Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Education policy disputes in the 2016 elections

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


EDUCATION POLICY-Masthead.png

Ballotpedia's
Election Analysis
FEDERAL
Battleground elections:
U.S. Senate • U.S. House
STATE
State legislatures • Gubernatorial
State Attorney General
LOCAL
Municipal • School boards
Local courts • Local measures
PUBLIC POLICY
Budget • Education • Election • Energy • Healthcare • Environment
Terms and Concepts
Partisan Risk

Education policy was addressed in federal, state, and local races across the nation in 2016. Topics of debate included the cost of higher education and student debt; universal preschool and public school funding; teachers' unions and merit pay; Common Core and standardized testing; and school choice, charter schools, vouchers, and educational savings accounts (ESAs).

According to the U.S. Department of Education, "Education is primarily a State and local responsibility in the United States. It is States and communities, as well as public and private organizations of all kinds, that establish schools and colleges, develop curricula, and determine requirements for enrollment and graduation. ... [T]he Federal role in education [has developed] as a kind of 'emergency response system,' a means of filling gaps in State and local support for education when critical national needs arise."[1]

In 2016, Democrats and progressives generally supported more federal involvement in education through regulations, programs, and funding. Republicans and libertarians generally supported more local and parental control and less federal involvement.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Ballotpedia tracked over 40 proposed education ballot measures and school choice ballot measures in 2016, 12 of which were certified to appear before voters.
  • In 2016, many Democrats supported universal preschool and increased funding to public schools. They discussed reducing or eliminating college tuition at public universities and addressing student debt.
  • Many Republicans opposed national standards like Common Core, supported replacing tenure-based teacher pay with a merit-based system, and wanted to increase options for school choice.


    • This page summarizes some of the key education policy issues that were debated in 2016, as well as the stances of political parties and presidential candidates on those issues. In addition, this page highlights specific issues that were playing out in select states and identifies relevant state and local ballot measures. Click on the tabs below to learn more.

    Major issues

    The role of the federal government in education is limited by the Tenth Amendment.[2] Education is primarily funded and governed on the state and local level, resulting in variation between school systems across the country. In 2016, Democrats and progressives generally supported increased federal involvement in making education standards more uniform, while Republicans and libertarians generally resisted federal involvement and supported more local control of education.

    Common Core

    See also: Common Core
    Common Core logo.jpg

    The Common Core State Standards Initiative (Common Core) outlined quantifiable benchmarks in English-language arts and mathematics at each grade level from kindergarten through high school. This issue was part of the 2016 election cycle at all levels, from local school board elections to the presidential race.[3]

    The benchmarks were developed by a working group assembled by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers from 2008 through 2009. After their finalization in 2009, the Common Core standards drew attention from groups concerned about elements such as the impact of standardized testing on academic achievement.

    Higher education

    See also: Higher education in the United States

    Public higher education in the United States is mainly run by state governments, most of which have an agency to oversee and develop policy. The United States Department of Education is the primary financier of university research and student financial aid. If a university, either public or private, receives any federal funds, that institution must comply with federal regulations pertaining to education. At the time of the 2016 election, the cost of attending college had increased steadily over the previous decades, resulting in increasing student debt. Many candidates promoted policies intended to make higher education more affordable and reduce student indebtedness.

    Show more

    Funding

    Funding for public higher education is mainly allocated in states' budgets. The 2008 recession led to decreased public higher education funding. While there were moderate increases in state allocations between 2012 and 2015, the average amount of spending was "still 15 percent less, per student, than before the economic downturn," according to a study by the State Higher Education Executive Offices (SHEEO).[4]

    Demand for higher education rose sharply over the 20 years prior to 2016, with enrollment reaching 11.3 million full-time students in 2013. Most higher education policy was centered around trying to increase access, lower costs, and contain student debt.

    College costs and prices

    In the 2012-2013 school year, average tuition reached $8,070 at public four-year schools, a nearly 4.8% increase from the previous year. For a private four-year institution, the average was $24,525, which represented a 4.54% increase over 2011-2012. Between the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 academic years, the average annual in-state tuition cost for public institutions in Washington rose by 13.7%, the greatest increase in the nation. By contrast, the average annual tuition cost for public schools in Maine rose by only 0.01%.[5]

    Financial aid

    The federal government provides financial aid to undergraduate students in the form of grants and loans. Notable grants administered by the U.S. government include Pell Grants and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (FSEOG). Loan programs administered by the federal government include the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) Program and Federal Perkins Loan Program. Individual states may also administer student financial aid programs. In addition, postsecondary institutions often offer institution-specific financial aid to their students.[6][7][8]

    According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 85 percent of first-time, full-time undergraduate students at four-year institutions (public and private) received financial aid in the 2011-2012 academic year. This was up from 75% in the 2006-2007 academic year. Public higher education funding nationwide totaled an estimated $76.2 billion in fiscal year 2014. According to the National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs, the states disbursed approximately $11.3 billion in state-based financial aid to postsecondary students in the 2012-2013 academic year.[9]

    Student debt

    According to the Institute for College Access and Success, in the 2013-2014 school year, an average of 62% of all students nationwide graduated with debt at an average of about $27,779 per borrower. The state with the lowest average debt held by students was Utah, where the average student debt was about $18,921. Conversely, students who graduated from colleges and universities in Delaware held an average of about $33,808 in debt, the highest in the country.[10]

    While tuition for private schools is typically higher than that of public schools, debt does not always follow this same pattern. The Institute for College Access and Success analyzed data on student debt held by graduates of public and private schools. They found that in the 2013-2014 school year, about 60% of students nationwide who graduated from a public institution had debt, which averaged about $25,665 per borrower. For private schools, they found that approximately 65% of students graduated with an average of $28,498 in debt. However, in some states, such as New Hampshire, students on average graduated from private schools with less debt than those who graduated from public schools. The chart below compares these statistics for all 50 states.[11]

    Graduation rates

    At four-year schools, students commonly take between four and six years to complete their degrees. Likewise, students at two-year institutions commonly take three years to complete their degrees. In 2013, around 57.6% of all students at four-year public colleges graduated within six years, and 19.4% of all students at two-year public colleges graduated within three years.[12]

    Funding and faculty

    Many states struggled to maintain funding levels for higher education in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. State-based funding totaled $76 billion in 2014, an increase over the previous year, while per-pupil appropriations had declined 23% since 2008. To keep up with high demand, the college faculty profession was one of the fastest-growing in the nation, increasing by nearly 73% between the 1991-1992 and 2011-2012 school years, from 450,368 to 780,127. Around 56% of those jobs were part-time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics expected this trend to continue, with part-time faculty comprising an increasing share of instructional staff.[13]

    School choice

    See also: School choice

    School choice refers to the educational alternatives available to parents who do not wish to send their children to the local district public school to which they have been assigned. Generally speaking, school choice programs were opposed by Democrats and teacher unions for taking money away from local district schools, while Republicans and conservative parents favored alternatives like charter schools and vouchers.

