3. Table of Contents
Page
3 Executive Summary
5 Faith-based Private Schools Research Findings by Topic
5 Numbers, geographic distribution, and aggregate enrollment by religious affiliation
6 Information on school staffing, salaries, and operational costs by religious affiliation
7 Trends between 1990 and 2010 in enrollment by religious affiliation
8 Trends in the establishment and closing of faith-based schools, especially in low-income
areas
12 Information on the race/ethnicity and income of families served by faith-based schools
15 Information on low-income, special needs, and English learner students in faith-based
schools
19 Academic outcomes of faith-based schools: national comparison to public schools
24 Academic outcomes of faith-based schools: scientific findings
27 Summary of available research on faith-based and public school outcomes of democratic
citizenship
28 Summary of available research on faith-based schools serving families of other faith traditions
29 Summary of available research on savings from faith-based schools
32 Summary of available research on parental satisfaction levels with faith-based schools
compared with other educational options
35 Conclusion
44 About the Author
45 Endnotes
4. Table of Contents
Page Figures
13 Figure 1. Proportion of Faith-based White Enrollments and the American Population
Compared
14 Figure 2. Proportion of Faith-based Minority Enrollments and the American Population
Compared
16 Figure 3. Disadvantaged Populations: Faith-based Schools, Public Schools, and America
Compared
32 Figure 4. Parental Satisfaction Levels: Faith-based, Nonsectarian, and Public Schools
Compared
Tables
5 Table 1. K-12 Faith-based Enrollments: Religious Affiliation
8 Table 2. K-12 Faith-based Student Enrollment: 2001-02 and 2009-10
10 Table 3. K-12 Faith-based Schools: 2001-02 and 2009-10
11 Table 4. K-12 Urban Faith-based School Closures: 1997-98 to 2009-10
12 Table 5. K-12 Faith-based Enrollments: Ethnicity/Race
15 Table 6. Where do students from families with incomes $75,000 and over go to school?
18 Table 7. Percentages of K-12 Faith-based Students with an IEP
19 Table 8. Percentages of K-12 Faith-based Students Who are LEP
21 Table 9. Faith-based School NAEP Academic Advantage: All Students
22 Table 10. Faith-based School NAEP Reading Advantage: Student Sub-groups
23 Table 11. Faith-based School NAEP Math Advantage: Student Sub-groups
26 Table 12. Gold Standard Research: Attending Private Schools Improves Academic Outcomes
29 Table 13. Private School Parental Choice Programs Save Money
31 Table 14. Estimated Annual Savings from Private School Parental Choice Programs
33 Table 15. Parental and Public Satisfaction: Private and Public Schools
Appendices
36 Appendix A. Parental and Public Satisfaction with Private Schools: Major Findings Since 2000
43 Appendix B. About the Assembling the Evidence Project
5. 3
Executive Summary
This report assembles the available evidence on the contributions of faith-based schools to American
education, society, and the economy.* Currently there are 21,023 faith-based schools nationwide
enrolling nearly 4.4 million students (p. 5). The largest share of faith-based schools (36 percent) is
located in cities, and they also have smaller class sizes compared to public schools (p. 5). The
average student/teacher ratio in faith-based schools is 12:1, compared to the average public school
student/teacher ratio of 15:1 (p. 6). In addition to compiling available statistics related to faith-based
schools, this report contains several analyses of faith-based school closures, student demographics,
academic achievement, and savings to taxpayers. Key findings from those analyses include:
Overall, there were more than 8,200 fewer faith-based schools in 2009-10 compared to 1997-
98. While a number of those schools may have consolidated, approximately 3,400 of “closed”
faith-based schools (41 percent) were located in central cities (p. 11).
Faith-based school enrollments closely reflect the demographics of the American population at
large, with no more than a five percentage point difference for any minority ethnic/racial group.
Faith-based schools also enroll fewer White students compared to the American White population
overall, 70 percent compared to 78 percent (pp. 13-14).
Faith-based school students overall perform roughly two years ahead of their public school peers
based on results from the annually administered federal National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP), also known as the Nation’s Report Card. Historically, disadvantaged students
perform up to three and a half years ahead in reading; and in math up to two years ahead once
they reach eighth grade (pp. 20-23).
The estimated annual savings to taxpayers from nearly 4.4 million students attending faith-based
private schools instead of public schools amounts to nearly $53 billion. The annual estimated
savings from the 27 operational private school parental choice programs during the 2012-13
school year that had available data approaches $2 billion (pp. 29-31).
This report also compiles findings from scientific research about the academic outcomes of faith-
based schools, civic values, parental satisfaction, and public opinion concerning faith-based schools
and associated parental choice programs. Key findings include:
The preponderance of scientific research finds that faith-based students have better academic
outcomes than public school students. No scientifically credible study has ever concluded that
faith-based school attendance negatively affects academic outcomes. Scientific analyses also
overwhelmingly find increased high school graduation and college attendance rates for private
*
Unless otherwise noted, private school data for this report and the Assembling the Evidence website are from the U.S.
Department of Education’s 2009-10 biennial Private School Universe Survey (PSS) and more expansive online PSS web tool. The
2011-12 PSS report was published in July 2013. The updated data are scheduled to be available through the Department’s
online PSS web tool in November 2013.
6. 4
and faith-based students, particularly urban, low-income, and minority students. By comparing
the experiences of the same students as they move from public to private and faith-based
schools, other scientific research shows former public school students received better services
and had stronger academic achievement in private and faith-based schools (pp. 25-27).
Many researchers attribute the success of faith-based schools at improving performance and
closing achievement gaps among disadvantaged and minority students to the religious conviction
among teachers that all students are equal in the eyes of God and can reach their full potential.
This conviction reinforces religious educators’ high expectations for all students and their
insistence that all students take rigorous courses (p. 25).
Fully 59 findings from 21 studies examining civic values and faith-based schools have been
conducted using various scientific methods. The overwhelming majority of those findings (33)
found that faith-based schools do a better job of promoting civic values than public schools.
Twenty-three findings were neutral, and just three findings concluded public schools do a better
job promoting civic values (p. 28).
An additional seven analyses focus on promoting civic values through private school parental
choice programs. Five found that school choice improves civic values, and two found find no
visible impact from school choice. No empirical study concludes that parental choice has a
negative impact on civic values (p. 28).
Since 1993 parental satisfaction levels with faith-based schools have remained consistently near
or above 80 percent. In contrast, assigned public schools have significantly lower parental
satisfaction levels that have hovered around 50 percent. Chosen pubic schools have satisfaction
levels that have remained around 60 percent (p. 32).
Inner-city parents nationwide as well as parents of school choice scholarship students also
express strong support for private schools. Compared to public school parents, two to three
times as many private school parents give their children’s schools an A grade or say they are “very
satisfied” (pp. 32-33).
Since 2000 alone there have been more than 40 scientifically credible analyses, studies, polls, and
surveys of the opinion of parents and the American public about various aspects relating to
private schools, including academics, safety, morals, and support for a variety of parental choice
policies. With just two exceptions, they all find higher parental and public support for private
schools (pp. 33-34).
At a time of rising schooling costs and tighter budgets, limiting schooling options to the public sector
is ill advised, according to leading experts such as California State University-Long Beach Professor of
Education William H. Jeynes—especially since faith-based private schools save money and frequently
achieve better outcomes than the traditional public schools nearby.
7. 5
Faith-based Private Schools Research Findings by Topic
This section provides more details about the available research and findings by topic based on a
review of the Research Library contents. Unless otherwise noted, the information in this section is
also presented on the Assembling the Evidence website.
Numbers, geographic distribution, and aggregate enrollment by religious affiliation
There are 21,023 faith-based schools, representing 16 percent of all schools.1 Roman Catholic
schools make up the largest share of faith-based schools, with more than 7,500 schools. Non-
denominational Christian schools represent the second largest share with more than 4,300 schools,
followed by Baptist schools, nearly 2,100.2 The largest portion of faith-based schools (36 percent) is
located in cities, followed by suburbs (33 percent). The remaining schools are located in rural areas
(20 percent) and towns (12 percent). There are 4,360,456 students enrolled in faith-based schools,
representing 8 percent of all student enrollments nationwide.3 Roman Catholic schools make up the
largest share of faith-based enrollments, with more than 2.3 million students. Non-denominational
Christian schools represent the second largest share with more than 697,000 students, followed by
Baptist schools with nearly 290,000 students.4
Table 1. K-12 Faith-based Enrollments: Religious Affiliation
Roman Catholic 2,314,397
Christian (unspecified) 697,358
Baptist 289,582
Jewish 221,178
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod 179,525
Episcopal 119,746
Seventh-Day Adventist 64,720
Assembly of God 57,520
Presbyterian 55,449
Church of Christ 40,352
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod 36,988
Methodist 35,933
Islamic 32,646
Other 26,729
Calvinist 26,691
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 23,383
Friends 22,205
Mennonite 20,384
Pentecostal 16,924
Church of God 13,744
Amish 13,245
8. 6
Church of the Nazarene 11,852
Brethren 9,091
Other Lutheran 6,596
Greek Orthodox 4,768
Church of God In Christ 2,814
African Methodist Episcopal 2,153
Latter Day Saints 1,640
Disciples of Christ 1,342
Source: U.S. Department of Education PSS, 2009-10.
Notes: 1. Details may not sum to total because of rounding or missing values in cells with too few sample cases,
according to the U.S. Department of Education. 2. Includes K-12 and ungraded enrollments.
