Presidential Candidates on Education
I was doing some research this morning on the presidential candidates take on education and came across this website. It is a good source to review historical positions taken by each candidate and their voting records in DC as well as their home state legislature if they served.
It is important Americans become familiar with each candidate’s position to gain a surface level perspective about their beliefs and what they might do as President. Equally important is to review their voting record. This gets a little more speculative unless you did deeper into the Bills but it does show patterns of their beliefs through their records of action taken.
There appears to be the greatest party division when it comes to Federal oversight of curriculum, school vouchers and the United State’s global ranking on student assessments. The last one appears to be of common interest regardless of party but from there it becomes more polarized.
School vouchers or choice is being touted as a way to provide parental choice in the schools their children attend. Parents, arguably not all, have this option currently. Many of the choice/voucher plans would attach the local tax revenue with a child and transfer it to the school they attend (public or private). It is important to understand why the candidates believe this will benefit all students. Also, what is their solution to improve public schools instead of solely addressing school reform through structuring student migration as a solution. What assurances do they propose to “level the playing field” between public and private/charter schools? In particular can non public schools practice selective admissions, are there equal teacher certification requirements, equitable student achievement measures and equal student achievement accountability. What assurances will they provide the for profit companies running non public schools will be accountable in an equitable manner with the public schools?
They greatest myth behind Common Core is it was a Federal mandate to design a national curriculum doctrine. This is false. The need and development for Common Core was a state level initiative. The Federal government controlled the environment for local control changes through the waiver process of NCLB in a way encouraging reform of the system. The presidential candidates and their positions should be explored and pressed concerning their national interest to ensure a base level curriculum and academic achievement levels for all the students in the country. What is their plan to accomplish United States’ ascension in the global ranking of student academic levels?
It is important the American public invests personal time in understanding the presidential candidates take on education in this country and what they would do as the President of the United States.