Proponents say vouchers create a competitive environment that allows students to get the best education possible; the idea is that poorly performing schools will work to improve the education they deliver to avoid losing students and the funding they come with. But opponents say vouchers pull money away from public schools without reducing costs, and that students from families who do not take advantage of vouchers could suffer as their peers depart for private schools. Opponents also raise concerns about vouchers funding religious education, which is something DeVos supports.

Education Savings Accounts: Commonly referred to as ESAs, education savings accounts give families state money to spend as they see fit (within parameters, which vary by state). Unlike vouchers, which are specifically to pay for private or parochial school, these accounts let parents pay for private school, as well as things like tutoring or transportation to and from school. Like vouchers, some states restrict access to certain students, such as children with disabilities or Native American students who live on reservations. The way states distribute the money varies, with some giving families their allotment (how they calculate that allotment also varies) upfront and others doling it out in pieces. As with vouchers, proponents argue the accounts increase competition and, subsequently, the quality of offerings, while opponents voice concerns about whether families are using the money wisely. Attempts to expand them have generated considerable controversy, perhaps most publicly in Nevada.

Charter Schools: This term has obviously been on the public’s radar for some time now, but it’s worth pinning down. To start, charter schools are public schools (which is why they are often contrasted with “traditional” public schools): They are taxpayer-funded and they do not charge tuition. But they are privately managed, meaning they are not overseen by local districts (although some are authorized by those districts). Some charter managers are nonprofit and some are for-profit. Sometimes charter schools are part of a larger chain (think Success Academy or KIPP), and sometimes they stand alone.

When the charter concept was developed in the early ‘90s, the broad idea was to give the schools more flexibility than traditional public schools—so that they might incubate innovative education ideas—while still requiring them to meet certain standards and accept all types of students, often through a lottery system if there are more interested kids than spots. (There is much debate about whether and which charters successfully meet this mission.) While there is some partisan debate around charter schools, the divide isn’t as simple as Republicans in favor, Democrats against. While Republicans do generally support charter schools, so do a number of Democrats, including the outgoing education secretary, John King, who helped found a charter. But the model has been opposed by Democratic teachers’ unions, which argue that charters pull funds from the traditional public schools the unions represent.