Information on school staffing, salaries, and operational costs by religious affiliation
Faith-based student/teacher ratios published by the U.S. Department of Education are broken down
to a minimal faith-based school level. In Catholic schools the student/teacher ratios are: 14:1 overall;
14:8 in elementary schools; 13:5 in secondary schools; and 10:7 in combined schools. At other
religious schools the student teacher ratios average 10:2 for all school levels. In Conservative
Christian schools the student/teacher ratios are: 10:7 overall; 10:3 in elementary schools; and 11:2 in
secondary schools; and 10:8 in combined schools. At other affiliated and unaffiliated faith-based
schools, the student/teacher ratios average 9:9 across school levels.5
The Assembling the Evidence website uses the most recent unpublished data on student enrollment
and full-time equivalent (FTE) teachers from the Department’s online PSS web tool for 28 religiously
affiliated schools, as well as “other” religious schools, to generate a more inclusive student/teacher
ratio average of 12:1 across all faith-based schools. That ratio is far less than the published average
public school student/teacher ratio of 16:1.6 The faith-based schools student/teacher ratio is also
less than the 15:1 average public school student/teacher ratio presented on the Assembling the
Evidence website, which is derived using the latest unpublished district public school student
enrollment and FTE teacher data from the Department’s online Common Core of Data (CCD).
The median base salary for full-time, faith-based private school teachers is 30 percent lower than
full-time, district public school teachers’ base salary, $35,050, compared to $49,800. The base salary
for full-time public charter school teachers is $40,800. Salary data from the U.S. Department of
Education is broken down according to eight faith-based school categories. Teachers at three faith-
based school types earn base salaries between $40,000 and $44,000: Catholic (private), Jewish, and
Seventh-Day Adventist. Teachers at four faith-based school types earn base salaries between
$30,000 and $37,000: Catholic (diocesan), Catholic (parochial), Lutheran, and other religious schools.
Teachers at Baptist schools earn base salaries of $26,300.7
9. 7
In spite of lower base salaries, full-time, faith-based private school teachers spend more of their
weekly work hours teaching than their public district and charter school peers, 59 percent compared
to 57 percent. The time devoted by teachers to various weekly activities is reported by the U.S.
Department of Education, broken down according to eight faith-based school categories. Teachers at
Baptist schools, who earn the lowest average base salaries, spend the most time teaching, with 60
percent of their weekly work hours devoted to teaching. Teachers at Jewish schools also spend just
under 60 percent of their time teaching. Catholic (parochial), Lutheran, and other religious school
teachers each spend 59 percent of their time teaching. Seventh-Day Adventist and Catholic (diocesan)
school teachers spend 58 percent of their time teaching; while Catholic (private) school teachers
spend 53 percent of their time teaching.8
There is growing concern about the rising cost of schooling. Comprehensive data on private school
operational costs are not available. An analysis published by the Goldwater Institute in 2006 found
that Arizona private schools place far greater emphasis on teaching staff and ongoing (rather than
deferred) maintenance, keeping costs down and performance levels high.9 Other research documents
administrative “bloat” in public schools and districts.10 Given the lower average tuition prices at faith-
based private schools, investigating their management and operations practices is a ripe research
topic. The U.S. Department of Education collects data on teachers and other school staff in public,
Catholic, and other religious schools. In private and faith-based schools, teachers represent a larger
share of the staff than their peers in public schools: 51 percent in public schools compared to 58
percent in Catholic schools and 59 percent in other religious schools. There are other notable staffing
differences as well. General support staff in Catholic schools is 22 percent and 21 percent in other
religious schools. In contrast, general support staff in public schools approaches one-third of all staff
at 31 percent. Public school staff also have a higher proportion of instructional aides, 12 percent
compared to 7 percent in Catholic schools and 6 percent in other religious schools.11
Trends between 1990 and 2010 in enrollment by religious affiliation
Enrollment data for Catholic and other religious faith-based schools are available back to 1997;
however, generating a reliable enrollment trends was not possible because so many schools had
missing data for the 1997-98 and/or 2009-10 school years.12 More detailed data are available after
2000. The table below presents enrollment trends based on 2001-02 and 2009-10 enrollment
figures from the U.S. Department of Education’s corresponding Private School Universe Survey (PSS)
reports.13 Faith-based schools with enrollment figures that did not meet U.S. Department of
Education reporting requirements or were flagged as potentially unreliable were excluded. Out of the
21 faith-based school types presented in the table below, 14 experienced enrollment increases (67
percent), and seven experienced enrollment declines (33 percent).
10. 8
Table 2. K-12 Faith-based Student Enrollment: 2001-02 and 2009-10
2001-02 to 2009-10
School Affiliation
Number
of
Students
2009-10 # Change % Change
Assembly of God 57,520 -8,518 -14.81
Baptist 289,582 -25,102 -8.67
Brethren 9,091 949 10.44
Calvinist 26,691 -12,388 -46.41
Christian (unspecified) 697,358 93,734 13.44
Church of God 13,744 -42 -0.31
Episcopal 119,746 19,343 16.15
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 23,383 7,246 30.99
Friends 22,205 1,324 5.96
Greek Orthodox 4,768 206 4.32
Islamic 32,646 9,695 29.70
Jewish 221,178 22,700 10.26
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod 179,525 17,224 9.59
Methodist 35,933 18,366 51.11
Other 26,729 -30,310 -113.40
Other Lutheran 6,596 1,221 18.51
Pentecostal 16,924 -22,376 -132.22
Presbyterian 55,449 15,552 28.05
Roman Catholic 2,314,397 -201,127 -8.69
Seventh-Day Adventist 64,720 4,039 6.24
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod 36,988 1,404 3.80
Source: U.S. Department of Education, PSS school years 2001-02 and 2009-10.
Notes: 1. The following faith-based schools were excluded because reporting standards were not met or were flagged
as potentially unreliable: African Methodist Episcopal, Amish, Church of God in Christ, Church of the Nazarene,
Disciples of Christ, and Latter Day Saints. Mennonite schools were also excluded because of data reliability concerns. 2.
Given those exclusions, details will not sum to the total. 3. Includes K-12 and ungraded enrollments.
Trends in the establishment and closing of faith-based schools, especially in low-
income areas
Various research articles are available on Catholic school closures in particular.14 Since 1990, more
than 1,300 Catholic schools have closed affecting some 300,000 students at a cost to taxpayers of
more than $20 billion.15 Several recent articles and studies attribute this decline to the rise of public
charter schools and find that urban Catholic schools are especially vulnerable to enrollment losses
due to charter schools.16 Many analyses focus on particular cities or states. A recent study estimates
11. 9
that about one-third of New York State’s charter school enrollment, 21,000 students, comes from
Catholic schools at an estimated annual cost to taxpayers of $390 million.17 Based on charter
enrollments in Michigan it has been estimated that for every three students gained by charter
schools, private schools will lose one.18
A recent report from the U.S. Census Bureau takes a broader look at private school enrollment
declines over the past decade. It concluded, “The decline in private school enrollment occurred at all
school levels but was concentrated among schools that were larger, religiously affiliated, and not
located in rural areas.”19 The Census report indicated the growth of charter schools likely contributed
to those declines but also indicated the increasing popularity of homeschooling is another possible
factor.
Other analyses note Catholic school enrollments had been declining before the rise of charter schools
in part because of increasing costs, management practices, and other non-charter school factors.20
Still other research cautions against making causal connections between private and charter school
enrollment changes. Charter school quality greatly affects the number of transfers from private to
charter schools, and other researchers found only a modest effect, at best, on Michigan Catholic and
private school enrollments due to charter schools.21
Some research suggests instead that private school enrollments should be rising, not falling, given
the expansion of parental choice programs across the country. The Thomas B. Fordham Institute’s
Parental Choice Director Adam Emerson noted that 212,000 students were using tax-credit and
voucher scholarships in 2012, increasing 25 percent in the past five years alone.22 However, more in-
depth analyses challenge this assertion. Various limitations on scholarship student eligibility, caps on
how many students can participate, and geographical restrictions dampen private school enrollment.
Further, according to Maria Marta Ferreyra of Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business,
“When vouchers are restricted to nonsectarian schools, overall private school enrollment expands less
than under universal vouchers, and Catholic school enrollment declines as the voucher rises. Further,
fewer households benefit or gain school quality. In particular, fewer low-income households gain
school quality.”23 Such findings have tremendous implications for universal parental choice policy—
particularly since less expensive, faith-based schools in non-rural areas appear especially vulnerable
to enrollment declines and school closures.
A related research area concerns private management of faith-based schools, including hiring private
management companies to oversee day-to-day school operations. For example, during the 2012-13
school year the country’s largest Roman Catholic education system, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia,
transferred management of 21 schools enrolling more than 2,500 students to the non-profit Faith in
Our Future Foundation rather than close them. Bishop Fitzgerald explained that the partnership helps
better ensure that “we are on the right path towards sustainable, academically excellent schools that
are rooted in faith.” The decision to turn over management to a private foundation “reflects a
paradigm shift, it serves to change the organizational structure for Catholic education, [but] not its
mission,” said Archbishop Charles J. Chaput.24
With available U.S. Department of Education data, it is possible to compare the number of faith-based
schools across 21 religious affiliations in the 2001-02 school year and the 2009-10 school year.25
12. 10
The total number of faith-based schools across 21 different religious affiliations decreased overall by
1,243 schools since the 2001-02 school year. The number of faith-based schools increased for 11
religious affiliations and decreased for nine religious affiliations. Other Lutheran schools remained
constant. This is an unexpected finding since as noted above, 14 out of 21 faith-based schools
experienced enrollment increases during this same period. This situation likely indicates that schools
may be consolidating rather than closing.
Table 3. K-12 Faith-based Schools: 2001-02 and 2009-10
2001-02 to 2009-10
School Affiliation
Number of
Schools
2009-10 # Change % Change
Assembly of God 364 -65 -17.78
Baptist 2,098 -450 -21.44
Brethren 88 28 31.64
Calvinist 114 -21 -18.85
Christian (unspecified) 4,310 175 4.07
Church of God 118 -65 -55.27
Episcopal 411 64 15.51
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 169 53 31.60
Friends 85 8 9.44
Greek Orthodox 34 4 12.74
Islamic 222 34 15.18
Jewish 861 131 15.18
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod 1,137 27 2.39
Methodist 266 125 46.83
Other 209 -393 -188.17
Other Lutheran 59 0 0.00
Pentecostal 319 -263 -82.56
Presbyterian 245 61 24.98
Roman Catholic 7,570 -637 -8.42
Seventh-Day Adventist 936 -25 -2.71
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod 379 -32 -8.55
Source: U.S. Department of Education PSS school years 2001-02 and 2009-10.