    Show more

    The school choice movement arose in the 1980s. Around that time, legislatures around the country began enacting various forms of school choice such as open enrollment policies, magnet schools, and charter schools. As of November 2016, 43 states and the District of Columbia had enacted legislation permitting charter schools, which operate outside the traditional school governance structure.

    Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia also had school choice programs that provided support for students to attend private schools. Options included traditional school vouchers, scholarship tax credits, and personal tax credits and deductions. Some states allowed Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), which allowed parents to withdraw their children from public district or charter schools and receive a deposit of public funds into government-authorized savings accounts. These funds could be used by parents to cover private school tuition and fees, online learning programs, private tutoring, community college costs, or other higher education expenses.[14][15]

    Multiple states saw challenges to school voucher programs heading into the 2016 election. In July 2015, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Douglas County School District's voucher program unconstitutional for providing "public funds to religious schools." The district together with the Colorado Department of Education, petitioned the United States Supreme Court to review the case in October 2015. In 2016, a judge in Nevada put the state's program of educational savings accounts on hold while a lawsuit against the program progressed through the courts. That lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, alleging the program "[violated] the Nevada Constitution’s prohibition against the use of public money for sectarian (religious) purposes."[16][17][18][19]

    Standardized testing

    As of April 2016, nearly 600 bills had been proposed in state legislatures across the country related to standardized testing. According to a researcher at the National Conference of State Legislatures, this was "up from just six such bills proposed five years [prior]." The bills ranged from how much testing should be mandated, which tests to use, and whether students can opt out, to how much the results should affect teacher evaluations. Delinking teacher evaluations from state test results had been proposed in almost half of the states as of April 2016.[20]

    Teacher merit pay

    See also: Teacher merit pay

    Merit pay refers to any system in which compensation is partly based on an evaluation of the employee's job performance, as distinct from seniority. The evaluation may be based either on measurable factors like changes in student test scores, supervisory judgment, or a combination of factors, some measurable and some subjective. In 2016, Democrats generally opposed merit pay for teachers and Republicans generally supported such systems.[21]

    Universal preschool

    In 2016, candidates disagreed on whether or not preschool should be the responsibility of the federal government. The Democratic Party platform included universal preschool in its list of education priorities, while most Republican candidates voiced support for state-level programs instead.[22][23] At the time, some states, including Oklahoma, Florida, and New York, had different kinds of state-level universal preschool programs.[24]

    Analysis

    Education survey

    In May and June of 2015, the organization Education Next conducted its ninth annual survey of a nationally representative sample of some 4,000 respondents. The survey included questions about curricula, testing, school choice options, and federal, state or local control, among other things. On some topics, it asked alternative questions "in order to determine the sensitivity of opinion to new information and particular wording." To view the results of the survey, click here.

    Government involvement

    Politicians, parents, and teachers were divided about who should control education. Democrats clearly supported more federal involvement than Republicans by a margin of 20 percentage points. The question asked was, "What level of government should play the biggest role in setting educational standards for what students should know?"[25]

    Common Core

    Support for Common Core decreased from 65% in 2013 to 49% in 2015. Among Democrats, support for the standards was 20 percentage points higher than among Republicans.

    Participants were asked the following question regarding Common Core: "As you may know, in the last few years states have been deciding whether or not to use the Common Core, which are standards for reading and math that are the same across the states. In the states that have these standards, they will be used to hold public schools accountable for their performance. Do you support or oppose the use of the Common Core standards in your state?"[25]

    Merit pay

    The survey also asked about teacher merit pay and showed that roughly half of the general public supported merit pay for teachers, with Republicans being slightly more in favor, and Democrats being slightly more opposed. The question asked was, "Do you favor or oppose basing part of the salaries of teachers on how much their students learn?"[25]

    School choice

    The table below gives some of the key findings from the 2015 Education Next survey on the issues of school choice, broken down by general public, Republicans and Democrats. While all groups seemed to favor tax credits for scholarships similarly, Democrats favored vouchers more than Republicans, and Republicans supported charter schools more than Democrats.[25]

    Opinions on school choice
    Vouchers 1:"A proposal has been made that would give low-income families with children in public schools a wider choice, by allowing them to enroll their children in private schools instead, with government helping to pay the tuition. Would you favor or oppose this proposal?"
    Group Support Neither support nor oppose Oppose
    General Public 42.00% 17.00% 41.00%
    Republicans 36.00% 17.00% 47.00%
    Democrats 47.00% 17.00% 36.00%
    Vouchers 2: "A proposal has been made that would use government funds to pay the tuition of low-income students who choose to attend private schools. Would you favor or oppose this proposal?"
    Group Support Neither support nor oppose Oppose
    General Public 34.00% 16.00% 50.00%
    Republicans 28.00% 13.00% 59.00%
    Democrats 41.00% 16.00% 43.00%
    Charters 1: "Do you support or oppose the formation of charter schools?"
    Group Support Neither support nor oppose Oppose
    General Public 47.00% 35.00% 19.00%
    Republicans 56.00% 32.00% 12.00%
    Democrats 40.00% 35.00% 25.00%
    Charters 2: "As you may know, many states permit the formation of charter schools, which are publicly funded but are not managed by the local school board. These schools are expected to meet promised objectives, but are exempt from many state regulations. Do you support or oppose the formation of charter schools?"
    Group Support Neither support nor oppose Oppose
    General Public 51.00% 22.00% 27.00%
    Republicans 62.00% 18.00% 19.00%
    Democrats 42.00% 24.00% 34.00%
    Tax credits: "A proposal has been made to offer a tax credit for individual and corporate donations that pay for scholarships to help low-income parents send their children to private schools. Would you favor or oppose such a proposal?"
    Group Support Neither support nor oppose Oppose
    General Public 55.00% 19.00% 26.00%
    Republicans 54.00% 18.00% 28.00%
    Democrats 56.00% 19.00% 25.00%

