Amendment 2 (School Choice) FAQ
What is Amendment 2 and how will it appear on the ballot?
Amendment 2 broadens the state legislature’s powers to create new K-12 educational programs and opportunities. The exact wording that will appear on the ballot is:
“To give parents choices in educational opportunities for their children, are you in favor of enabling the General Assembly to provide financial support for the education costs of students in kindergarten through 12th grade who are outside the system of common (public) schools by amending the Constitution of Kentucky as stated.
IT IS PROPOSED THAT A NEW SECTION BE ADDED TO THE CONSTITUTION OF KENTUCKY TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
The General Assembly may provide financial support for the education of students outside the system of common schools. The General Assembly may exercise this authority by law, Sections 59, 60, 171, 183, 184, 186, and 189 of this Constitution notwithstanding.”
What does the Amendment do and not do?
-
It allows the legislature to create new programs to support K-12 education in addition to the traditional public school system.
-
It retains the constitutional requirement of the state legislature to “. . . provide for an efficient system of common schools . . . “
-
No specific programs are on the ballot. The amendment merely allows the legislature to consider additional programs in the future.
​
What are the goals of additional programs that might be enacted?
-
To allow parents access to the educational environment that best serves their children, whether it is traditional public, charter, or private.
-
To safeguard this access:
-
for parents of any income level, regardless of zip code
-
for parents where the traditional public school does not fit, or is inadequate for, their children’s needs
-
-
To promote more effective education and improved academic performance for all students, regardless of their school, by enabling every family options that serve their children well.
-
To provide more parental control over their children’s education
-
To fund students, not systems.
-
To allow parents more schooling options for their children:
-
to find the best school environment for the child
-
to enable low-income parents to have options
-
to provide parents with primary responsibility for schooling choices
-
-
To improve the academic performance of all students, regardless of the school they attend.
-
To provide more options for teachers to find the best teaching environment for them.​
​
What types of programs have other states enacted?
There are a host of programs states have enacted, often referred to as “school choice.”
Thirty-three states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have programs that allow some school funds to “follow” the child to the school of their family’s choice such as (see https://www.edchoice.org/ ):
-
Tax Credit Scholarships: These award scholarships to eligible students to attend private school, funded by private donations for which donors receive a tax credit.
-
Education Savings Accounts (ESAs): These provide a savings account to eligible families to fund their children’s education expenses, including tuition, tutoring, and related expenses. They are funded by an appropriation from the state legislature.
-
​Vouchers: These award funds to eligible students for private school tuition and are funded by state appropriations. ​​
​​
Forty-five states plus the District of Columbia have charter schools
(https://www.federationforchildren.org/school-choice-in-america/ )
-
Charter schools are public schools that are granted “charters” to serve students with innovative and flexible approaches. Their enrollments are often determined by lottery among applicants. They are funded by state (and possibly local) appropriations.
Every state that shares a border with Kentucky has at least some of these choices for families. These include Tennessee, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, West Virginia, Missouri, Illinois. All states in the Southeast U.S. and in other
Why would we consider providing alternatives to the traditional public schooling system?
Though public schools serve some students well, the evidence shows that large numbers of public school students fail to acquire basic reading and math skills needed for future success. For example, in 2023 state testing, overall just 48% of Kentucky public school 4th graders were proficient in reading; it was 39% for low-income students; and 26% of Black students. The corresponding figures for 8th grade reading are 44%, 34%, and 23%. (https://www.kyschoolreportcard.com/organization/20?year=2023)
Also, during the past decade, the “Nation’s Report Card” testing outcomes for Kentucky for 4th and 8th grade reading and math have all worsened. The latest scores are only, at best, modestly different from the 1990s. For example, in the Report Card for Grade 4 Reading, the score for Kentucky’s white students in 2022 isn’t notably different from the performance way back in 1998. For Black students in the same assessment series, the 2022 score isn’t notably different from the score back in 1992. The gaps in math scores between white and Black students are larger than in the 1990s. The Nation’s Report Card shows Kentucky has an even lower number of students who attained proficiency than state testing shows in 2022. (https://www.bipps.org/_files/ugd/7833d4_f2bc8a43ad6743ee893ad88f1510906c.pdf)
Furthermore, the ACT average composite score for 11th graders has fallen in Kentucky for the past several years and was at the same level in 2023 as it was in 2013 when ACT's current score reporting foramt was adopted.