Notes: 1. The following faith-based schools were excluded because reporting standards were not met or were
flagged as potentially unreliable: African Methodist Episcopal, Amish, Church of God in Christ, Church of the
Nazarene, Disciples of Christ, and Latter Day Saints. Mennonite schools were also excluded because of data reliability
concerns. 2. Because of those exclusions, details will not sum to the total. 3. Includes K-12 and ungraded schools.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Elementary and Secondary Information System (ElSi) provides
more detailed information about the number of faith-based schools over a longer period of time,
dating back to the 1997-98 school year.26 It also includes locales for schools across various faith-
based categories. With this basic information, it is possible to see what schools were open in the
1997-98 school year but no longer open in the 2009-10 school year for 28 religiously affiliated
13. 11
schools by locale type. A much more detailed analysis than is possible here would be needed to
identify schools that were located in low-income areas then closed. Raw declines also do not
necessarily mean that schools closed. They could have been consolidated. With these caveats in mind,
from 1997-98 to 2009-10 there were 8,226 fewer faith-based schools overall. Of those “closed”
faith-based schools, 41 percent overall (3,402) were designated as “central city.”
Table 4. K-12 Urban Faith-based School Closures: 1997-98 to 2009-10
School Affiliation
Number of F-
B Schools
Closed
Percent of
F-B Schools
Closed
Number of
Closed Urban
Schools
Percent of
Closed Urban
Schools
African Methodist Episcopal 10 0.12 9 90.00
Amish 345 4.08 7 2.03
Assembly of God 256 3.03 82 32.03
Baptist 942 11.14 349 37.05
Brethren 19 0.22 3 15.79
Calvinist 29 0.34 7 24.14
Christian (no specific denomination) 1,579 18.68 579 36.67
Church of Christ 73 0.86 43 58.90
Church of God 77 0.91 32 41.56
Church of God in Christ 13 0.15 11 84.62
Church of the Nazarene 123 1.45 58 47.15
Disciples of Christ 19 0.22 6 31.58
Episcopal 10 0.12 6 60.00
Evangelical Lutheran Church 25 0.30 10 40.00
Friends 38 0.45 30 78.95
Greek Orthodox 289 3.42 170 58.82
Islamic 5 0.06 2 40.00
Jewish 331 3.92 152 45.92
Latter Day Saints 114 1.35 64 56.14
Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod 71 0.84 30 42.25
Methodist 110 1.30 52 47.27
Other 652 7.71 261 40.03
Other Lutheran 143 1.69 76 53.15
Pentecostal 313 3.70 99 31.63
Presbyterian 325 3.84 116 35.69
Roman Catholic 2,024 23.94 1,050 51.88
Seventh–Day Adventist 181 2.14 90 49.72
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod 110 1.30 8 7.27
Totals 8,226 97.30 3,402 41.36
Source: U.S. Department of Education PSS, 2009-10; and the Elementary and Secondary Information System (ElSi).
Notes: 1. Includes K-12 and ungraded schools. 2. "Urban" schools are those designated with a “central city” (not urban fringe,
which includes large towns) locale. 3. For purposes of this table, faith-based schools are considered “closed” if data were
reported for them in the 1997-98 school year but none was reported for the 2009-10 school year. This definition cannot
account for schools that were consolidated. 4. Mennonite schools were excluded from this table because of concerns with the
validity of their locale designations. 5. Given this exclusion, details will not sum to the totals. 6. Evangelical Lutheran Church
formerly known as AELC, ALC, or LCA.
14. 12
City-based closures across seven faith-based categories reached 100 or more schools: Roman
Catholic, 1,050; non-denominational Christian, 579; Baptist, 349; other religious schools, 261; Greek
Orthodox, 170; Jewish, 152; and Presbyterian, 116. While not all faith-based school closures were in
cities, it appears a significant portion was. In fact, city-based closures represented nearly one-third
or more of all school closures for 25 of the 28 faith-based schools examined.
This table is not included on the website because a much more extensive analysis is needed to
identify the extent and causes for faith-based school closures in low-income areas. However, it does
provide a starting point for consideration.
Information on the race/ethnicity and income of families served by faith-based
schools
Ethnicity/race data are available at the national and state levels for faith-based schools.27 White
students represent the largest share of faith-based private school enrollments, 2.7 million or 70
percent. Hispanic enrollments represent the next largest share with more than 435,000 students, 12
percent of faith-based enrollments. Faith-based schools enroll 327,000 Black students, representing
9 percent of faith-based enrollments. More than 221,000 Asian/Pacific Islander students are enrolled
in faith-based schools, representing 6 percent of enrollments. Faith-based schools enroll 102,000
students of multiple races, or 3 percent of enrollments; and 17,000 American Indian/Alaska Native
students, roughly 0.5 percent of enrollments.28
Table 5. K-12 Faith-based Enrollments: Ethnicity/Race
American Indian/Alaska Native 17,105
Asian/Pacific Islander 221,088
Black 327,022
Hispanic 435,338
White 2,680,634
Multiple races 101,759
Total 3,782,946
Source: U.S. Department of Education PSS, 2009-10.
Notes: 1. Details may not sum to total because of rounding or missing values in cells with too few sample cases,
according to the U.S. Department of Education. 2. Includes K-12 and ungraded enrollments.
Research indicates that private schools—faith-based schools in particular—typically offer more
racially integrated environments than public schools. Since private school attendance is not as closely
attached to where families can afford to live as public schools, they do not tend to reflect racially
segregated housing patterns. Importantly, schools’ strong religious missions also contribute to better
racial integration.29 Of the eight empirical studies specifically examining racial segregation in private
schools participating in parental choice programs, seven find that parental choice moves students
from more segregated schools into less segregated schools. One study finds no net effect on
segregation. No empirical study finds that parental choice increases racial segregation.30
15. 13
In fact, research has shown that faith-based schools participating in the Milwaukee Parental Choice
Program (MPCP) in 1999-2000 enrolled the highest proportions of low-income students (62 percent).
Additionally, half of the city’s public schools were racially isolated (90 percent of enrollments are
either "minority" or White), compared with less than one-third of faith-based schools (30 percent).31
A decade later, the voucher program was found to have a neutral effect on integration. Researchers
believe that over time decoupling schooling from attendance zones mitigated residential
segregation.32 Private schools participating in the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP) were
also found to have racial demographics that more accurately reflect the surrounding metropolitan
area than D.C. public schools. Additionally, researchers concluded scholarship students were less
likely to attend racially isolated schools than their public school peers, and the fact that the vast
majority of students participating in the OSP are Black indicates that the voucher program will help
students leave more segregated public schools for better integrated private schools.33
Turning to faith-based schools overall, they enroll a smaller proportion of White students compared
to the American population, 70 percent compared to 78 percent.34 Faith-based minority enrollments
also mirror the American population within five percentage points across ethnic/racial groups.
Figure 1. Proportion of Faith-based White Enrollments and the American Population Compared
Whites
78%
70%
64%
66%
68%
70%
72%
74%
76%
78%
80%
Faith-based Students U.S.A.
Source: Author’s figure based on U.S. Department of Education PSS data for the 2009-10 school year; and the U.S. Census
Bureau, 2011. Note: PSS data include K-12 and ungraded enrollments.
Compared to the American population at large, faith-based schools enroll roughly the same
proportion of American Indian/Alaska Native students, students of multiple races, and Asian/Pacific
Islander students. Faith-based enrollments of Black students are just 4 percentage points below the
American population (9 percent versus 13 percent). Similarly, Hispanic faith-based enrollments are
only 5 percentage points below the American population (12 percent versus 17 percent). The
scientific and demographic findings outlined here have important implications for defending parental
choice programs against legal challenges purporting to promote racial integration.†
†
A recent example is the U.S. Department of Justice’s August 22, 2013, filing arguing that vouchers awarded
under Louisiana’s Student Scholarships for Education Excellence Program violate decades-old desegregation
16. 14
Figure 2. Proportion of Faith-based Minority Enrollments and the American Population Compared
Minorities
0.5%
3%
6%
9%
12%
1%
2%
5%
13%
17%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Am. In./AK Nat.
Multiple races
Asian/Pac. Is.
Black
Hispanic origin
Faith-based Students U.S.A.
Source: Author’s figure based on U.S. Department of Education PSS data for the 2009-10 school year; and the U.S. Census
Bureau, 2011. Note: PSS data include K-12 and ungraded enrollments.
Another common misconception is that most wealthy American families enroll their children in
private schools. In reality most of those families send their children to public schools. Family income
data associated specifically with faith-based private schools are not readily available; however, the
Census Bureau regularly publishes statistical tables on the family incomes of Americans sending their
children to public, private, or both types of schools.35 For context, the median annual American
household income is just under $53,000, and less than 40 percent of American homes with children
under the age of 18 have annual incomes of $75,000 or more.36 Yet 85 percent of all families in this
highest Census income bracket send their children to public schools. In contrast, just 11 percent of
these families send their children to private schools; while 3 percent send their children to both types
of schools. Depending on families’ ethnic/racial backgrounds, higher percentages of wealthy families
send their children to public schools: 86 percent of Black families, increasing to 88 percent each for
families of Hispanic origin and those who are Asian.
orders in place at 34 public school districts. The voucher program currently helps about 8,000 low-income
students (mostly Black) attend private schools instead of average or low-performing public schools. A
subsequent DOJ motion filed on October 22, 2013, seeks to prevent parents, represented by the Black Alliance
for Educational Options, from intervening. See U.S. Department of Justice, Broomfield v. Dodd, August 22, 2013;
U.S. Department of Justice, Broomfield v. Dodd and Fuselier, et al., October 22, 2013; cf. Clint Bolick, “Justice
Department vs. Louisiana Voucher Kids,” Wall Street Journal, September 23, 2013; Mary C. Tillotson, “DOJ
backpedals on Louisiana voucher lawsuit,” Watchdog.org, September 27, 2013; and Tillotson, “DOJ wants
Louisiana parents out of voucher lawsuit,” Watchdog.org, October 25, 2013.
