the Supreme Court for the last 20-plus years, you’ll know that the majority (delightfully) takes a dim view of discriminating against people or groups based upon their religious affiliations. I could be wrong (it has happened plenty of times before) but I’m thinking it is pretty clear how this case is likely to go.
Even if/when the high court allows religious charter schools, enthusiasts need to remember that this is what awaits even if you win the case:
The B and B alliance does not want m(any?) new charter schools to open, and both will be aghast at the idea of religious charter schools. I am not going to help them dream up insidious ways to discriminate against religious groups. If I did, it wouldn’t take me long to dream up five or six ways. On principle, I am with the religious charter school enthusiasts. Color me skeptical that this effort will prove a productive way to provide new schools and seats, but non-discrimination and an experimental mindset should prevail.
Enthusiasts should, however, understand the politics of what they are getting into.
Editor’s note: The NAEP will release 2024 fourth and eighth grade math and reading scores Wednesday. Buckle up!
Education is no longer about students sitting in rows of desks from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. And school choice, the term supporters used for years to describe the movement for education options is out. Parent-directed education is in.
That was the call to arms Florida charter school leaders received from one of their earliest supporters on the closing day of an annual gathering convened by the state’s Department of Education.
“We were charged to be laboratories of innovation,” said Jim Horne, a former Florida education commissioner and lawmaker who sponsored the Sunshine State’s first charter school bill. “I challenge you to step out of the proverbial box. If you don’t innovate, you will stagnate.”
Education savings accounts, which allow parents to direct public education funding to private schools, tutoring, curriculum and other options for their children, have been sweeping the country and are now in effect in 19 states.
This has led some national observers to wonder whether charter schools risk losing momentum or becoming political orphans.
Manny Diaz Jr., Florida’s education commissioner, has pushed to counter that chatter. In his keynote address last year, he said education options of all kinds can flourish in the Sunshine State, which is home to the nation’s largest ESA programs and a growing charter school sector.
“We’re capitalizing on this historic school choice and charter school movement. We’re giving parents the ability to choose the best path for their students, regardless of background, regardless of income.”
Last year, the state rechristened its annual convening of charter school leaders as the Florida Charter School Conference and School Choice Summit. This year, private school leaders and educators made up nearly a quarter of the 1,300 attendees.
This year’s event featured main-stage presentations by Success Academy founder Eva Moskowitz, whose New York-based charter school network began eyeing a Florida expansion, as well as presentations on improvements in public-school student achievement, and multiple sessions that highlighted the opportunities growing scholarship programs offer to charter schools.
Last year’s House Bill 1 supercharged the growth of Florida’s ESA programs and created a new Personalized Education Program for students who don’t attend school full-time. That, combined with continued growth of New Worlds Scholarship Accounts for public-school students who need extra academic help, and the existing program for students with unique abilities, creates a substantial opportunity for public schools, including charters, to offer services to scholarship students.
Between those three programs alone, “we’re talking about $1 billion from students that do not have to go to school,” David Heroux, senior director of provider development and relations for Step Up For Students, which manages the bulk of Florida’s K-12 education choice scholarships, said during one session.
School districts, including Brevard and Glades counties, have already begun offering individual courses to scholarship students, with others planning announcements soon or expressing interest in participating.
Adam Emerson, executive director of the Florida Department of Education’s Office of Independent Education and Parental Choice, urged attendees to join the school districts in embracing a la carte learning and the possibilities it has unlocked for charter schools.
“We are entering into a whole new universe of choice,” he said.
Education Next published a piece recently by Holly Korbey called The Tutoring Revolution, which reads in part:
Recent research suggests that the number of students seeking help with academics is growing, and that over the last couple of decades, more families have been turning to tutoring for that help. Private tutoring for K–12 students has seen explosive growth both nationally and around the globe. Between 1997 and 2022, the number of in-person, private tutoring centers across the United States more than tripled, concentrated mostly in high-income areas like Brentwood. Many students are also logging onto laptops to get personalized digital tutoring, with companies like WyzAnt and Outschool reporting they’ve enrolled millions of students for millions of hours in private, video-based learning sessions that students access conveniently from home. Market reports estimate the digital tutoring market was worth $7.7 billion globally in 2022, with projections of a compound annual growth rate of nearly 15 percent from 2023 to 2030.
