Four prominent experts commented on my article, “It’s time to redefine the federal role in K-12 education.” I thank them for submitting their observations.
As noted by Theresa Alban, superintendent of Maryland’s Frederick County Public Schools, my purpose in writing this article was to stimulate a much-needed and long overdue discussion about Washington, DC’s role in school improvement. Because the major federal education reforms of the last three decades have not shown the progress we need, and because the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) provides little in the way of a course correction, it’s time to take a hard look at our fundamental principles to determine how best to proceed.
Kristin Amundson, from the National Association of State Boards of Education, believes that the states are moving ahead on their own under ESSA and that there is no need for significant new federal action on K-12 education. I disagree. I suspect that in the coming years, most states will simply fine tune their accountability systems and mount no major efforts to improve their schools.
Ms. Amundson believes also that having the states, not the federal government, take the lead will result in greater progress over time. On this I agree. No Child Left Behind was a mistake, as was the Race for the Top program, because both gave the federal government too much control over matters best left to the states. Instead, the federal role should be to set broad priorities and provide substantial funding, with the states and local school districts making decisions on the specifics.
Daria Hall, from the Education Trust, argues that the main federal role is to help children from low-income families and children of color to get a good education. Currently, those children are much more likely than others to be enrolled in schools and districts that are underfunded, have large numbers of ill-equipped teachers, set low expectations, and provide an unsupportive learning environment. Over the last two decades, however, we have made little or no progress in righting these wrongs even though federal law has in fact made equity its priority. Clearly, then, a focus on equity is not enough. While necessary, it’s not sufficient.
My proposal squarely addresses the shortcomings of recent federal policymaking. I argue that greater equity will be achieved through a new and different approach than has been pursued through Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the main federal equity program. (And keep in mind that no president since Jimmy Carter has proposed large increases in Title I funding. This includes liberals such as Barack Obama as well as conservatives such as George W. Bush. Neither party seems to think it has been a rousing success.)
Theresa Alban endorses the idea of a fresh approach to federal policymaking, and she highlights the need to focus on the topics of pre-school education, teacher quality, and school funding. She also questions the amount of weight that has been given in recent years to student assessment instead of school and classroom improvement — I am happy to find myself in accord with such a highly regarded school superintendent.
Finally, Chris Cross, like Ms. Amundson, offers sobering words of caution about my proposal to expand the federal government’s involvement in curriculum. I also find useful Mr. Cross’s reminder that many students today need more than a good teacher to succeed—they also need good healthcare, counseling, and many other supports. At his urging, then, I will reconsider my proposal to define curricular reform as a federal priority, and I will welcome ideas about helpful ways for the federal government to launch significant new efforts to address students’ social and emotional learning and health needs.
Thank you to all four commentators for their thoughtful contributions.
This article is an invited response to “It’s Time to Redefine the Federal Role in K-12 Education” by Jack Jennings.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Jack Jennings
JACK JENNINGS is the former president and CEO of the Center on Education Policy, now housed at George Washington University. From 1967 to 1994, he served as subcommittee staff director and then as a general counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Education and Labor. He is the author, most recently, of Presidents, Congress, and the Public Schools .