    National races

    Party platform summaries

    Democratic Party

    Democratic Party Logo.png

    The Democratic Party platform, passed at the party convention in July 2016, listed the following five main education concerns:[26]

    “
    • Making Debt-Free College a Reality
    • Providing Relief from Crushing Student Debt
    • Supporting Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions
    • Cracking Down on Predatory For-Profit Schools
    • Guaranteeing Universal Preschool and Good Schools for Every Child[27]
    		 ”

    Democrats proposed lower interest rates on future student loans, refinancing current student loans, income-based repayment plans, and a moratorium on student loan payments until such plans were put in place:[26]

    “ As we make college affordable for future students, we will not forget about the millions of borrowers with unsustainable levels of student debt, who need help right now. Democrats will allow those who currently have student debt to refinance their loans at the lowest rates possible. We will simplify and expand access to income-based repayment so that no student loan borrowers ever have to pay more than they can afford. And we will significantly cut interest rates for future undergraduates because we believe that making college more affordable is more important than the federal government making billions of dollars in profit off those loans. ... To make progress toward these goals, the government should offer a moratorium on student loan payments to all federal loan borrowers so they have the time and get the resources they need to consolidate their loans, enroll in income-based repayment programs, and take advantage of opportunities to reduce monthly payments and fees.[27] ”

    In general, Democrats proposed more spending on education from all levels of government to fund more programs such as universal preschool, after-school and summer programs, and investments in education for economically disadvantaged and disabled students.

    Regarding charter schools, the Democratic platform said the following:[26]

    “

    We support democratically governed, great neighborhood public schools and high-quality public charter schools, and we will help them disseminate best practices to other school leaders and educators. Democrats oppose for-profit charter schools focused on making a profit off of public resources. We believe that high-quality public charter schools should provide options for parents, but should not replace or destabilize traditional public schools. Charter schools must reflect their communities, and thus must accept and retain proportionate numbers of students of color, students with disabilities and English Language Learners in relation to their neighborhood public schools. We support increased transparency and accountability for all charter schools.[27]

    		”

    Republican Party

    Logo-GOP.png

    In 2016, Republican candidates generally supported school choice, charter schools, merit pay, and reducing the role of the federal government in education.

    During the presidential primaries, higher education received attention from Republican candidates. Ohio Gov. John Kasich and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush pledged to make higher education more affordable and accessible, and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called for more transparency and accountability at public colleges. Sen. Marco Rubio said in a campaign speech that he planned to break up the "'cartel' of higher education institutions by creating an alternative accreditation pathway for 'low-cost, innovative competitors.'"[28]

    The Republican Party platform included opposing national standards and assessments, replacing tenure-based teacher pay with a merit-based system, and increasing school choice and parental and local control.[29]

    “

    We reject a onesize-fits-all approach to education and support a broad range of choices for parents and children at the state and local level. We likewise repeat our longstanding opposition to the imposition of national standards and assessments, encourage the parents and educators who are implementing alternatives to Common Core, and congratulate the states which have successfully repealed it. Their education reform movement calls for choice-based, parent-driven accountability at every stage of schooling. ...

    We support options for learning, including home-schooling, career and technical education, private or parochial schools, magnet schools, charter schools, online learning, and early-college high schools. We especially support the innovative financing mechanisms that make options available to all children: education savings accounts (ESAs), vouchers, and tuition tax credits. Empowering families to access the learning environments that will best help their children to realize their full potential is one of the greatest civil rights challenges of our time. A young person’s ability to succeed in school must be based on his or her God-given talent and motivation, not an address, ZIP code, or economic status. We propose that the bulk of federal money through Title I for low-income children and through IDEA for children with special needs should follow the child to whatever school the family thinks will work best for them.[27]

    		”

    The Republican platform said the following about higher education:[29]

    “

    We call on state officials to preserve our public colleges, universities, and trade schools as places of learning and the exchange of ideas, not zones of intellectual intolerance or “safe zones,” as if college students need protection from the free exchange of ideas. A student’s First Amendment rights do not end at the schoolhouse gates. Colleges, universities, and trade schools must not infringe on their freedom of speech and association in the name of political correctness. ...

    The federal government should not be in the business of originating student loans. In order to bring down college costs and give students access to a multitude of financing options, private sector participation in student financing should be restored. Any regulation that increases college costs must be challenged to balance its worth against its negative economic impact on students and their families.[27]

    		”

    Libertarian Party

    The Libertarian Party platform stated the following on the issue of education:[30]

    “ Education is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality, accountability, and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Recognizing that the education of children is a parental responsibility, we would restore authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. Parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children’s education.[27] ”

    Green Party

    In the Green Party Platform, the party supported such things as "equal access to high-quality education, and sharp increases in financial aid for college students," repealing No Child Left Behind Act and increased "funding for after-school and daycare program." The party was "strongly opposed to the dissolution of public schools and the privatization of education" and "military and corporate control over the priorities and topics of university academic research," and any involvement by the military in public schools.[31]