17. 15
Table 6. Where do students from families with incomes $75,000 and over go to school?
Families by Ethnicity/Race/Origin Public only Private only Public & private
All 85% 11% 3%
Asian 88% 11% 1%
Hispanic origin 88% 9% 3%
Black 86% 10% 4%
White 85% 12% 4%
Source: Percentages based on figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, School Enrollment in the United States, 2011, Table 8.
Information on low-income, special needs, and English learner students in faith-
based schools
Another common misconception is that private schools enroll few low-income, special needs, and
English learner students. The way these students are reported gives artificially low counts in private
schools, particularly faith-based private schools. The reason is that each of those student groups is
defined by participation in federally-funded programs: the National School Lunch Program (which
includes free and reduced-price lunches), Title I of the ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education
Act, also known as No Child Left Behind), and IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act).
Yet according to the U.S. Department of Education, overall 56 percent of private schools do not
participate in federal education programs. Fully 20 percent of Catholic private schools do not
participate in federal education programs; 72 percent of other religious private schools; and 75
percent of nonsectarian private schools. Most non-participating private schools (58 percent) made a
conscious choice not to participate. Thus significant numbers of private school students who are from
low-income families, have special needs, or are English learners are not counted simply because the
educational services they receive are not funded by the federal government.37
Comparing available faith-based school and district public school data with comparable U.S. Census
Bureau data reveals enrollments of special student populations in faith-based schools better reflect
the American population at large than district public school enrollments.38 In fact, across all three
special student populations, the public school proportions are at least twice as high as both the
Census and faith-based school proportions, as shown in Figure 3.
Low-income Students. With the above caveats in mind, faith-based private schools do, in fact, enroll
students designated as low-income. Students are counted as “low-income” if their families’ incomes
qualify them for free or reduced-price lunches under the federal National School Lunch Program,
$26,845 or $38,203, respectively, for a family of four during the 2007-08 school year.39 U.S.
Department of Education data indicate that more than 1.2 million faith-based school students were
approved for free and reduced-price lunches during the 2007-08 school year.40 The percentages of
eligible students vary across faith-based schools, with a median of 23.8 percent.41 That median
closely reflects the 21.4 percent of related children under 18 living in poverty reported by the U.S.
Census Bureau.42 In contrast, 47.8 percent of public school students are eligible for free or reduced-
price lunches.43
18. 16
Figure 3. Disadvantaged Populations: Faith-based Schools, Public Schools, and America Compared
Disadvantaged Populations
48%
12% 11%
24%
5% 5%
21%
5% 5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Low-Income Students Special Needs Students English Learner Students
Public Schools Faith-based Schools U.S.A
Sources: Author’s figure is based on data from the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Notes: 1. The “Low-income” faith-based percentage is the median of percentages of students approved for free or reduced-
price lunches under the National School Lunch Program for eight faith-based school affiliations. 2. The “Special needs”
percentages for public and faith-based schools are for students with individualized education plans or programs (IEPs) that
make them eligible for federal funding under IDEA. Just because students have IEPs does not necessarily mean they participate
or receive federally funded services. 3. Faith-based school percentages are medians for available religiously-affiliated schools
for the 2007-08 school year. 4. Public school percentages are for the 2007-08 school year. 5. The Census Bureau low-income
percentage is for related children under 18 living in poverty in 2011. 6. The Census Bureau special needs percentage is for
school-age children with reported disabilities in 2010. 7. The Census Bureau English learner percentage is for school-age
children who spoke a language other than English at home and who reported speaking English “not well” or “not at all” in 2008.
This proxy likely understates the actual number of low-income faith-based school students since
most of those schools (56 percent overall) do not participate in federal education programs. Yet a
growing number of states have enacted parental choice programs for students from low-income
families to expand their education options. As of the 2012-13 school year there were nearly 245,000
students enrolled in private and faith-based schools through 32 voucher and tax-credit scholarship
programs operating in 16 states and the District of Columbia: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana,
Iowa, Louisiana,‡ Mississippi, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. A program has also been enacted in Douglas County,
Colorado.44
‡
One week after the state education department announced scholarship awards to nearly 8,000 students for the
upcoming school year, on May 7, 2013, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that the funding mechanism behind
the state’s voucher program for low-income students in average or failing public schools was unconstitutional.
More than nine out of 10 scholarship parents reported being very satisfied with the program and the academic
programs available to their children. See “Louisiana Voucher Remains Legal, AFC Urges Legislature to Resolve
Funding Issue Louisiana Supreme Court rules against existing funding mechanism,” American Federation for
Children, May 7, 2013, Press Release; and “Louisiana Scholarship Program: Parental Satisfaction Survey Results,”
Black Alliance for Educational Options and the Louisiana Federation for Children, February 2013.
19. 17
Special Needs Students. For federal reporting purposes, public and private school students are
considered “special needs” if they have an individualized education plan or program (IEP), which
makes them eligible to receive services funded through the federal Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA). Students are considered “special needs” if they have a diagnosed disability.
Under IDEA, children whose parents place them in private schools are not individually entitled to
special education services. Through a consultation process, some students are selected to receive
certain services and are given an IEP that describes the services the student will receive. This law was
enacted by Congress in 1975 to ensure that children with disabilities were not excluded from public
school classrooms. According to official Congressional testimony from the U.S. Department of
Education, prior to IDEA “approximately 1 million children with disabilities were totally excluded from
the public school system and another 4 million did not receive appropriate services.”45 Judith
Heumann, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services during the Clinton
Administration, recalled her own experience as a child with polio. When it was time for her to start
kindergarten at her local public school, “the school officials did not see me—they saw my wheelchair.
And they barred me from class. I was a fire hazard, they said.”46
While IDEA was enacted to protect civil rights, only students with IEPs are considered special needs
for reporting purposes. This reporting method is likely both to understate the number of private
school special needs students and overstate the number of public school students deemed special
needs. This is one reason why simplistic public/private school special needs enrollment comparisons
are misleading and unreliable. Faith-based private schools generally do not favor classifying students
with stigmatizing labels that will follow them throughout their school-age years. In fact, recent
research has shown that Milwaukee public school students who used vouchers to transfer to
neighborhood private schools were 60 percent more likely to have been labeled with a disability at
their former public schools than their current private schools.47 This does not mean that private and
faith-based school students with special educational needs and learning differences do not receive
the individualized attention and academic support they require. Rather, if the private school services
these students receive are not federally funded, they are not considered disabled for federal reporting
purposes. There are also several reasons why public school special needs student enrollments are
likely overstated.
The rates of “hard,” medically-diagnosed disabilities (severe brain injury, visual impairments, etc.)
have remained steady for decades.48 In contrast, a growing body of research documents the over-
identification of public school students with “soft,” more subjective specific learning disabilities (SLD)
or learning disabilities (LD). In fact, these subjective disabilities alone account for 41 percent of all
disabilities across the 13 categories defined by the U.S. Department of Education. To put that figure
into perspective, the proportion of students labeled with SLD IEPs compared to other disabilities is
more than twice as high as speech or language impairments (18.5 percent); more than five times
greater than intellectual disabilities (7.45 percent); nearly six times greater than autism (7.03
percent); and almost six times greater than the proportion of students with multiple disabilities,
developmental delays, traumatic brain injuries, as well as orthopedic, visual, and hearing impairments
combined (7.19 percent altogether).49
20. 18
Students identified as learning disabled have average and above average intelligence, but because
their brains process information differently, these students often perform poorly on standardized
assessments.50 It is common for private and faith-based school officials to recognize these students
as simply having learning differences. Rather than labeling students, private and faith-based schools
provide the additional individualized support they need. Public schools operate differently, which
contributes to their comparatively higher special needs student enrollments. Public school students
are frequently labeled with an SLD IEP based on assessments by education committees, not medical
professionals.51 Researchers from the National Institutes of Health have found evidence that poor
reading instruction in the early grades results in deficiencies that are later misidentified by school
officials as learning disabilities. The NIH research team estimated that up to 70 percent of those
learning disability labels are preventable with proper reading instruction.52
Experts also identify several perverse incentives that contribute to the mis- or over-identification of
public school students as learning disabled. One is ensuring poor test-takers are exempted from
mandatory assessments so that public schools are better able to meet their annual academic
performance growth targets and not jeopardize their associated state and federal funding.53
Additionally, many states distribute federal IDEA funding based on the number of students placed on
IEPs by school districts, often referred to as “bounty funding.”54 Researchers have found that up to 62
percent of the total increase in special-education enrollments in bounty funding states is attributable
to financial incentives. They further note that such over-identification has resulted in nearly 400,000
more students in special education nationwide at a cost of $2.3 billion annually.55
Thus federal IEP statistics sorely understate the actual number of faith-based school students
diagnosed with disabilities simply because the services those students receive are not federally
funded. With that caveat in mind, the U.S. Department of Education reports that 8.3 percent of private
school students overall have IEPs, approximately 429,000 students.56 The percentages of students
with IEPs vary across faith-based private schools, from 4 percent up to 14 percent, with a median of
5.1 percent.57 That median reflects the 5.2 percent of children with disabilities reported by the U.S.
Census Bureau. In contrast, the overall percentage of public school students with IEPs is more than
twice as high at 12.3 percent.58
Table 7. Percentages of K-12 Faith-based Students with an IEP
Catholic 14.40%
Baptist 3.70%
Jewish 10.90%
Lutheran 4.40%
Seventh-Day Adventist 3.70%
Other religious 6.60%
Source: U.S. Department of Education, Schools and Staffing Survey, Table 2. Number and percentage of all private schools
that had any students with an Individual Education Plan (IEP) or who were limited-English proficient (LEP) and percentage of
students with an IEP or who were LEP, by affiliation: 2007-08.
