5 questions every presidential candidate should answer on K–12 education edition

Historically, K-12 education has been a local affair, with the federal government playing a supporting role.  That role grew substantially with No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) under former president George W. Bush, and subsequently with the Race to the Top grants and NCLB waivers under President Obama. Thus, the executive branch has shaped today’s most controversial education policies. Pressure to improve the nation’s schools is high; recent international comparisons of student achievement indicate US students had average or below average scores.

US President Barack Obama smiles while visiting the Clarence Tinker elementary school children, at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, September 17, 2014. Reuters.

With the nation’s future economic competitiveness at stake, here are five questions for presidential candidates on their approaches to national education policy:

 The Common Core State Standards for reading and mathematics have become increasingly controversial since 46 states adopted them in 2010. Have your views on the Common Core changed since it was introduced? Why or why not?

The Obama administration pressured states to adopt Common Core State Standards, though not originally a federal initiative. By 2010, 46 states had adopted Common Core. Of these states, more than 20 have altered, reviewed, or re-branded the standards. These new college- and career-ready standards are generally more demanding than those they replaced, and the new tests aligned to the standards have amplified the controversy over Common Core in many states.

Candidates should be able to explain the importance of high educational standards, and how they plan to balance state versus federal control of education.

 Federal law requires annual state reading and mathematics assessments for all students in grades 3-8 and again on one occasion in high school. Assessment critics are concerned about “over-testing” and over-emphasizing tested subjects, while proponents argue, “You cannot fix what you cannot measure.” What is your position on federal testing requirements?

While the testing and reporting requirements of NCLB are generally viewed as positive and important for accountability and equity, the inordinate focus on reading and math to the exclusion of other subjects is viewed by many as an unintended negative consequence of the law. NCLB created a groundswell of anti-testing sentiment and the new generation of recently adopted  assessments has inflamed opposition to state assessments. Some view federally mandated testing as an overreach. Others say that if we’re spending so much, we owe it to ourselves (not to mention the kids) to know what we’re getting.

 Candidates should be able to articulate their view of an appropriate federal role for holding schools accountable for performance and for maintaining a well-rounded public education system — one that is not narrowly focused on reading and math.

 Historically, the federal government has played an important but supplemental role in education. This includes providing Title I resources for low-income students and ensuring appropriate services for students with disabilities. Since No Child Left Behind in 2002, federal influence has extended into schools, shaping states assessments, school interventions, and teacher evaluations. If you could, how would you revise NCLB to provide a perfect role for the federal government?

 The federal hand in education expanded dramatically with the passage of NCLB. It has continued to expand with President Obama’s use of Race to the Top grants and state waivers from NCLB requirements. Both the Senate and House legislation currently in conference committees would substantially dial back federal participation.

Candidates should be able to articulate clear views on federal participation in education, and not hide behind an appeal to “local control.”  Key federal roles to consider are offering accountability, supplementing resources for low-income and disabled students, and encouraging research and development.

US President George W. Bush speaks about the “No Child Left Behind” education program and called on Congress to reauthorize the law as Secretary of Education Margaret Spelling and 6th grade student Mariano Ramos, 11, listnen at Horace Greeley Elementary School in Chicago, IL, January 7, 2008. Reuters

 With a large proportion of American K-12 schools facing sanctions from NCLB, and no congressional relief in sight, the Department of Education has been granting waivers to states in exchange for the adoption of favored federal policies. Would you use your authority to provide relief to states in the face of congressional inaction? If so, would you use waivers to influence state educational policy?

NLCB includes audacious achievement goals (100% proficiency in reading and math for all students by 2014), and schools failing to meet these goals have faced significant and widespread sanctions. In 2010, as NCLB had yet to be reauthorized, the Department of Education announced that it would offer NCLB waivers to the growing number of schools facing sanctions. Attached to these waivers, however, were specific Department of Education reform requirements, such as college- and career-ready standards and the use of student data in teacher evaluation. Critics have called this an over-reach, while supporters claim it was both pragmatic and necessary.

How would a candidate govern in view of the likely lack of congressional cooperation and possible deadlock in the specific context of education? There are principled objections to the executive’s use of “waiver” authority to push policy – would the next president leave that lever alone, or use it to further his or her own agenda?

 International comparisons of student achievements indicate that US high school students have average or below average adult literacy skills. As president, how would you ensure that the public education system produces a skilled workforce that ensures the leadership of the United States in the global marketplace?

This is a trick question. Recent studies do indicate that, in terms of academic achievement and literacy, American high school students had average or below average scores when compared to students in other industrialized OECD nations — though US spending in elementary and secondary education is well above the OECD average. But, constitutionally, education is the responsibility of states and the president has little direct control over public schools.

Presidents feel an urge to put forth a bold plan, but the last two presidencies have seen bold plans run counter to the principles of state and local control. These principles are ones that many candidates pay lip service to, and that many Americans hold dear.