Friday, December 09, 2011

A Snapshot of Republican Candidates' Positions on Education

Do the Republican presidential hopefuls have a plan that is likely to improve education in America, or are they dealing with irrelevant side issues that are not likely to make much impact at your child's school?

This from The Huffington Post:

Bachmann: Abolish Education Department. Says federal government doesn't have a role in education; jurisdiction is with state and local governments.

Gingrich: Shrink Education Department. But supported Obama administration's $4 billion Race to the Top grant competition for states.

Huntsman: "No Child Left Behind hasn't worked for this country. It ought to be done away with." Favors more school choice.

Paul: Abolish the Education Department and end the federal role in education.

Perry: Turned down federal education aid to Texas worth up to $700 million because he saw it as imposing national standards on Texas schools. Opposed No Child Left Behind law.

Romney: Supported No Child Left Behind law. Once favored shutting Education Department, later saw its value in "holding down the interests of the teachers' unions."

Santorum: Voted for No Child Left Behind law. Wants "significantly" smaller Education Department but not its elimination.


Courtney Young said...

I believe that the Republican candidates are dealing with an issue that could change education. Education is an important key in the future of all persons in today's society. I feel as if the No Child Left Behind law was a good attempt of helping students in their education, but it has proved not to have worked. Students are pushed along through the system, and so many students are falling through the cracks. Like building a house, one does not start from the roof and build down to the basement. There is a foundation built on fundamentals; if a student does not understand key concepts, how can we as teachers expect them to understand and fully grasp other key concepts building on an unsteady foundation. I believe that the government should re-evaluate the No Child Left Behind law, and notice that our future leaders are failing, because we are pushing them along. I feel as if the government should have control of education, and continue to have a Department of Education. The government should provide stricter and higher guidelines, and the states should enforce the guidelines. When one looks at other countries and their education systems, the government plays a major role in education. Government was looking for change with No Child Left Behind; it’s time for a reality check, and literally help every child so they are not left behind.

Aaron Hall said...

I agree with Courtney. Something that is often overlooked is the fact that when there is a problem, the solution is fixing the root of the problem; not the symptoms. NCLB addresses the symptoms. It seems that the system only kicks in when students need help. What we need is a system that prevents that child from needing help in the first place.

Anonymous said...

I am up for disolving Department of Education. 70+ billion dollar budget this year and what do we have to show for it? We would be better off just distributing their budget among the states and letting those state leaders determine what is best for their students. 10th Amendment if very clear that the feds have no constitutional business engaging in state public schools. Over the last three years the departments' budget has more than doubled while at the same time Kentucky has failed provide textbooks funds to elementary schools, reduced SEEK calculated distributions and for those teachers not let go not even COLA increases in salary.

That ain't unbridled or racing to the top by any quantitative or qualitative measure.