Notes: 1. "IEP" stands for individualized education plan or program. Students with an IEP are eligible to receive services
under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2. The Catholic percentage represents combined
percentages for Catholic private, parochial, and diocesan school students.
21. 19
Research suggests that parental choice programs for special needs students minimize the perverse
financial incentives for public school districts to over-identify students as learning disabled. One
recent analysis of the country’s largest special needs voucher program, Florida’s McKay Scholarship
Program, found that when public schools are at risk of losing students to nearby private schools, the
probability that students would receive an SLD IEP dropped 15 percent.59
To expand educational options for students with special educational needs, a growing number of
states have enacted targeted private school parental choice programs. As of the 2012-13 school year,
10 voucher and tax-credit scholarship programs, as well as one educational savings account (ESA)
program, have been enacted in eight states: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio,
Oklahoma, and Utah. Nearly 30,500 students were enrolled in private and faith-based schools
because of those programs. North Carolina also enacted an individual tuition tax credit in 2011. This
program is sufficiently large (up to $6,000 in tax credits per child) to provide meaningful financial
help to parents of children with special educational needs.60
English Learners. Private schools also enroll English learners, also referred to as limited English
proficient (LEP) students. The U.S. Department of Education reports that 7.9 percent of private school
students overall are LEP, approximately 408,000 students.61 The percentages of LEP students vary
across faith-based schools, from slightly more than 2 percent up to 34 percent, with a median LEP
enrollment of 5.4 percent.62 That median reflects the combined 5.0 percent national average of
school-age children who speak English “not well” and “not at all” reported by the U.S. Census
Bureau.63 In contrast, 11.3 percent of public school students are designated LEP.64
Table 8. Percentages of K-12 Faith-based Students Who are LEP
Catholic 8.70%
Baptist 3.10%
Jewish 33.70%
Lutheran 2.40%
Seventh-Day Adventist 8.70%
Other religious 5.30%
Source: U.S. Department of Education, Schools and Staffing Survey, Table 2. Number and percentage of all private schools
that had any students with an Individual Education Plan (IEP) or who were limited-English proficient (LEP) and percentage of
student with an IEP or who were LEP, by affiliation: 2007-08.
Notes: 1. "LEP" stands for limited English proficient. 2. Reporting standards were not met for LEP Catholic-Diocesan schools,
therefore data were not presented. 3. Catholic percentage represents the combined percentages for Catholic private and
parochial school students.
Academic outcomes of faith-based schools: national comparison to public schools
Analyses of by the U.S. Department of Education have shown “that students who had attended private
school in eighth grade were twice as likely as those who had attended public school to have
completed a bachelor’s or higher degree by their mid-20s (52 versus 26 percent).”65 Importantly,
students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds (referred to as socioeconomic status or SES) who
had attended private school in eighth grade were more than three times as likely as their public
22. 20
school peers to have earned a bachelor’s degree by their mid-twenties (24 versus 7 percent).66 Based
on its ongoing reviews of student performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP), also known as the Nation’s Report Card, the U.S. Department of Education summarized, “For
the past 30 years, NAEP has reported that students in private schools outperform students in public
schools.” 67
A notable exception was in 2006 when the U.S. Department of Education reported no statistically
significant differences between private and public school performance once various student
background characteristics were taken into account.68 Independent experts from Harvard University,
however, determined the study’s student characteristics measures were “flawed.” Once better
measures were used a private school advantage resulted “in nearly all comparisons.” Specifically, the
Harvard researchers noted, “Similar results are found for Catholic and Lutheran schools taken
separately, while evangelical Protestant schools achieve parity with public schools in math and have
an advantage in reading.” The flaws with the U.S. Department of Education report were “so deep-
seated that their purported findings lack credibility,” the Harvard researchers concluded.69
It is possible to compare NAEP public and private school student results for grades 4, 8, and 12
across several subjects for a variety of years. For most years and subjects, Catholic schools are the
only faith-based schools with disaggregated NAEP results because they have sufficiently large sample
sizes for reporting purposes. Results for Lutheran and Conservative Christian faith-based schools are
also reported by the U.S. Department of Education when their sample sizes meet reporting standards;
however, the availability of reported results varies significantly across grades and subjects for all of
these faith-based schools.
In spite of that limitation, NAEP subject-specific reports confirm the U.S. Department of Education’s
previous findings that private school students typically outperform their peers in public schools.70
The generally accepted rule of thumb is that 10 NAEP scale-score points are roughly the equivalent to
one grade level (or academic year) of learning.71 Based on the available NAEP results, faith-based
school students perform up to two and a half years ahead of their public school peers. On average,
faith-based school students across grade levels outperform their public school peers by:
1.6 grade levels ahead in reading
1.1 grade levels in math
1.4 grade levels in science
1.3 grade levels in writing
2.0 grade levels in vocabulary
2.0 grade levels in geography
1.5 grade levels in U.S. History
1.8 grade levels in civics
Those results are similar to findings conducted by faith-based schools associations. For example,
International Association of Christian Colleges & Schools students in all K-12 grades perform better
than the national average, ranging from at least two months above grade level in grade 12 up to two
years, five months above grade level in grade 9.72 The table below summarizes the faith-based school
advantage for all faith-based school students compared to their peers in public schools.73
23. 21
Table 9. Faith-based School NAEP Academic Advantage: All Students
Reading
School Affiliation Student Group Grade Results From Additional Grade Levels of Learning
Catholic All 4 2011 1.5
Catholic All 8 2003 2.0
Conservative Christian All 4 2011 1.3
Conservative Christian All 8 2003 1.5
Lutheran All 4 2011 1.1
Lutheran All 8 2003 2.0
Math
Catholic All 4 2011 0.5
Catholic All 8 2011 1.3
Catholic All 12 2000 1.5
Conservative Christian All 4 2011 0.7
Conservative Christian All 8 2003 1.0
Conservative Christian All 12 2000 1.1
Lutheran All 4 2011 0.5
Lutheran All 8 2003 2.0
Lutheran All 12 2000 1.3
Science
Catholic All 4 2009 1.5
Catholic All 8 2009 1.1
Catholic All 12 2000 1.6
Conservative Christian All 4 2000 1.1
Conservative Christian All 8 2000 1.3
Lutheran All 4 2000 1.9
Lutheran All 8 2000 2.0
Lutheran All 12 2000 1.0
Writing
Catholic All 4 2002 1.3
Catholic All 8 2011 1.8
Conservative Christian All 4 2002 0.6
Lutheran All 4 2002 1.4
Lutheran All 8 2002 1.6
Vocabulary
Catholic All 4 2011 1.7
Catholic All 8 2011 2.2
Geography
Catholic All 4 2001 2.4
Catholic All 8 2010 1.6
U.S. History
Catholic All 4 2006 1.3
Catholic All 8 2010 1.6
Catholic All 12 2001 1.6
24. 22
Civics
Catholic All 4 1998 1.8
Catholic All 8 2010 2.0
Catholic All 12 1998 1.7
Source: Author's figures are based on U.S. Department of Education NAEP results.
Notes: 1. NAEP stands for National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the Nation's Report Card. 2. Results
represent the most recent year available. 3. Author's advantage in years figures are calculated based on 10 NAEP scale-score
points being roughly equivalent to one grade level (academic year) of learning.
Given the smaller sample sizes of private and faith-based school students participating in NAEP
assessments, the U.S. Department of Education does not report results at the state or regional levels.
Yet national results are available for select student sub-groups attending Catholic, Lutheran, and
Conservative Christian schools.
The tables below summarize the faith-based school NAEP reading and math advantage for Black,
Hispanic, and low-income students, defined as being eligible for free and reduced-price lunches
under the federal National School Lunch program. Sample sizes for the following student sub-groups
were frequently too small to meet reporting standards, and therefore they are not included: American
Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Pacific Islander, and students of two or more races. Based on available
NAEP results, historically disadvantaged students perform up to three and a half grade levels ahead of
their public school peers in reading. The average performance advantage across grade levels is:
1.7 grade levels ahead for Black students
2.5 grade levels ahead for Hispanic students
1.6 grade levels ahead for low-income students
Table 10. Faith-based School NAEP Reading Advantage: Student Sub-groups
Black
School Affiliation Grade Results From Additional Grade Levels of Learning
Catholic 4 2011 0.9
Lutheran 4 2003 0.9
Conservative Christian 4 2011 0.8
Catholic 8 2003 2.4
Conservative Christian 8 2003 2.5
Lutheran 8 2003 2.4
Hispanic
Catholic 4 2011 1.7
Conservative Christian 4 2011 2.5
Catholic 8 2003 3.4
Conservative Christian 8 2003 2.3
Low-Income
Catholic 4 2011 0.4
Lutheran 4 2011 0.8
Catholic 8 2003 2.5
Lutheran 8 2003 2.7
25. 23
Source: Author's figures are based on U.S. Department of Education NAEP results.
Notes: 1. NAEP stands for National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the Nation's Report Card. 2. Results
represent the most recent year available. 3. Author's advantage in years figures are calculated based on 10 NAEP scale-score
points being roughly equivalent to one grade level (academic year) of learning. 4. Given the smaller proportions of students
identified as American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Pacific Islander, and two or more races, disaggregated sample sizes were
frequently too small to be reported. 5. Low-income is defined as students eligible for free and reduced-price lunches under the
federal National School Lunch program.
The overall faith-based performance advantage for historically disadvantaged students is smaller in
math than reading. In general, Black, Hispanic, and low-income fourth-graders perform on par with
or slightly below their public school peers (except Hispanic students attending conservative Christian
schools); eighth-graders, however, outperform their public school peers. Based on the available NAEP
results, the average math performance advantage across all grades is:
0.3 grade levels ahead for Black students
1.0 grade levels ahead for Hispanic students
0.3 grade levels ahead for low-income students
Table 11. Faith-based School NAEP Math Advantage: Student Sub-groups
Black
School Affiliation Grade Results From Additional Grade Levels of Learning
Catholic 4 2011 0.0
Lutheran 4 2011 0.1
Conservative Christian 4 2011 0.3
Catholic 8 2003 0.8
Conservative Christian 8 2003 0.2
Hispanic
Catholic 4 2011 0.1
Conservative Christian 4 2011 1.4
Catholic 8 2011 1.4
Low-Income
Catholic 4 2011 -0.5
Lutheran 4 2011 -0.6
Catholic 8 2003 2.0
Source: Author's figures are based on U.S. Department of Education NAEP results.