Recall as well one of the most fascinating parts of Emily Hanford’s Sold a Story podcast series wherein Lacey Robinson, a veteran teacher in inner-city public schools described taking a teaching position in the suburbs. Robinson wanted to learn what the suburban schools were doing to teach literacy to upper-income students, and then bring it back to the inner-city schools. She discovered that the suburban schools were providing their students with approximately nothing:
“They were learning to decode at home with tutors. I know, because I became one of them.”
If you speak with or poll American suburbanites, they have traditionally expressed a fair degree of confidence in their public schools, which they tended to describe as either “okay” or “good.” Monitor their actions over time, however, and you see that they placed a greater and greater reliance upon tutoring. Most were enrolling their children in public schools, but they were relying upon them less and less and upon tutoring and other private enrichment spending more and more.
In 2015 Wired ran an article called The Techies Who Are Hacking Education by Homeschooling Their Kids. The unstated background message of this article: Silicon Valley families had decided that the time opportunity cost of enrolling their children in a school, even a public school they had already paid for with their taxes, was too high. Key quote:
“There is a way of thinking within the tech and startup community where you look at the world and go, ‘Is the way we do things now really the best way to do it?’” de Pedro says. “If you look at schools with this mentality, really the only possible conclusion is ‘Heck, I could do this better myself out of my garage!’”
Your garage, and perhaps your local Kumon, museums and hackerspaces. Early during the pandemic, Silicon Valley families created a Facebook group called “Pandemic Pods” with spontaneous order scratch to a very itchy group of American families.
The COVID-19 pandemic opened the eyes of many families regarding how much responsibility they should take for the education of their children: all of it. The public school system operates in the interests of its major shareholders (i.e., those deciding school board elections). Broadly speaking, mere taxpayers and families don’t qualify. One can describe the public school system as broken, but you can more precisely observe that it is operating as intended.
If you doubt that last statement, I invite you to attempt to lobby for a meaningful change in the way the public school system operates. You’ll meet all kinds of interesting people. Sadly, most of them will be eager to die on a hill defending the K-12 status quo.
If someone purposely designed an education system to generate inequality, they would have some difficulty exceeding the ZIP code assignment plus tutoring for those who can afford it status quo. The question moving forward is not whether we are going to have more a la carte multi-vendor education. The question is what, if anything, we are willing and able to do to distribute that opportunity.
This school year, 2024-2025, for the first time, Brevard County students using Florida’s education choice scholarship programs will have a new option: the ability to sign up for online courses offered by Brevard Virtual School.
Brevard Public Schools was the first countywide school district in Florida to offer courses to scholarship families through its virtual school. But more are sure to follow.
Florida law allows scholarship students to access services, including classes, from traditional public, virtual, or charter schools. However, families can’t choose this option if a school is not set up to accommodate it.
The option has historically been underused. This is beginning to change, however, thanks to a growing interest in innovation among public -school leaders and people in their communities.
On Brevard’s heels, the Glades County School District has begun making in-person classes available to scholarship students. Other school districts and charter school organizations are taking similar steps across the state.
History of blurred lines
In Florida, the boundaries between a public school district and the world of parent-directed learning outside the system have long been blurry.
Heather Price, the principal of Brevard Virtual School, has helped lead the charge to make classes available to scholarship families. “I have been immersed in the world of flexible learning since 2008 and am always looking for ways to improve and expand what we can offer to families”, she said.
Brevard Virtual School serves over 5,000 online students, enrolled in approximately 12,000 courses. Some use the virtual option full -time, while others use it to supplement classes at their local public schools. Homeschoolers can also sign up for individual courses.
During the 2023 Florida Legislative Session, House bill 1 passed, making parental involvement a priority. It made every family in the state eligible for an education choice scholarship. It also added a new flexible learning option to the mix: the Personalized Education Program (PEP), a scholarship specifically for students who do not attend school full-time.
The first year, the PEP scholarship was capped at 20,000 students. This school year, that cap tripled.
Price heard buzz among parents that many of her existing part-time students were signing up for scholarships.
She wanted to make sure her school was among the available options.
“We knew that our families who have been with us for many years would be the exact same families who would be interested in what the scholarship offers,” Price said. As a result: “We either need to get on board or we’re going to lose folks who love us, and who we love.”
A foundation of diverse online learning options
Florida Virtual School (FLVS) functions as a statewide school district and has offered publicly funded online classes since the late ‘90s. It has long offered classes to students using private school scholarships.
Florida school districts can create online schools that employ local teachers and use FLVS curriculum and technology. These district franchises provide local flavor and opportunities for in-person meetings, while the statewide FLVS option provides a broader selection of courses. It’s common for online students to take a few classes from each.