Don’t Kentucky’s public schools just need an increase in funding?
In 2023, funding (the total of local, state, and federal funds) for Kentucky’s public schools was $20,136 per pupil. (https://www.education.ky.gov/districts/FinRept/Pages/Fund%20Balances,%20Revenues%20and%20Expenditures,%20Chart%20of%20Accounts,%20Indirect%20Cost%20Rates%20and%20Key%20Financial%20Indicators.aspx)
After adjusting for inflation, total funding for K-12 in 1990 was about $8,000 per pupil (roughly $4,000 without inflation adjustment). It is now well over double its 1990 value (i.e., an over 100% increase) and increased nearly every year except just following the Great Recession.
(https://www.bipps.org/_files/ugd/7833d4_f2bc8a43ad6743ee893ad88f1510906c.pdf)
Where has the increased funding gone?
Finding a precise answer to this is not feasible with the publicly available data we have access to. However, it is clear that it has not gone for substantially higher teacher salaries. After adjusting for inflation, average Kentucky public teacher salaries have fallen for over a decade, and in 2023 were only about 8% higher than in 1990.
It is also clear that some of the increased funding went to fund a large increase in non-teacher staffing.
(https://www.bipps.org/_files/ugd/7833d4_f2bc8a43ad6743ee893ad88f1510906c.pdf)
Do school choice programs “take money away from” or “defund” traditional public schools?
The Kentucky Constitution still requires that the legislature fund schools to “. . . provide for an efficient system of common schools . . .“ Amendment 2 allows for programs in addition to this Constitutional requirement, not instead of.
Moreover, existing school choice programs in other states virtually all save on overall education costs and create the potential for greater per-pupil funding for public schools. The reason is that, in these programs, the funds that “follow” students to outside schools are much less than the expenditures for those students in a public school. The excess may be retained by the public school, which actually raises its per-pupil funding. All the while, students who leave the public system are educated at a lower cost.
(For fiscal analyses of state programs, see https://www.edchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/The-Fiscal-Effects-of-School-Choice-WEB-reduced.pdf.)
Still, we need to consider that some choice-program participants may have already been in private schools and gain some state funding after becoming eligible. Recent analyses indicate that this does not present a substantial fiscal burden.
Are school choice programs a “giveaway” to private schools? Could they allow “using public money for a private school?”
School choice program funds for private tuition are in exchange for an effective education. The provision of a good education is the main point of government/taxpayer funding of education. This is what “public money” is intended for. It is not for propping up any particular school or system.
Who do school choice programs and charter schools mostly serve: low-income, minority households or upper-income families?
The U.S. Department of Education finds that charters schools, as a share of their enrollment, serve more Black and Hispanic students and fewer White students. Moreover, many charters schools target low-income, minority communities.
(https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgb/public-charter-enrollment
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cge/racial-ethnic-enrollment)
Most school choice programs limit eligibility to lower-income families and to children with special needs or learning disabilities. (https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-private-school-choice-2024/) Recently, some states have expanded the income eligibility of selected programs. Yet, in an analysis of Arizona’s expanded program, the Common Sense Institute finds, “Arizona’s school choice programs support relatively high participation in private schooling by low- and middle-income families.”
(https://commonsenseinstituteaz.org/esa-growth-and-change/)
How effective are school choice programs and charter schools in improving student educational outcomes?
Regarding charter schools, a review by a Stanford University institute finds: "Looking at year-to-year academic progress from 2015 to 2019, the typical charter school student in our national sample had reading and math gains that outpaced their peers in the traditional public schools (TPS) they otherwise would have attended. . .. Black and Hispanic students in charter schools advance more than their TPS peers by large margins in both math and reading."
(https://ncss3.stanford.edu/wp-content): /uploads/2023/06/Credo-NCSS3-Report.pdf p. 5-6)
Also, for a specific example, schools from Success Academies, a charter school system in New York City, are surpassing other schools in their test scores: https://www.successacademies.org/results/.
For school choice programs, most studies indicate that choice programs have a positive effect on students’ academic performance. Only a few studies show otherwise. ( https://www.edchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/123s-of-School-Choice-WEB-07-10-23.pdf, p. 14.) Since virtually all participants in the programs studied are low-income, special needs, or learning disabled, the resulting findings imply (mostly) positive effects for these groups.