Notes: 1. NAEP stands for National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the Nation's Report Card. 2. Results
represent the most recent year available. 3. Author's advantage in years figures are calculated based on 10 NAEP scale-score
points being roughly equivalent to one grade level (academic year) of learning. 4. Given the smaller proportions of students
identified as American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Pacific Islander, and two or more races, disaggregated sample sizes were
frequently too small to be reported. 5. Low-income is defined as students eligible for free and reduced-price lunches under the
federal National School Lunch program.
26. 24
Academic outcomes of faith-based schools: scientific findings
Research documenting the academic advantages of private and faith-based schools trace back to
1966, with James Coleman’s Equality of Educational Opportunity.74 Though private schools were not
the subject of this study, its findings challenged conventional wisdom by concluding that family
background, not school factors such as money, class size, or teachers’ credentials, was the
predominant factor contributing to student learning. In 1981 Coleman concluded that Catholic high
school students outperform their public school peers because of their religious schools’ inherent
“social capital,” namely, having voluntary networks of families and faith communities. Unlike his
previous research with enhanced data he was able to adjust for various family background
characteristics, which revealed that learning gains were the result of private school quality, not
student/family characteristics.75 Coleman’s 1981 findings sparked a national controversy when he
concluded sophomores in Catholic and other private schools perform up to one year ahead of their
public school peers, in large part because of their schools’ more disciplined environments and high
expectations for all students, which makes private schools better at sparking students’ interest in
learning.76 Additionally, Coleman found:
Catholic schools more nearly approximate the "common school" ideal of American education
than do public schools, in that the achievement levels of students from different parental
educational backgrounds, of black and white students, and of Hispanic and non-Hispanic
white students are more nearly alike in Catholic schools than in public schools. In addition,
the educational aspirations of students from different parental educational backgrounds are
more alike in Catholic than in public schools.77
With better data and enhanced methodological controls for family background differences, in 1987
Coleman concluded that Catholic and private schools’ success is rooted in parental and shared
community values.78 So supported, Catholic high school students’ academic growth in verbal and
mathematical skills outpaces their public school peers by about one grade level.79 Importantly for
disadvantaged students in particular, the religious community support surrounding Catholic high
schools inhibits dropping out even though these schools place more rigorous academic demands on
all students.80 As Coleman summed up:
The proximate reason for the Catholic schools' success with less‐advantaged students and
students from deficient families appears to be the greater academic demands that Catholic
schools place on these students. But the ability to make these demands appears to follow in
large part from the greater control that the school based on a functional community is able to
exercise.81
Data availability and research advances in the past few decades have contributed to a significant body
of scientific research on the academic outcomes of private and faith-based schools. Perhaps the most
extensive analysis to date was conducted by William H. Jeynes in 2012. His analysis included 90
studies examining the effects of faith-based private schools, public charter schools, and district
public schools. His analysis found that attending a faith-based school correlated with the highest
level of academic achievement among the three school types. He found no statistically significant
27. 25
performance difference between public charter and district school attendance. Importantly,
achievement gaps were smaller at faith-based schools. The religious conviction that all students are
equal in the eyes of God and can reach their full potential was common among faith-based
educators. This conviction reinforced religious educators’ high expectations for all students and their
insistence that all students take rigorous courses. At a time of rising schooling costs and tighter
budgets, Jeynes concludes that limiting schooling options to the public sector is ill advised, especially
since lower cost faith-based private schools succeed where more expensive public sector schools
have failed.82
Those findings are corroborated by mounting evidence from parental school choice programs, which
have made it possible to conduct more exacting research on the performance of private and faith-
based schools compared to public schools. With the exception of two programs in Maine and
Vermont, faith-based schools are eligible to participate in publicly funded voucher scholarship
programs and typically represent a significant share of participating choice schools.83 There have
been 12 “gold standard” random assignment studies of voucher programs conducted from 1998
through 2012 focusing on the academic outcomes of participating students.84 This scientific method
distinguishes between control and treatment groups, similar to medical trials, which yields high levels
of confidence that other influencing factors are not affecting the results (such as parents’ education
level or student background characteristics).
No gold standard study has ever found a negative impact on students attending private schools
though a parental choice program. On the contrary, 11 of the 12 gold standard studies find that
attending a private school improves academic performance for all students (6 studies) or some
students (5 studies). The sole exception was a 2004 replication of the 2002 study by Peterson and
Howell in New York by Princeton researchers, who used an arbitrary and novel definition of Black
students, along with other now discredited practices, to conclude that attending private schools in
New York City had at best only a “trivial” impact on Black student achievement.§ Peterson and Howell
conducted more than 120 scientific re-analyses. Positive effects were found in all cases, 90 percent of
which (108) were statistically significant, confirming that the academic performance of Black students
attending private schools improved.85
Overall the 11 gold standard studies finding positive impacts show that attending private schools
(including faith-based private schools), increases the likelihood of high school graduation, college
attendance, as well as improved reading and math scores, as summarized in the table below. These
are compelling findings, especially since students attending private and faith-based schools through
various voucher programs are overwhelmingly from low-income families and had previously attended
underperforming public schools.
§ Alan Krueger and Pei Zhu, “Another Look at the New York City School Voucher Experiment,” American Behavioral Scientist,
January 2004/Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 658-698.
28. 26
Table 12. Gold Standard Research: Attending Private Schools Improves Academic Outcomes
No. Author(s) Year
Program
Location
Low-
income
Student
Group
Time
Period Outcomes
Increased likely college enrollment rate 24 percent.
Increased likely full-time college enrollment rate 31
percent.
12
Chingos &
Peterson86
2012 New York Black
Within 3
years
Increased likely selective, four-year college enrollment
rate 130 percent.
11 Jin et al.87 2010 New York
From low-
performing
public
schools
After 1
year
Raised math scores 4 points (confirms Bernard et al.,
2003, using a different assumptions)
All
After 4
years
Increased high school graduation rate 21 percentage
points to 91 percent.
10
Wolf et
al.88
2010 D.C. From low-
performing
public
schools
After 4
years
Increased high school graduation rate 20 percentage
points to 86 percent.
After 1
year
Raised reading scores 8 points.
9 Cowen89 2008 Charlotte All
After 1
year
Raised math scores 7 points.
8
Krueger &
Zhu90
2004 New York Black
After 3
years
None but methodology discredited.
7
Barnard
et al.91
2003 New York
Black,
from low-
performing
public
schools
After 1
year
Raised math scores 5 points.
6
Howell &
Peterson92
2002
Dayton,
OH
Black
After 2
years
Raised combined math & reading scores 7 percentile
points.
5
Howell &
Peterson93
2002 D.C. Black
After
2years
Raised combined math & reading scores 9 percentile
points.
4
Howell &
Peterson94
2002 New York Black
After 3
years
Raised combined math & reading scores 9 percentile
points.
3 Greene95 2001 Charlotte All
After 1
year
Raised combined math & reading scores 6 percentile
points.
2 Rouse96 1998 Milwaukee All
After 4
years
Raised math scores 8 percentile points.
Raised math scores 11 percentile points.
1
Greene,
Peterson,
Du97
1998 Milwaukee All
After 4
years
Raised reading scores 6 percentile points.
29. 27
There are numerous non-gold standard studies using scientifically rigorous methods that also find
students (low-income and minority students in particular) attending private and faith-based schools
through parental choice programs have better academic outcomes than their peers in public
schools.98 Coleman’s original research had been criticized for not properly controlling for potential
biases, resulting in no statistically significant faith-based school effect.99 By the early 1990s,
however, research methods had continued to improve and other scholars besides Coleman concluded
that Catholic and faith-based schools outperform public ones even after controlling for various
student and school factors.100
In fact, in his review of the literature about school effects on learning, University of Wisconsin
Professor John Witte concluded that the empirical literature “indicate[s] a substantial private school
advantage in terms of completing high school and enrolling in college, both very important events in
predicting future income and well-being. Moreover, the effects were most pronounced for students
with achievement test scores in the bottom half of the distribution.”101 Numerous studies find higher
high school graduation rates and college attendance rates for private and faith-based school
students, particularly low-income, urban, and minority students.102 Other research also shows
improved performance for minority students who attend faith-based private schools.103 By comparing
the experiences of the same students as they move from public to private schools, other research
shows former public school students received better services and achieved better outcomes in private
schools.104 Using matched samples that compare students with similar observable characteristics,
several other scholars have found statistically significant achievement growth in reading among
private and faith-based school students.105
Not all research finds a private or faith-based school advantage.106 Yet, the preponderance of
scientific research does.107 One recent analysis by University of Illinois researchers criticized the
research relating to the benefits of private schools for not being nationally representative, and also
because some researchers have ties with pro-parental choice organizations.108 As to researchers’
affiliations, what counts is research quality—not who publishes it. Additionally, given the size,
eligibility, and geographical restrictions on the majority of those parental choice programs (often at
the urging of choice opponents), it would be nearly impossible for any single program with
participating faith-based schools to meet such a standard. University of Arkansas Department of
Education Reform Chair Jay P. Greene, however, dismisses what he calls the “inconclusive research
myth,” noting the only thing that varies about the research is the scope and magnitude of the private
school benefits—not whether those benefits exist. As Greene puts it, “If similar results were produced
for a method of fighting cancer or housing the homeless, we might expect reporters and analysts to
be elated about such promise.”109
Summary of available research on faith-based and public school outcomes of
democratic citizenship
This is a growing research area, focusing largely on Catholic schools. These schools are more racially
integrated than public schools. More administrators in private schools than public schools believe
their schools excel at promoting citizenship, and Hispanic adults who attended private schools have
30. 28
been shown to have higher political participation rates. In 2001, David E. Campbell summarized the
findings to date noting, “Students in Catholic schools display greater civic proficiency than students
who attend assigned public schools. …Few findings in social science can be replicated in five
independent sources of data (six, if you count the Washington and Dayton surveys separately). In
short, it seems that strong evidence has accumulated that private—particularly Catholic—schools are
a private means to the very public end of facilitating civic engagement.”110
Patrick Wolf subsequently compiled an enhanced literature review in 2007 that examined 59 findings
from 21 studies examining various aspects of civic values, including political tolerance, volunteerism,
political knowledge, civics skills, and patriotism. Of the 23 findings from studies using the most
rigorous methods for removing the influence of student selection, 12 found statistically significant
positive effects of private schools and school choice on civic values. Ten findings were neutral, and
only one finding concluded public schools promoted better civic values. Among the remaining 36
findings from studies using basic scientific controls for possible self-selection, 21 found better civic
values in private schools, 13 were neutral, and just two concluded public schools were superior.111
The most recent related literature review was compiled by Greg Forster of the Friedman Foundation
for Educational Choice and focuses on parental choice programs.112 Thus far there are seven relevant
empirical studies that gauge civic values such as respecting the rights of others and civic knowledge.