    Presidential candidates' stances

    Democratic Party Hillary Clinton

    See also: Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016
    caption
    • On July 6, 2016, Hillary Clinton introduced a new student loan reform policy to decrease the indebtedness of college graduates. To be implemented over five years, students from families with a combined income of $125,000 or less would be able to attend in-state public colleges without paying tuition. For families earning less $85,000, the plan would be effective immediately. Graduates would also be able to defer their loans after graduation for three months.[32][33]
    • On July 5, 2016, Clinton addressed members of the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union. In the speech, she said, “If I am fortunate enough to be elected president, educators will have a partner in the White House, and you’ll always have a seat at the table.” She was cheered for “calling for less standardized testing, more support for vulnerable children and more respect and pay for public school educators,” but members of the audience booed when she discussed her support for charter schools. Clinton said, “When schools get it right, whether they’re traditional public schools or public charter schools, let’s figure out what’s working and share it with schools across America. Rather than starting from ideology, let’s start from what’s best for our kids.”[34]
    • In the transcript of Clinton’s roundtable with the American Federation of Teachers on November 9, 2015, Clinton stated her opposition to connecting teacher evaluation and pay to test outcomes. She also said that charter schools should be “supplementary, not a substitute” for excellent public schools.[35]
    • During a town hall meeting on November 7, 2015, Clinton expressed her support for public schools and discussed the role of charter schools. She said, “I have for many years now, about 30 years, supported the idea of charter schools, but not as a substitute for the public schools, but as a supplement for the public schools. And what I have worked on through my work with the Children’s Defense Fund and my work on education in Arkansas and through my time as first lady and senator is to continue to say charter schools can have a purpose, but you know there are good charter schools and there are bad charter schools, just like there are good public schools and bad public schools. But the original idea, Roland, behind charter schools was to learn what worked and then apply them in the public schools. And here’s a couple of problems. Most charter schools — I don’t want to say every one — but most charter schools, they don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids, or, if they do, they don’t keep them. And so the public schools are often in a no-win situation, because they do, thankfully, take everybody, and then they don’t get the resources or the help and support that they need to be able to take care of every child’s education. So I want parents to be able to exercise choice within the public school system — not outside of it — but within it because I am still a firm believer that the public school system is one of the real pillars of our democracy and it is a path for opportunity.”[36]
    • In a statement released on October 24, 2015, Clinton voiced support for the Obama administration’s plan to eliminate unnecessary standardized testing. She wrote, “While testing can provide communities with full information about how our students are doing and help us determine whether we have achievement gaps, we can and must do better. We should be ruthless in looking at tests and eliminating them if they do not actually help us move our kids forward.”[37]
    • Clinton announced her $350 billion plan for higher education reform on August 10, 2015.[39][40] Called the "New College Compact," the plan would institute the following changes to higher education financing:
    • Students would not have to take out a student loan to pay for tuition, books, or fees at four-year public colleges. Community college students would receive free tuition.[41]
    • Families would be expected to make "an affordable and realistic family contribution."[41]
    • States would have to maintain their current level of higher education funding. The federal government would also provide additional funding and "never again profit off student loans for college students."[41]
    • Colleges would be expected to "control their costs" and work to prevent "abusive practices that burden students with debt without value."[41]
    • Graduates with existing student loan debt would be able to refinance their loans and "enroll in a simplified income based repayment program so that borrowers never have to pay more than 10 percent of what they make."[41]
    • Clinton announced a service element of her higher education reform policy on August 20, 2015. The plan would see AmeriCorps expanded to 250,000 members, with greater scholarship awards for AmeriCorps volunteers who commit to three years of public service.[42]
    • In October 2014, Clinton advocated making college more affordable and "praised President Obama for increasing federal Pell grants by $1,000," according to Fox News. She said, "Higher education shouldn’t be a privilege for those able to afford it. It should be an opportunity widely available for anybody with the talent, determination and ambition."[43]
    • In March 2007, Clinton criticized the No Child Left Behind Act. She said, "While the children are getting good at filling in all those little bubbles, what exactly are they really learning? How much creativity are we losing? How much of our children's passion is being killed?" According to the Concord Monitor, Clinton "called for universal preschool, higher teacher salaries and schools that emphasize self-discipline and respect, not just test scores. Clinton also criticized what she described as the outsourcing of tutoring and other services to private companies."[44]
    • In 2007, the American Federation of Teachers endorsed Clinton's bid for president.[45]

    Republican Party Donald Trump

    See also: Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016
    caption
    • Trump laid out a student loan repayment plan in a speech in Ohio on October 13, 2016. He said, “We would cap repayment for an affordable portion of the borrower’s income, 12.5 percent, we’d cap it. That gives you a lot to play with and a lot to do. And if borrowers work hard and make their full payments for 15 years, we’ll let them get on with their lives. They just go ahead and they get on with their lives. … Students should not be asked to pay more on the debt than they can afford. And the debt should not be an albatross around their necks for the rest of their lives.”[47]
    • Trump called school choice the “new civil rights issue of our time” at a campaign event in Virginia on September 24, 2016. He said, “Too many African Americans have been left behind and trapped in poverty. I will fight to make sure every single African American child in this country is fully included in the American dream. That includes the new civil rights issue of our time: School choice.”[48]
    • On September 8, 2016, Trump delivered a speech on education policy in Ohio. He said, “As your president I will be the nation's biggest cheerleader for school choice. I understand many stale old politicians will resist, but it's time for our country to start thinking big and correct once again.” He proposed allocating $20 billion towards school choice policies. In his speech in Ohio, Trump also commented on the issue of merit pay for teachers, saying, “I will also support merit pay for teachers so that we reward our best teachers instead of the failed tenure system that rewards bad teachers and punishes the good ones.”[49]
    • Trump gave a speech at the American Legion national convention in Ohio on September 1, 2016, where he discussed his goal of promoting patriotism in U.S. schools. Trump said, “Together, we are going to work on so many shared goals. But I want to begin by discussing one goal that I know is so important to all of you: promoting American pride and patriotism in America’s schools. In a Trump Administration, I plan to work directly with the American Legion to uphold our common values and to help ensure they are taught to America’s children. We want our kids to learn the incredible achievements of America’s history, its institutions, and its heroes. We will stop apologizing for America, and we will start celebrating America. We will be united by our common culture, values and principles – becoming One American Nation. One country, under one constitution, saluting one American Flag. The flag all of you helped to protect and preserve. That flag deserves respect, and I will work with American Legion to help to strengthen respect for our flag – and, by the way, we want young Americans to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.”[50]
    • In an interview on January 11, 2016, with The Wall Street Journal, Donald Trump said he would do “tremendous cutting” of the federal government. Education policy, he said, should be returned to the states, and he said he would end the Common Core education standards, which conservatives view as federal overreach. “Education should be local and locally managed,” said Trump.[51]