A review of other studies generally show positive effects of school choice programs on related outcomes such as education attainment, school safety, and parent satisfactions. (https://www.edchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/123s-2024.pdf, p. 10.)
How will teachers fare with the availability of school choice and charter schools?
As school choice options and charter schools expand, teachers have wider opportunities for employment among schools that offer a greater variety of teaching environments and educational philosophies. Also, increased school choice raises the demand for teachers’ services. Studies indicate that this increased demand pushes up the pay for teachers generally; public, private, and charter.
Does school choice harm the educational outcomes for traditional public school students; or does it induce their improvement?
A review of research on this topic finds: "Of 21 studies of the effect of choice-based competition on the test scores of nonparticipating students, 20 studies conclude that choice-based competition led to improved student test scores in affected public schools, while one study reported no effects of competition” (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0161956X.2016.1207436)
A specific example of this is the following:
“Despite numerous assertions that school choice will destroy Kentucky’s public school system, an examination of how Florida’s public schools have fared during the major expansion of school choice options there provides solid evidence that choice doesn’t mean public schools will be harmed. In fact, evidence from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) shows public schools in Florida also prospered notably as choice options steadily increased in the Sunshine State."
(https://www.bipps.org/_files/ugd/7833d4_25de99649439489fbefcfbfdd6da5e63.pdf).
Are school choice and charter schools viable options in rural areas?
Rural areas present special concerns for school choice and charter programs, with the low population to draw from and transportation issues. However, many rural areas already have private schools. The Brookings Institution found that 69% of rural families in the U.S. live within 10 miles of a private school. (https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/es_20170330_chingos_evidence_speaks.pdf)
Moreover, as funds become available for private education in Kentucky (or elsewhere), schooling options are expected to expand.
Also, small private schools that draw on a small population base are quite common. National Center for Education Statistics data show that the average number of students in rural private schools is 102.
(https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_205.90.asp?current=yes)
The National Microschooling Center finds that the median number of children served in their sample of microschools is 16. (https://microschoolingcenter.org/hubfs/Website%20Final%202024%20Sector%20Analysis.pdf)
Charter schools are often much smaller than their traditional public school counterparts and, in some areas, locate in the vacant space of public school buildings.
Will charter schools and private schools adequately serve disabled students?
Charter schools and private schools are geared to serve varying populations of disabled and non-disabled students, and some specialize in disabled students. Most school choice programs have funding specifically for disabled students. Thus, parents who find the public school is inadequate to serve their child, more options will be available.
With expanded school choice, will this generate funds for private schools that engage in racial discrimination or segregation?
Federal and state laws already prohibit discrimination. Furthermore, claiming that private school operators are racist, when many of them seek out underserved populations, is inflammatory.
Additionally, early attempts at voucher programs in Virginia were anti-segregationist, contrary to claims otherwise. (https://www.aier.org/article/freedom-of-choice-in-education-the-origins-of-a-slogan/)
Recent evidence indicates that school choice programs improve school racial integration. A summary of studies finds: “Of the eight studies, seven found positive effects on integration in schools. One was unable to detect any effects, and none found negative effects."
(https://www.edchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/123s-2024.pdf, p. 55)
Is it true that low educational outcomes of poor children can only be solved by dealing with the underlying socioeconomic conditions they face and parenting shortcomings they cause?
There is no doubt that the socioeconomic environment and parental influences affect children’s educational performance. Nevertheless, many charter schools (and private schools) have figured out how to successfully engage with students and parents from such environments. In New York City, for example, “Charter schools . . . located in low-income black and Hispanic neighborhoods have achieved educational results, not only far above the levels achieved by most public schools in those neighborhoods ... but sometimes even higher educational results than those in schools located in affluent white neighborhoods.”
(https://www.hoover.org/research/economist-looks-90-tom-sowell-charter-schools-and-their-enemies-1)
​
Many parents in these unfavorable socioeconomic conditions apparently recognize the value of the better education charters provide. As of a few years ago, New York City had 79,600 applicants for 26,900 charter school spots. (https://schools.nyccharterschools.org/growth-demand)
​
​