Of these, five find that parental choice improves civic values and practices.113 Two find no visible
impact from school choice.114 No empirical study has found that parental choice has a negative
impact on civic values and practices.115
Criticism of private and faith-based schools’ effects on citizenship tends to define “public” very
narrowly based inputs such as how schools are funded rather than outputs of democratic citizenship
(such as community service, civics performance, etc.). Likewise, private and faith-based school
criticism typically rests on broad assumptions about private school exclusivity, contrary to empirical
evidence that faith-based schools in particular allow tuition discounts, have inclusive admissions
policies, and tend to be more racially integrated than public schools. It is also important to note the
high participation levels of faith-based private schools in parental choice programs across the
country, most of which exclusively serve disadvantaged students.
Summary of available research on faith-based schools serving families of other faith
traditions
The National Catholic Educational Association (NCEA) annually reports on non-Catholic enrollment,
currently 16 percent, ranging from 10 percent in the Plains region to 18 percent in the New England
and Mid-east regions.116 Among Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod schools, 36 percent of students are
non Lutherans, 17 percent are not affiliated with any church, and 3 percent are other Lutheran
denominations.117 Recent research has also noted that Black students in New York City are at risk of
not going on to college, and families actively sought private schools—including those outside their
faith traditions—to help their children overcome that disadvantage.118
31. 29
Summary of available research on savings from faith-based schools
The U.S. Department of Education presents tuition data for Catholic and other religious schools only.
Faith-based school tuition averages slightly less than $6,600. Average public school funding is nearly
$5,400 more, averaging more than $12,000 per pupil. Tuition amounts, however, vary by school type
and grade level. Roman Catholic school tuition averages $6,018 overall. Elementary tuition averages
$4,944; high school, $7,826; and K-12, $9,066. Other religious private school tuition averages
$7,117 overall. Elementary tuition averages $6,576; high school, $10,493; and K-12, $7,073. 119
Actual amounts are likely lower since each school reports the highest annual tuition charged for a
full-time student, and those amounts do not reflect discounts.120 While most (not all) faith-based
schools charge tuition, roughly 90 percent of private schools offer discounts. Fully 97 percent of
Roman Catholic schools offer tuition discounts, as well as 94 percent of other religious private
schools.121 This means a back-of-the envelope estimate of the annual savings to taxpayers from
4,360,456 students attending faith-based private schools instead of public schools amounts to $52.5
billion.122
There is also a significant and growing body of research showing private school parental choice
programs result in fiscal savings to state budgets and public school districts because on average
scholarship amounts are sufficient to cover most, if not all, tuition and are less than per-student
state and local base/foundational funding amounts. The most precise analyses distinguish between
fixed and variable funding and find that contrary to claims about negative fiscal impacts, parental
choice programs save money at the state and local levels, leaving more—not less—funding for public
schools. Several rigorous analyses conducted during the past decade all find that parental choice
programs result in savings to taxpayers and school districts. No rigorous analysis has found a
negative fiscal impact.123 The table below summarizes recent research findings from those studies.
Table 13. Private School Parental Choice Programs Save Money
Author(s) Year
Nation/
State
Time
Period
Program Findings
Wolf &
McShane124
2013 DC
2004-
2009
DC
Vouchers
$135 million savings; a $2.62 ROI for every $1.00
spent
Florida
EDR125
2012 Florida 2011-12
Tax-credit
Scholarship
$23 million net savings
Scafidi126 2012 Nation 2008-09 Any
Any parental choice program redirecting less than
$8,000 reduces public school districts' expenses at a
higher rate than their student losses
Costrell127 2010
Wisconsin
&
Milwaukee
FY 2011
Milwaukee
Voucher
$51.9 million net savings
Florida
OPPAGA128
2008 Florida
FY 2007-
08
Tax-credit
Scholarship
$9 million in savings; a $1.49 ROI for every $1.00
spent
Costrell129 2008
Wisconsin
&
Milwaukee
FY 2009
Milwaukee
Voucher
$37.2 million net savings
32. 30
Aud130 2007 Nation
1990-
2006
18 voucher
& tax-
credit
scholarship
programs
$444 million combined savings to states and local
public school districts
Aud &
Michos131
2006 DC FY 2005
DC
Vouchers
$8 million annually with federal subsidy; $258,000
annually without federal subsidy
It is possible to calculate an estimated statewide and combined annual savings from students
attending private and faith-based schools instead of public schools through the 27 voucher, tax-
credit, and educational savings account (ESA) programs that were operational as of the 2012-13
school year and had available data as of March 2013, summarized in table 14 below.132 Some
important caveats must be kept in mind, however.
Calculating the savings from students attending private schools through parental choice programs
requires distinguishing between students who would otherwise attend public schools absent financial
assistance, and those who would be in private schools regardless. More than half of the parental
choice programs listed below (14) require that eligible students must have first been enrolled in
public schools. Though helpful, using this requirement to identify public school “switchers” likely
underestimates the actual savings because it considers only one side of the ledger. The other side of
the ledger concerns current private schools students who absent financial assistance would otherwise
have to enroll in public schools at significant additional public expense. A more in-depth analysis
would be needed to quantify approximately how many private school students that would be, but it
should be borne in mind that any savings estimate is likely understated for that reason.
Additionally, while prior public school enrollment requirements may help state lawmakers achieve
positive fiscal notes and increase the likelihood of passing parental choice legislation, it effectively
excludes current private school students whose families are struggling to afford out-of-pocket
tuition on top of paying local property and/or state taxes that fund public schools their children do
not attend. Thus however much prior public school enrollment requirements may originate from good
economics, they do not advance equity. A more inclusive approach would make all students currently
in or who would otherwise be assigned to public schools that are low-performing, dangerous, or
under a desegregation order eligible for scholarships.
Another caveat about the savings figures below concerns special education students. Statewide per-
pupil funding amounts significantly understate the funding required for special needs students, which
averages 1.9 times greater than the statewide per-pupil funding amounts.133 For this reason, the
savings estimates presented below associated with special education choice programs are based on
adjusted special needs student per-pupil funding averages, not general education student funding
averages. What the table below shows is that the annual estimated savings from the 27 operational
private school parental choice programs approaches $2 billion.
33. 31
Table 14. Estimated Annual Savings from Private School Parental Choice Programs
State
Program
Type
Target Population Year
Per-Pupil
Funding
Average
Scholarship
Estimated
Annual Savings
AZ T All (primarily low-income) 2012-13 $7,421 $1,861 $135,248,069
AZ T Low-income 2012-13 $7,421 $2,077 $31,195,860
AZ T Special needs 2012-13 $14,099 $4,879 $1,106,414
AZ ESA Special needs 2012-13 $14,099 $13,500 $216,880
CO V Douglas County School District 2011-12 $9,721 $4,575 $2,541,971
DC V •Low-income •In failing public schools 2012-13 $25,426 $8,483 $26,838,148
FL V Special needs 2012-13 $15,927 $6,255 $252,600,691
FL T •Low-income •Foster care 2012-13 $8,382 $3,664 $239,792,666
GA V Special needs 2012-13 $17,434 $5,917 $37,163,969
GA T All, public school 2011-12 $9,176 $3,494 $64,156,206
IA T Low-income 2012-13 $9,781 $1,031 $91,405,920
IN T Low-income 2012-13 $11,934 $880 $31,945,208
IN V Low-income 2012-13 $11,934 $4,091 $73,125,385
LA V •Low-income •In failing public schools 2012-13 $9,776 $5,300 $22,214,969
LA V Special needs 2012-13 $18,575 $6,799 $2,319,798
MS V Special needs 2012-13 $13,560 $5,018 $358,781
OH V •Cleveland Metro. School District •Low-income 2012-13 $12,147 $3,284 $57,724,485
OH V Special needs 2012-13 $23,079 $16,537 $14,661,141
OH V In/assigned to a failing public school 2012-13 $12,147 $4,106 $137,154,725
OH V Special needs 2012-13 $23,079 $9,743 $18,284,290
OK V Special needs 2012-13 $14,563 $7,298 $1,431,113
OK T •Low-income •In failing public schools 2012-13 $7,664 $7,298 $12,827
PA T Low-income 2011-12 $13,853 $990 $580,130,145
RI T Low-income 2012-13 $13,800 $2,727 $4,229,915
UT V Special needs 2012-13 $6,703 $4,733 $1,406,319
WI V Low-income 2012-13 $11,486 $6,442 $121,187,398
WI V •Racine Unified Public Schools• Low-income 2012-13 $11,486 $6,442 $2,521,900
Nationwide Total: $1,950,975,193
Sources: Estimates are based on the latest available data from the Alliance for School Choice, the Friedman Foundation for
Educational Choice, and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Notes: 1. T stands for tax-credit scholarship program; V stands for voucher scholarship program; and ESA stands for educational
savings account. 2. Per-pupil funding averages are for the 2009-10 school year (the latest available) and exclude federal funding. 3.