    Libertarian Party Gary Johnson

    See also: Gary Johnson presidential campaign, 2016
    Gary-Johnson-(New Mexico)-circle.png
    • On his campaign website, Johnson called for giving more control over education to state and local government and for eliminating the Department of Education. He said, "Most importantly, Governor Johnson believes that state and local governments should have more control over education policy. Decisions that affect our children should be made closer to home, not by bureaucrats and politicians in Washington, D.C. That is why he believes we should eliminate the federal Department of Education. Common Core and other attempts to impose national standards and requirements on local schools are costly, overly bureaucratic, and actually compromise our ability to provide our children with a good education."[52]
    • In 2012, Gary Johnson supported abolishing the Department of Education. He said, "I don't think people recognize that the the [sic] Department of Education was established in 1979 under Jimmy Carter. So if you measure educational performance since 1979 there is nothing to suggest that the federal government has added any value. The federal government gives eleven cents out of every school dollar that every state spends but it comes with 16 cents of strings attached, and I found this as governor of New Mexico. ... There is so much education that is being distorted by Washington. Give it up to the states and in my opinion there will be some fabulous successes that will be emulated."[53]
    • In his 2012 book, Seven Principles of Good Government, Johnson recommended giving each student in New Mexico a $3,500 voucher for whichever school he or she chose to attend. "I realized that many people believed vouchers take money away from the public school system. But my plan would have increased the per capita funding for kids who remained in public schools because we were actually spending about $5,500/child—so each public school district would get an extra $2,000 for each student who opted out," Johnson explained.[54]
      • Johnson also proposed more competition between schools, writing, "I believe that we should treat K-12 education more like higher education. The reason higher education in the US is the best in the world is because these institutions compete with each other for tuition dollars. We need that same competition in public education."[55]
      • One area for public education reform Johnson cited in this book was testing standards. He wrote, "In order to improve schools, we have to measure and grade schools. And the purpose here isn't to denounce the schools but to say, 'Here's where we're at. What do we need to do to get better next year?' We need to compare one school to another when it comes to test scores in the various categories. We also need to be able to look at one school from one year to the next, and have the results put out in a format that is easy to read and easy to understand."[56]

    Green Party Jill Stein

    See also: Jill Stein presidential campaign, 2016
    caption
    • A video recorded earlier in 2016 of Jill Stein discussing technology and education gained renewed attention on August 1, 2016, because of comments she had made about the safety of wireless technology. “We should not be subjecting kids’ brains especially to that. And we don’t follow that issue in this country, but in Europe where they do, they have good precautions around wireless—maybe not good enough, because it’s very hard to study this stuff. We make guinea pigs out of whole populations and then we discover how many die. And this is like the paradigm for how public health works in this country and it’s outrageous, you know,” she said.[57]
    • In an interview on the Fox Business Network, Jill Stein detailed her proposal for a student bailout by having the Federal Reserve cancel the debt. She said it would be tax-free and would cost less than the bank bailout. “Actually, if you count the quantitative easing for the bankers, that was an additional $4.5 trillion, which is far more than we need for student debt which is $1.3 trillion,” she said.[58]
    • On July 5, 2016, Jill Stein released the web video, “Abolish Student Debt.” In the ad, Stein says, “We will bail out millennials and others in student debt. We did it for the crooks on Wall Street – it’s about time to do it for the millennials and the generation held hostage in debt.”[59]
    • On May 31, 2016, during an interview with Rolling Stone, Jill Stein discussed her plans to eliminate student debt. Stein said, “We are the only campaign that will cancel student debt and bail out [those with student loans] like Obama did for Wall Street. Isn't it about time we bailed out the young people? Therein is how we move forward, because that's 43 million people who don't need to be persuaded, they just need to learn that they have an option to come out and cancel their debt by voting Green. That could actually take over the election: 43 million is a winning plurality in the presidential race. This is mainly to say that the potential for our campaign can be a real positive force. Potentially even a dominating force if the generation in debt gets on to this.”[60]
    • Jill Stein expressed solidarity with the Million Student March Against Racism and Student Debt in an email on April 13, 2016. “I’m supporting the Million Student March Against Racism and Student Debt, taking place at campuses across the country, because burdening young people with crushing debt holds back not only their personal potential, but the potential of our entire society,” she wrote.[61]
    • During a July 6, 2015, phone interview conducted by On The Issues, Stein was asked about Common Core and national education standards and testing. She said, "In general, high stakes testing is more than counterproductive--it is destructive. It is used as a political tool against teachers--targeting low-income and people of color. Our educational system should target lifetime learning--with full and equitable funding; and eliminating disparities by race. Testing for diagnostic purposes as part of standards [is ok, but we should have] curriculum written by teachers--not by corporate contractors."[62]
    • On her 2016 presidential campaign website, Stein advocated for education as a right: "Abolish student debt to free a generation of Americans from debt servitude. Guarantee tuition-free, world-class public education from pre-school through university. End high stakes testing and public school privatization."[63]
    • In a November 29, 2015, interview with The Harvard Crimson, Jill Stein discussed her proposal to make “all public colleges free” and erase “all existing student debt.” She said, “Forty million young people are indentured servants without much hope of getting out of debt. We have a generation of hopeless young people who cannot get their way out of debt, who don’t have jobs, and who are watching the climate collapse.”[64]
    • Stein joined the Boston-area “Million Student March” on November 12, 2015, to demonstrate for the right to a free college education.[65]
    • In an interview with teleSUR published November 3, 2015, Stein said she would “abolish student debt, which can be done with the stroke of a pen and is really critical for liberating an entire generation of youth who are essentially indentured servants right now with no hope of change on the horizon” in her first 100 days of office if elected president.[66]
    • In a January 2012 interview with Steve Horn of Truth Out, Stein said, "We will provide tuition-free higher education, since it's comparable to a high school education in the 20th century - you need a higher education degree in the 21st century economy and it should be provided as a basic right."[67]
    • On her 2012 presidential campaign website, Stein stated support for student debt forgiveness and opposition to the privatization in public schools and "high-stakes testing."[68]

    State issues

    Education policy at the state level

    In 2016, education policy issues at the state level included charter schools and other school choice options, as well as funding for public pre-Kindergarten, K-12, and higher education. As of April 2016, nearly 600 bills had been proposed in state legislatures across the country related to standardized testing. According to a researcher at the National Conference of State Legislatures, this was "up from just six such bills proposed five years [prior]." The bills ranged from how much testing should be mandated, which tests to use, and whether students can opt out, to how much the results should affect teacher evaluations. Delinking teacher evaluations from state test results had been proposed in almost half of the states as of April 2016.[20]

    Local issues

    Summary

    At the local level, education policy addresses issues such as curriculum selection and testing. In decades prior to the 2016 election, standardized testing opt-outs, sex education curriculum, and book banning campaigns were subjects of debate on the local level. One such debate about the role of history education contributed to the replacement of an entire school board in Colorado following a recall effort. School board elections can significantly impact what, and how, children are taught in public schools.