FLVS partners with school districts, such as Brevard Public Schools, to support the local franchises.
“It’s a local twist on a statewide program,” Price said. “I’m sitting here in an office. Families can come in and get help. They can participate in our local activities.”
Districts build new organizational muscles
Thanks to the state’s long history of virtual schooling, Florida school districts are used to receiving funding for online courses on a per-class basis.
When they sign up as a scholarship provider, they face a new challenge: rather than reporting students to the state for funding, they must invoice students through the scholarship platform.
This requires districts to ensure correct operational systems are in place, from data systems to reporting.
Price said working through the issues required collaboration from every department in the district office.
The virtual school was a logical starting point to start building those organizational muscles. It had a critical mass of scholarship students, and the logistics of adding online students were simpler than at a physical campus.
But the work may not end there.
Many scholarship families are used to participating in public-school sports or extracurricular activities using Florida’s Tim Tebow law. Some of these electives, like band or drama, have classes associated with them, and districts will want to receive funding for students who take those classes. Other students want access to one-off courses or services at their local public school, including AP classes, career education courses, or state assessments.
Over time, more public schools will come up with new ways to meet the needs of students using scholarships, tapping a new revenue stream and expanding learning opportunities for students.
“We want them to be able to have the best of both worlds,” Price said. “So, they’re a scholarship student, but there’s also a lot of good, cool stuff that public school districts do.”
She added: “We want them to be able to have that choice and flexibility in how they educate their kids while taking advantage of all the opportunities that are available.”
The big news: In a closely watched case that could have national ramifications, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled a proposed religious charter school that the state approved last year violates the state constitution and charter school law.
What it means: The high court’s decision could halt the planned fall opening of the nation’s first religious charter school. The majority found that St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School was a governmental entity and state actor and therefore required to be non-sectarian. Six of the nine justices concurred with the majority, while one dissented and another partially concurred and partially dissented. Another justice recused himself.
It also said that Oklahoma’s approval of St. Isidore’s contract violates the state’s charter school laws, the state constitution, and the U.S. Constitution’s establishment clause and ordered the state to rescind its contract with St. Isidore.
The ruling also stated that a trio of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions did not apply to St. Isidore’s assertion that prohibiting it from receiving public funding would conflict with federal protection of religious freedom.
In the court’s words: “St. Isidore cannot justify its creation by invoking free exercise rights as a religious entity. St. Isidore came into existence through its charter with the state and will function as a component of the State’s public school system. This case turns on the State’s contracted-for teaching and religious activities through a new public charter school, not the State’s exclusion of a religious entity.”
Case history: The statewide virtual charter school board approved St. Isidore’s application by a 3-2 vote. The decision prompted two lawsuits, one from a parents and faith leaders' group at the lower court level, and the other from state Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who asked the state Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality. The high court’s ruling was on the attorney general’s lawsuit. The other case remains in the lower court. However, the high court’s ruling will likely render that case moot.
Why it matters: Charter schools are publicly funded but privately managed and have historically been classified as public schools. That makes them subject to federal requirements to be non-sectarian and comply with anti-discrimination policies. If St. Isidore is allowed to open, it would throw the doors wide open to efforts in other states to allow religious schools to directly receive taxpayer money. The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling could tee up the case for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether charter schools are state actors. So far, the nation’s high court has declined to address conflicting lower court rulings.
Fraying alliances: The case pitted Oklahoma’s GOP leadership against each other, with Gov. Kevin Stitt and state Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters supporting St. Isidore and Drummond opposing it. Drummond called the decision “a significant victory.” Stitt expressed concern that the ruling sends a “troubling message” that religious groups are second-class citizens in the state educational system and that he hopes the U.S Supreme Court will consider the case. Walters also promised additional legal action. “This ruling cannot and must not stand,” he posted on X.
The Oklahoma lawsuit and related cases also divided the charter school movement, with the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools taking a strong stand against St. Isidore and Great Hearts Academies, a network of 40 classical charter schools in Texas and Arizona, taking the opposite position in a related case.
What they’re saying: The Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa, which sponsored St. Isidore’s application, issued statements expressing their disappointment with the ruling and suggesting plans to appeal.
“The educational promise of St. Isidore Virtual Catholic School is reflected in the 200-plus applications we have received from families excited for this new learning opportunity,” wrote Laura Schuler, senior director of Catholic education for the archdiocese. “Clearly, we are disappointed in today’s ruling as it disregards the needs of many families in Oklahoma who only desire a choice in their child’s education. We will remain steadfast as we seek to right this wrong and to join Oklahoma's great diversity of charter schools serving all families in the state.”
