League Study of Federal Role in Education

Throughout the fall of 2011, the LWVMC Education Committee organized locally the National League’s study of the Federal Government’s role in education.  This study is in anticipation of Congress’ revision and renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, (ESEA) which in its current revised state is referred to as No Child Left Behind.  The League’s October 3 and November 7 Action meetings were devoted to discussions and consensus taking on the issues involved.  Conclusions were reported to the LWVUS November 30 and the national consensus will be finalized at the LWVUS Convention in 2012.

The scope of the Federal Role in Education study includes history of that role, the common core standards/assessments which are required for many federal programs but are national, not federal, and funding and equity issues which are addressed under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, otherwise known as No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top.

The National League has held since 1966 a position to secure equal rights and equal opportunity for all in education and employment.  The 1974-76 LWVUS Program included the phrase “equal access to quality education,” without having a definition of quality, and LWVUS efforts have focused mainly on categorical funding for specific needs.  Meanwhile, local and state leagues have developed positions to support an array of local and state educational reforms.

The need for the LWVUS to develop a more clearly defined position on equal access toquality education in federal funding is prompted by pending but long-delayed Congressional revision of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act as well as recent developments regarding common core standards and the assessment of the implementation thereof..

The history of the federal government’s support for education during the early years of the nation was mostly in the form of land grants for higher education.  Article I. Section 8 of the Constitution’s “general welfare” clause led to financial support for various forms of vocational education, the GI Bill of 1944, and the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) in response to the Russians’ Sputnik.

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution regarding designated powers leaves education a state and local responsibility to fund.  However, the post-Civil War 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, which eventually was interpreted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka to guarantee equality of educational opportunity.

Consequently, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 became a source of funding and support for specific populations of disadvantaged children needing special attention, with the goal of providing equity in education. This has amounted over the years to about 10% of California’s education budget.

The renewal of ESEA in 2001, known as No Child Left Behind, brought a focus on students’ proficiency.  Its intention to reduce the “education gap” between minorities and the majority white population was laudable.  However, its focus on testing brought unintended consequences. Time spent preparing for testing detracted from other parts of the curriculum such as science and social studies.  Furthermore, schools might be designated needing improvement or restructuring on the basis of a small number of their students.  Pressure on teachers and administrators has led to unfortunate episodes of cheating on test results.

While the 2001 version of ESEA brought these difficulties, it has continued to provide funds for programs to educate to numerous kinds of disadvantaged students:  children who are migrant or homeless, neglected or delinquent, children who are gifted, those with limited English proficiency, children in rural schools, Indian, Native Hawaiian and Alaska Natives, those who have experienced disaster (Katrina), etc..

Students who are disabled are enrolled under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004, which covers 6.6 million students ages 3-21, or 13% of all students enrolled in public schools. Known as special education, this includes students with physical or emotional disabilities or impairments.  Increasingly, these children are served in regular classroom settings and have individual learning plans developed cooperatively with staff and parents.  Federal funding for these mandated programs has been inadequate.

ESEA is long overdue for revision and various proposals are awaiting the attention of Congress.  Meanwhile, a development at the state level has led to the adoption of a “Common Core Standards Curriculum,” developed by Governors and chief education officers, of 44 states. One part of the League’s federal study has to do with how these standards, if implemented nationally, should be assessed.

An additional and important part of the League’s federal study has to do with early childhood education, including child care and preschool.  Questions for consensus include how such education, including teacher and parent education, should be funded.

Note:  League positions are posted here on our web page.