    In 2016, 644 of America's largest school districts by enrollment held elections for 2,047 seats. These elections took place in 38 states. These districts collectively educated a total of 17,177,187 students during the 2013-2014 school year, which was 34 percent of all K-12 students in the United States.[69]
    For more detailed information on these policy battles in local races see: Education reform: The fight to shape public school curriculum (2016); School board elections, 2016; Ballotpedia's school board candidate survey; Education reform: State funding battles and local responses (2016)

    Banning books

    The suggestion to ban a book in a school district can be a hotly disputed topic, as a district in California realized when the issue led to a recall effort in 2009. Those seeking bans are usually in favor of keeping adult content away from minors. According to an American Library Association report, 35 percent of book challenges were made by parents in 2014. Of all the book challenges made in the United States that same year, 34 percent of the challenges were due to sexually explicit content. Those opposed to book bans say students deserve to read books that contain diverse situations and may offer students the ability to opt out of reading books that are not approved by their parents. In all cases where parents asked school boards to ban books that they deemed inappropriate for readers under the age of 18 due to language, violence, or sexual content, the school board put the issue to a book review committee, and the book review committee denied the request.[70]

    Funding and reforms

    School districts rely mainly on revenues from state and local taxes to fund their operations. When a state adjusts its funding formula—the calculation that determines how much state funding each particular school district receives—legislatures often set criteria that tie district funds to compliance with reform-minded actions.

    History and citizenship

    United States history and citizenship curricula were at the center of public school reform efforts at both the state and local levels in 2016. One of the most notable disputes occurred in Jeffco Public Schools in 2015. Through a combined general and recall election, voters in the Colorado district replaced the entire school board, following a move by a majority bloc of board members to create a committee that would review changes to the Advanced Placement (AP) history curriculum.[71]

    Religion

    School districts in Oklahoma and Florida were caught in conflict with community members and outside groups when they approved religious courses and the distribution of religious materials to students. These examples demonstrate some of the controversies that surrounded religious curriculum at the local level.

    Sex education

    There is no national requirement for sex education in public schools in the United States, but most states provide for some form of human sexuality curriculum to be included in high school education. In 2015 and 2016, local controversies over this curriculum motivated some parents to seek election to school boards.

    Sex education curriculum was discussed in two Kansas school districts during the 2015 election cycle. In Lawrence, school board members supported changing their curriculum to the national standards for sex education created by the group Future of Sex Education. In Shawnee, portions of the curriculum caused controversy, leading one parent to run for election.

    Standardized tests

    Multiple parent movements in 2016 focused on opting children out of Common Core standardized testing. As of April 2016, nearly 600 bills had been proposed in state legislatures across the country related to standardized testing. According to a researcher at the National Conference of State Legislatures, this was "up from just six such bills proposed five years [prior]." The bills ranged from how much testing should be mandated, which tests to use, and whether students can opt out, to how much the results should affect teacher evaluations. Delinking teacher evaluations from state test results had been proposed in almost half of the states as of April 2016.[20]

    Vouchers

    Multiple states saw challenges to school voucher programs heading into the 2016 election. In July 2015, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Douglas County School District's voucher program unconstitutional for providing "public funds to religious schools." The district together with the Colorado Department of Education petitioned the United States Supreme Court to review the case in October 2015. In 2016, a judge in Nevada put the state's program of educational savings accounts on hold while a lawsuit against the program progressed through the courts. That lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, alleging the program "[violated] the Nevada Constitution’s prohibition against the use of public money for sectarian (religious) purposes."[72][73][74][75]

    The final Wisconsin 2016 budget expanded a state program to allow more students to attend private schools with publicly funded vouchers. The bill removed the cap of 1,000 students statewide allowed to participate in the voucher program; instead, the cap for the 2016-2017 school year was set at one percent of each school district's total enrollment. This cap was scheduled to rise by one percent each year over the following 10 years until the 2025-2026 school year, when the law would eliminate the cap.[76] Wisconsin had 872,436 total students in the 2012-2013 school year, one percent of which would amount to a cap of 8,724 total students statewide allowed to participate in the voucher program.[77]

    Previously, the voucher program was paid for out of a separate state fund. Students who attended private schools with vouchers were counted as part of the district's total enrollment for the first time in 2015 and were funded from the district's budget. Because these students attended private schools, state aid was funneled directly to the voucher program instead of the public school districts. Thus, the state aid given to most districts was decreased. According to the Fond du Lac Reporter, $16 million was directed away from public schools statewide and instead directed toward voucher students.[78] Under Wisconsin law, districts are permitted to increase property taxes to make up for the loss of funding. For instance, the Fond du Lac School District increased its tax levy by 11 cents per $1,000 of property value for a total projected revenue increase of $379,407.[79]

    Ballot measures

    Education ballot measures

    See also: Education on the ballot and School choice on the ballot
    Voting on Education
    Education.jpg
    Policy
    Education policy
    Ballot Measures
    By state
    By year
    Not on ballot


    Voting on
    Charter Schools and Vouchers
    Education.jpg
    Ballot Measures
    By state
    By year
    Not on ballot


    Certified education ballot measures

    The following education ballot measures were certified for the 2016 election.