St. Isidore principal Misty G. Smith called the ruling “a setback” for the state’s K12 students and pledged not to give up hope “that court’s error may be corrected.”
Eric Paisner, acting CEO for the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, called the decision “a resounding victory.”
“All charter schools are public schools. The National Alliance firmly believes charter schools, like all other public schools, may not be religious institutions. We insist every charter school student must be given the same federal and state civil rights and constitutional protections as their district school peers. The Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision reassures all Oklahoma families that their students’ constitutional rights are not sacrificed when they choose to attend a public charter school.”
Shawn Peterson, president of the Catholic Education Partnership, a national nonprofit organization advocating for school choice, didn’t take a position on the ruling but said he expects an appeal. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of St. Isidore could have implications for the 46 states, the District of Columbia Puerto Rico and Guam, which all have charter school laws.
“This case will be one of the more interesting school choice cases to watch as there is a great deal at stake, including some big policy questions and what actions state legislatures might take depending on the outcome of the ruling,” he said.
An attorney defending the Oklahoma’s charter school board wasted no time identifying the primary issue before the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
“This is whether the operation of a charter school violates the establishment clause,” said Philip Sechler, representing the Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board.
The board’s approval of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual Charter School last year catalyzed a controversy in the Sooner State that could pave the way for the nation’s first religiously affiliated charter school. That means the case has national ramifications and could reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
The high court sidestepped the issue when it declined last year to review a 2022 appellate court decision that said charter schools were state actors. Other federal circuits have issued conflicting decisions.
Experts have said Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s lawsuit to stop St. Isidore could bring the issue of public schools operated by religious groups back to the nation’s high court to settle.
On Tuesday, the Oklahoma Supreme Court took center stage for a case that has split the state’s top Republicans and frayed relationships within the diverse national charter school movement.
Drummond argued that St. Isidore is a public school and is subject to the same rules as the state’s other charter schools, which include being non-sectarian and tuition-free for families.
Yet in its application to open a new school, it “promises to be “Catholic in every way, Catholic in teaching and Catholic in employment.” Drummond added that the school requires the principal to be a practicing Catholic, while the state’s public schools cannot limit hires to members of one faith.
The Oklahoma Catholic Church and the state, he said, “have formed an actual union” that “eviscerates the separation of church and state” and violates Oklahoma’s constitution and charter school laws. While the U.S. Supreme Court may very well decide someday that public schools can be religious, the state court is limited in this case to a decision based on state law.
Attorneys for the statewide charter authorizer and for St. Isidore, which is intervening in the case, argued that the state does not control charter schools, as Drummond argued. Charter schools are public schools designed to be run by private organizations given autonomy to foster innovation.
“It has its own facilities, its own bank account, its own ability to raise funds and enter contracts in its own name,” Sechler said. “Being a public school does not make St. Isidore a state actor.”
Sechler also pointed out that charter schools hire their own staff, design their own mission statements and academic programs, and determine their own teaching methods. He added that no student is required to attend charter schools.
He said that operating under a state contract said, “does not make it a part of the government.”
Justices peppered the attorneys with questions throughout the arguments, including why using government funds to pay religious hospitals and allowing state scholarships to be used for religious colleges were constitutional.
When justices asked about the recent trilogy of U.S. Supreme Court decisions that struck down bans on religious schools’ participation in state school choice programs, Drummond said those organizations were private, with funding going to families who could choose where to spend it. Justice Dana Kuehn asked if public religious schools should be allowed as counterweights to secular public schools that “expound [ideologies] outside ABC and 123.”
“Does that open the door for a charter school to have a religious component if the public school has an anti-religious component?” she asked.
Justice Yvonne Kauger expressed concern that a U.S. Supreme Court decision in favor of religious charter schools would open the door to many religious organizations seeking to open publicly funded schools.
“When this all comes down – Katie bar the door – everybody would be affected,” she said. “Are we being used as a test case? It sure looks like it.”
St. Isidore attorney Michael McGinley assured the court that St. Isidore was not intended to be a test case but instead was an effort to meet the needs of families. He said many students in rural areas live too far away from in-person Catholic schools.
The state’s existing school choice scholarships, he added, won’t cover the entire cost of education, leaving low-income families to make up the difference. A charter school would solve that problem.
“Voucher programs are wonderful,” he said, “but they’re not perfect.”