The D.C. per-pupil amount reflects local funding only. 4. All amounts are in unadjusted dollars. 5. Per-pupil funding averages for
special needs student scholarship programs have been adjusted 1.9 times higher based on findings from the Center for Special
Education Finance (CSEF). 6. The Colorado program scholarship cap of $4,500 is used instead of the quarterly scholarship average of
$1,143. 7. For programs in D.C. and Ohio scholarship averages are from the previous year. 8. The D.C. savings are likely understated
because research by the Cato Institute has found actual per-pupil funding is closer to $30,000. 9. The Florida special needs
enrollment figure is from the February 2013 state education department quarterly report. 10. Ohio's Jon Peterson scholarship
average of $9,743 is a weighted average derived from the varying scholarship amounts awarded across nine student disability
categories reported by School Choice Ohio. 11. For the 2013-14 school year, Arizona's ESA eligibility was expanded to include
students in foster care, military dependents, and students in or assigned to failing public schools. 12. On May 7, 2013, the Louisiana
Supreme Court ruled that the funding mechanism for the state's low-income/failing schools voucher program was unconstitutional.
On June 21, 2013, Gov. Bobby Jindal signed the annual budget, which included $45 million for nearly 8,000 voucher students for the
2013-14 school year.
34. 32
Summary of available research on parental satisfaction levels with faith-based
schools compared with other educational options
Parents and the American public have consistently shown higher levels of satisfaction with private
schools compared to public schools. Many additional analyses of individual private school parental
choice programs find that parental satisfaction levels are much higher with chosen private schools.134
Since 1993, the U.S. Department of Education has also disaggregated parental satisfaction survey
results according to faith-based and nonsectarian private schools, as well as chosen and assigned
public schools.135 Assigned public schools routinely have significantly lower parental satisfaction
levels that hover around 50 percent; while chosen pubic schools have slightly higher satisfaction
levels at around 60 percent. In contrast, parental satisfaction levels with faith-based schools have
remained consistently higher, near or above 80 percent since 1993.
Specifically, faith-based schools consistently earn the strongest satisfaction levels with the quality of
their teachers as well as school safety and discipline. In terms of overall satisfaction with the schools
and their academic programs faith-based and nonsectarian schools garner similar satisfaction levels
among parents.
Figure 4. Parental Satisfaction Levels: Faith-based, Nonsectarian, and Public Schools Compared
Parents nationwide who are "verysatisfied" with:
48%
57%
52%
56% 55%57%
64%
52%
66%
61%
73% 74%
79% 79% 80%
75% 76%
79% 79%
83%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Staff Interaction Teachers School Academics Order & Discipline
Public, assigned Public, chosen Private, nonsectarian Private, religious
Source: Author’s figure is based on 2007 data from the U.S. Department of Education.
Inner-city parents nationwide as well as parents of school choice scholarship students also express
strong support for private schools. Two to three times as many private school parents give their
children’s schools an A grade or say they are “very satisfied,” and more D.C. voucher parents give
their children’s private schools high marks than public school parents.
35. 33
Table 15. Parental and Public Satisfaction: Private and Public Schools
Give Schools an A
Author(s) Year Parents Private Public
Howell & Peterson136
2002 Nation, inner-city 52% 26%
Greene137
2001 Charlotte voucher, low-income 53% 26%
Give Schools an A or B
Author(s) Year Parents Private Public
Wolf et al.138 2010 76% 68%
Wolf et al.139 2009 76% 63%
Wolf et al.140 2008 76% 63%
Wolf et al.141 2007
D.C. voucher, low-income
74% 55%
Parents "Very Satisfied" with Schools/Academic Program
Author(s) Year Parents Private Public
Greene & Forster142
2003 FL voucher, special needs 93% 33%
Howell & Peterson143
2002 Dayton voucher, low-income 51% 19%
Howell & Peterson144
2002 Cleveland voucher, low-income 47% 29%
Howell & Peterson145
2002 San Antonio voucher, low-income 61% 35%
Howell & Peterson146
2002 New York City, Dayton, Cleveland vouchers, low-income (combined) 40% 15%
Several other studies prior to 2000 also confirm higher levels of parental satisfaction with private
schools, particularly with academics and safety.147 Annual polls dating back to the 1970s by Phi Delta
Kappa (PDK), a prominent national association of education professionals, have also included
questions about public support for private school vouchers. Changes to the way related questions
were worded beginning in 1991 negatively affected results, and after a few years PDK pollsters
concluded that public support for private school vouchers was waning. That conclusion was roundly
criticized—particularly when numerous other polls by news outlets and respected organizations such
as Gallup showed public support for vouchers had held steady at or around 60 percent for nearly two
decades (in recent years, however, tax-credit scholarships have become more popular).148
Since 2000 alone there have been more than 40 analyses, studies, polls, and surveys conducted to
gauge the opinion of parents and the American public on various aspects relating to private schools,
including academics, safety, morals, and support for a variety of parental choice policies. Most of that
research (34 studies and polls) focuses on state and program-specific aspects. The remainder (12
studies and polls) focus on national opinion. Both the American public and parents of students
participating in private school parental choice programs express strong support for private schools.
In particular, they say private schools are superior to public schools in terms of academics, safety
discipline, respect for teachers and students, and staff interaction with parents.
Only two scientifically credible surveys since 2000 have found stronger public support for public
schools. One nationwide survey of American adults released in 2012 presents support levels from
mothers compared to non-mothers. That analysis found that fewer mothers would choose private
schools compared to public schools to obtain the best education for their children (37 percent versus
45 percent). Likewise, fewer non-mothers would choose private schools compared to public schools
to obtain the best education for their children (37 percent versus 41 percent).149 However, a
36. 34
subsequent survey conducted in 2013 found that more mothers and non-schooling adults (those with
no children or no school-age children) would choose private schools for the best education.
Specifically, 42 percent of mothers would choose private schools compared to 36 percent who would
choose public schools. Among non-schooling adults, 43 percent would choose private schools
compared to 35 percent who would choose public schools.150 Another multi-state survey found that
higher percentages of voters in three states said they believed public schools, not private schools,
offer a better education: Arkansas, 47 percent versus 33 percent; Kansas, 40 percent versus 35
percent; and Mississippi, 43 percent versus 38 percent.151 (See Appendix A, which summarizes the
major findings about parental and public support for private and faith-based schools). Despite those
findings, the preponderance of scientifically creditable opinion research finds strong parental and
public support for private and faith-based schools, as well as the parental choice programs that help
more students attend these schools.
37. 35
Conclusion
The available evidence and analyses presented in this report indicate faith-based schools make
significant contributions to American education, society, and the economy. Specifically, faith-based
student performance and academic outcomes across student sub-groups is superior to public school
student performance, even after controlling for various student background differences. Faith-based
school enrollments also more closely reflect the American population at large across a variety of
demographics. In contrast to many commonly held opinions, wealthy American families are far more
likely to send their children to public schools instead of private schools (85 percent versus 11
percent). Back-of-the envelope estimates as well as more exacting fiscal analyses all indicate that
private and faith-based schools save taxpayers money, and that absent these schools the public
would be spending tens of billions more dollars each year. Not only does the preponderance of
scientific research find that faith-based school students have better academic outcomes, particularly
low-income, urban, and minority students, faith-based schools also excel in promoting civic values
and have earned parental satisfaction rates near 80 percent or above for the past two decades.
Many researchers attribute the success of faith-based schools at raising performance and closing
achievement gaps among disadvantaged and minority students to the religious conviction among
teachers that all students are equal in the eyes of God and can reach their full potential. This
conviction reinforces religious educators’ high expectations for all students and their insistence that
all students take rigorous courses. Available statistics indicate that the largest share of faith-based
students (44 percent) is enrolled in city-based schools.152 At a time of rising schooling costs and
tighter budgets, the evidence is mounting that limiting schooling options to the public sector is ill
advised and inequitable, especially since faith-based private schools operate at a significantly lower
cost and have frequently achieved better outcomes than the traditional public schools nearby.
38. 36
Appendix A
Parental and Public Satisfaction with Private Schools: Major Findings Since 2000
Parental and Public Satisfaction with Private Schools
Author(s) Year Survey Sample Outcomes
To obtain the best education, 42% of moms would choose private schools; 36%
would choose public schools
DiPerna 2013
American
mothers &
non-schooling
adults
To obtain the best education, 43% of non-schoolers would choose private
schools; 35% would choose public schools
64% give an A or B to local private/parochial schools
48% give an A or B to regular public schools
DiPerna 2013 Texas voters
Voters 2.5 times more likely to give to private/parochial schools an A, 33%
compared to public schools, 14%
77% give an A or B to local private/parochial schools
49% give an A or B to regular public schoolsDiPerna 2013
North Dakota
voters
Voters slightly more likely to give private/parochial schools an A, 24% compared
to public schools, 20%
60% give an A or B to local private/parochial schools
45% give an A or B to regular public schools
DiPerna 2013 Maine voters
Voters more than twice as likely to give to private/parochial schools an A, 23%
compared to public schools, 10%
93% very satisfied/satisfied with current school
94% very satisfied/satisfied with child's academic progress
99% say their child feels safe at school
BAEO & AFC 2013
Low-income
Louisiana
parents
98% say they feel welcome at their child's school
21% of Americans give an A or B to public schools
19% of African-Americans give an A or B to public schools
39% of Hispanics give an A or B to public schools
Support private school choice for low-income students, vouchers 50%
Howell,
Peterson &
West
2013
American
adults
Support private school choice for low-income students, tax-credit scholarships
72%
59% give an A or B to local private/parochial schools
49% give an A or B to regular public schoolsDiPerna 2012
North Carolina
voters
Voters more than twice as likely to give to private/parochial schools an A, 26%
compared to public schools, 11%
DiPerna 2012 Montana voters 95% of students attend public schools