    1. California Proposition 58, Non-English Languages Allowed in Public Education (2016)
      A "yes" vote supported repealing most of the 1998 Proposition 227, the "English in Public Schools" Initiative, thus effectively allowing non-English languages to be used in public educational instruction.
      A "no" vote opposed repealing most of Proposition 227, which was designed to prohibit non-English languages from being used in public schools.
    2. Alabama Auburn University Board of Trustees, Amendment 1 (2016)
      A "yes" vote supported this proposal to add two members, elected at large, to the Auburn University Board of Trustees and ensure that not more than three board member terms expire in any one calendar year.
      A "no" vote opposed this proposal, keeping three members at-large and no restrictions on number of terms ending in a particular year.
    3. Maine Tax on Incomes Exceeding $200,000 for Public Education, Question 2 (2016)
      A "yes" vote was a vote to approve an additional 3 percent surcharge on the portion of any household income exceeding $200,000 per year. Revenue would be earmarked to fund public education.
      A "no" vote was a vote against this proposal to enact a 3 percent surcharge on household incomes greater than $200,000.
    4. Oklahoma One Percent Sales Tax, State Question 779 (2016)
      A "yes" vote was a vote in favor of increasing the state sales tax by one percentage point to generate a predicted $615 million per year for education funding.
      A "no" vote was a vote against increasing the state sales tax.[80]

    Proposed education ballot measures

    The following education ballot measures did not make the ballot in 2016.

    1. New Mexico Dates for School Elections Amendment (2016)
    2. New Mexico Permanent Funds for Childhood Education Amendment (2016)
    3. New Mexico School Board of Regents Nominations Amendment (2016)
    4. New Mexico School Elections Amendment (2016)
    5. New Mexico State Funds for Tribal Colleges Amendment (2016)
    6. New Mexico Permanent Funds for Early Childhood Amendment (2016)
    7. Virginia Charter School Establishment Amendment (2016)
    8. South Dakota Education Franchise Tax Amendment (2016)
    9. Missouri Board of Education Limitation Amendment (2016)
    10. Arkansas Lottery Proceeds for Scholarships Amendment (2016)
    11. Arkansas Funding for Education Amendment (2016)
    12. Nevada Pupil Information Privacy Protection Initiative (2016)
    13. Washington Common Core Removal Initiative (ITP) (2016)
    14. Mississippi Voucher System Amendment, Initiative 45 (2016)
    15. Montana Elected Board of Education Amendment (2016)
    16. California Legislative Control over University of California Amendment (2016)
    17. California Eliminate Religious and Philosophical Vaccination Exemptions Referendum (2016)
    18. California University Lecturer Compensation Calculation Initiative (2016)
    19. Massachusetts Ending Common Core Education Standards Initiative (2016)
    20. Hawaii Local School Boards Amendment (2016)
    21. Arizona Tuition Increase Limits Initiative (2016)
    22. California Local Control and Accountability in Education Initiative (2016)
    23. Georgia Sales Tax for Education Distributed on Per Student Basis Amendment (2016)

    See also

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ U.S. Department of Education, " The Federal Role in Education," accessed March 13, 2016
    2. ↑ U.S. Department of Education, "Laws & Guidance," accessed June 27, 2014
    3. ↑ Common Core State Standards Initiative, "About the Standards," accessed July 23, 2014
    4. ↑ The Chronicle of Higher Education, "State Higher-Education Spending Is Up, but Not Above Pre-Recession Level," April 27, 2016
    5. ↑ National Center for Education Statistics, "Table 330.20. Average undergraduate tuition and fees and room and board rates charged for full-time students in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by control and level of institution and state or jurisdiction: 2011-12 and 2012-13," accessed December 15, 2014
    6. ↑ National Center for Education Statistics, "Fast Facts - Financial aid," accessed December 18, 2014
    7. ↑ Federal Student Aid: An Office of the U.S. Department of Education, "Grants and Scholarships," accessed December 18, 2014
    8. ↑ Federal Student Aid: An Office of the U.S. Department of Education, "Loans," accessed December 18, 2014
    9. ↑ National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs, "44th Annual Survey Report on State-Sponsored Student Financial Aid, 2012-2013 Academic Year," accessed December 18, 2014
    10. ↑ CollegeInSight, "Explore All Data," accessed August 22, 2016
    11. ↑ CollegeInSight, "Student Debt of Graduating Seniors," accessed July 12, 2016
    12. ↑ The Chronicle of Higher Education, "College Completion: Who graduates from college, who doesn't, and why it matters," accessed December 15, 2014
    13. ↑ Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, "Occupational Outlook Handbook, Postsecondary Teachers," accessed January 15, 2015
    14. ↑ National Conference of State Legislatures, "School Choice and Charters," accessed June 18, 2014
    15. ↑ Friedman Foundation for School Choice, "What is School Choice?" accessed June 18, 2014
    16. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Judge puts sweeping Nevada school choice program on hold," January 11, 2016
    17. ↑ The Daily Signal, "ACLU Files Lawsuit to Block School Choice for Nevada Children," August 27, 2015
    18. ↑ The Washington Post, "Colorado Supreme Court strikes down school voucher program," June 29, 2015
    19. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Douglas Cnty. School Dist. v. Taxpayers for Public Education," accessed February 22, 2016
    20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 Education Week, "Testing Proves Volatile Part of State Legislative Mix," April 20, 2016 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "edwk" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "edwk" defined multiple times with different content
    21. ↑ NOLA.com, "Teachers to begin receiving merit pay based on 2013-14 evaluation scores," October 3, 2013
    22. ↑ U.S. News & World Report, "A 2016 Preschool Primer," August 20, 2015
    23. ↑ Urban Institute, "The political future of public preschool," October 26, 2015
    24. ↑ The Atlantic, "The Case Against Universal Preschool," Alia Wong, November 18, 2014
    25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 Education Next, "The 2015 EdNext Poll on School Reform," Winter 2016, Vol. 16, No.1
    26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 26.2 Democratic Platform Committee, "2016 Democratic Party Platform," July 8-9, 2016
    27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 27.2 27.3 27.4 27.5 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    28. ↑ Education Writers Association, "Education & the 2016 Elections," accessed February 8, 2016
    29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 Republican National Convention, "Republican Platform 2016," accessed August 5, 2016
    30. ↑ Libertarian Party, "2016 Libertarian Party Platform," accessed July 5, 2016
    31. ↑ gp.org, "II. Social Justice (2016)," accessed August 23, 2016
    32. ↑ The Washington Post, "Clinton to propose 3-month hiatus for repayment of student loans," July 5, 2016
    33. ↑ Hillary for America, "How much would Hillary Clinton’s debt-free college plan save you (even if you've already graduated)?" July 6, 2016
    34. ↑ The Washington Post, "Teachers union cheers Clinton for stance on standardized testing and pay, but boos her embrace of charters," July 5, 2016
    35. ↑ Vox, "Hillary Clinton is planning a huge break with Obama on education," November 16, 2015
    36. ↑ The Washington Post, "Hillary Clinton: Most charter schools ‘don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids, or, if they do, they don’t keep them,'" November 8, 2015
    37. ↑ International Business Times, "Hillary Clinton Endorses Obama's Reductions In School Testing Wrought By No Child Left Behind, Education Law She Voted For," October 24, 2015
    38. ↑ CNN, "Top teachers union endorses Hillary Clinton," October 3, 2015
    39. ↑ The Briefing, "College Compact: Costs Won’t Be a Barrier," accessed November 23, 2015
    40. ↑ Politico, "Hillary Clinton's $350 billion plan to kill college debt," August 10, 2015
    41. ↑ 41.0 41.1 41.2 41.3 41.4 Hillary for America, "Hillary Clinton’s New College Compact," accessed August 10, 2015
    42. ↑ CBS News, "Hillary Clinton's newest college proposal encourages public service," August 20, 2015
    43. ↑ Fox News, "Hillary Clinton touts affordable higher education in $225G Las Vegas speech," accessed February 2, 2015
    44. ↑ Concord Monitor, "Clinton assails 'No Child' in NEA speech," accessed February 2, 2015
    45. ↑ GWU.edu, "Hillary Clinton's Statement On The AFT's Endorsement," accessed February 2, 2015
    46. ↑ Congress.gov, "H.R.1," accessed February 2, 2015
    47. ↑ The Washington Post, "Trump just laid out a pretty radical student debt plan," October 13, 2016
    48. ↑ LA Times, "Donald Trump calls school choice 'new civil rights issue' of our time," September 24, 2016
    49. ↑ US News, "Donald Trump Goes All In on School Choice," September 8, 2016
    50. ↑ Politico, "Full text: Donald Trump's speech to the American Legion," September 6, 2016
    51. ↑ The Wall Street Journal, "Donald Trump Vows to Slash Funding for Education, EPA," January 11, 2016
    52. ↑ JohnsonWeld, "Education," accessed September 1, 2016
    53. ↑ iSideWith, "Interview with Gary Johnson," accessed January 9, 2016
    54. ↑ Johnson, Gary. (2012). Seven Principles of Good Government. Aberdeen: Silver Lake Publishing. (pages 68-69)
    55. ↑ Johnson, Gary. (2012). Seven Principles of Good Government. Aberdeen: Silver Lake Publishing. (page 69)
    56. ↑ Johnson, Gary. (2012). Seven Principles of Good Government. Aberdeen: Silver Lake Publishing. (page 95)
    57. ↑ Gizmodo, "Now Jill Stein Thinks Wi-Fi Might Be Hurting Kids," August 1, 2016
    58. ↑ Fox Business Network, "Green Party's Jill Stein on Tax-Free Student Loan Bailout," July 7, 2016
    59. ↑ I Agree To See, "New Jill Stein Ad Takes Bernie Sanders’ Student Loan Proposal One Step Further," July 5, 2016
    60. ↑ Rolling Stone, "Green Party's Jill Stein on Why Bernie Sanders Should Go Third-Party," May 31, 2016
    61. ↑ Jill 2016, "End Student Debt & Make Higher Education Free," accessed April 14, 2016
    62. ↑ On The Issues, "Phone Interview with 2016 Presidential Candidate Jill Stein," July 6, 2015
    63. ↑ Jill Stein for President, "My Plan," accessed February 16, 2016
    64. ↑ The Harvard Crimson, "Harvard Grad Jill Stein Faces Uphill Battle for Presidency," November 29, 2015
    65. ↑ ThinkProgress, "What You Need To Know About The Huge Student Protest Sweeping The Country Today," November 12, 2015
    66. ↑ teleSUR, "US Presidential Candidate Jill Stein: I Want to Be President to Save the World," November 3, 2015
    67. ↑ Truthout, "The Party of Our Discontent? An Interview With Green Party Candidate Jill Stein," January 29, 2012
    68. ↑ Jill Stein for President, "Issues," accessed July 6, 2015
    69. ↑ National Center for Education Statistics, "Elementary/Secondary Information System," accessed February 26, 2016
    70. ↑ American Library Association, "The State of America's Libraries 2015," accessed May 6, 2016
    71. ↑ Jeffco Public Schools, "Board Committee for Curriculum Review," accessed October 1, 2014
    72. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Judge puts sweeping Nevada school choice program on hold," January 11, 2016
    73. ↑ The Daily Signal, "ACLU Files Lawsuit to Block School Choice for Nevada Children," August 27, 2015
    74. ↑ The Washington Post, "Colorado Supreme Court strikes down school voucher program," June 29, 2015
    75. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Douglas Cnty. School Dist. v. Taxpayers for Public Education," accessed February 22, 2016
    76. ↑ fdlreporter.com, "Taxpayers pay for area voucher students," November 20, 2015
    77. ↑ National Center for Education Statistics, "ELSI Table Generator," accessed April 16, 2015
    78. ↑ fdlreporter.com, "FDL schools lose funding through program," October 17, 2015
    79. ↑ Kenosha News, "Local schools capitalize on voucher program," October 28, 2015
    80. ↑ Oklahoma Secretary of State, "Initiative 779," accessed December 23, 2015
    v • e
    Ballotpedia's Election Analysis in 2016
    Main
    Federal Desk
    State Desk
    Local Desk
    Policy Desk
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Education_policy_disputes_in_the_2016_elections&oldid=9067585"