Chapter 11, Part 1: The Department of Education
Day 18 of reading and sharing my notes on Project 2025 (the long title is Mandate for Leadership 2024: The Conservative Promise, in case you're searching for it).
Here's my approach and why I’m doing this.
Per request, I'm skipping ahead to Chapter 11. (If you have a section you want me to do, you can check out the list a couple of posts ago).
MY BIAS
You should know up front that I come at this with a variety of experiences. I taught English in a public university in South Korea. I taught 6th grade through high school in a private Christian school in the United States. I was an education reporter where I covered public schools, a community college, and did the occasional story on homeschooling and private schools. My husband is a public school teacher. My kids go to an online public charter school where I choose the curriculum and do all of the teaching, so it's a lot like homeschooling but with some government funding and oversight.
I might do a tiny bit more outside research on this section because I know education policy better than other areas.
SUMMARY
This Department of Education, by Lindsey M. Burke. She is director of the Center for Education Policy at The Heritage Foundation, per her bio in this document. She was on Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin's transition steering committee and leading team for education. She's on the Board of Visitors for George Mason University, the board of the Educational Freedom Institute, and the advisory board of the Independent Women's Forum's Education Freedom Center. She's been published in several journals. She has a BA from Hollins University, an MA from University of Virgina, and a PhD from George Mason University.
MY OPINION
It's interesting that it doesn't say what her degrees are in, and she doesn't list any experience in education itself.
OUTSIDE RESEARCH WITH MY OPINION
I couldn't help myself. I had to look up her degrees. Her BA is in Politics, her MA is in Foreign Language Education, and her PhD is in Education Policy. I think it's really weird that they weren't included in her bio, since they definitely speak to her qualifications to write this chapter.
SUMMARY
Burke opens the chapter this way:
**-"Federal education policy should be limited, and ultimately, the federal Department of Education should be eliminated."
Burke argues that families should get public funds that they can use to spend on any education options, including private or faith-based schools. She touts Arizona as an example.
She says federal funds raise education costs without improving outcomes. She says any money from the federal government should go to the states in block grants "without strings."
MY OPINION
I actually think grants with strings can harm education, as schools chase funding and have to try out programs. Sometimes those are good and lead to excellent outcomes. Other times they're just a pendulum swing that leave teachers and students frustrated, and they're abandoned when the next thing comes along.
SUMMARY
She also says student loans should go back to the private sector, "federal postsecondary education investments should bolster economic growth, and recipient institutions should nourish academic freedom and embrace intellectual diversity." She said universities have been "hostile to free expression, open academic inquiry, and American exceptionalism."
She says federal postsecondary policy "should be rebalanced to focus far more on bolstering the workforce skills of Americans who have no interest in pursuing a four-year academic degree." She says apprenticeship programs should be even with college degrees.
"Rather than continuing to buttress a higher education establishment captured by woke 'diversicrats' and a (italics begin) de facto (italics end) monopoly enforced by the federal accreditation cartel, federal postsecondary education policy should prepare students for jobs in the dynamic economy, nurture institutional diversity, and expose schools to greater market forces."
MY OPINION
Okay, that's a lot to unpack. I actually agree that we need more opportunities and funding for students who don't want a four-year degree.
But there's so much inflammatory language here (cartel? because they have accreditation standards?), and the whole "woke" thing seems to me to be against affirmative action.
I want our policies to do everything possible to even the playing field for people who have historically been kept out of education and jobs.
And what does she mean by "expose schools to greater market forces"?
SUMMARY
Burke lays out the history of federal education funding, from the Civil Rights Act through COVID. She says the Department of Education was supposed to improve efficiency, but instead, teachers unions "have leveraged the agency to continuously expand federal expenditures--a desirable funding stream from their vantage point because federal budgets are not constrained like state and local budgets that must be balanced each year."
OUTSIDE RESEARCH
Federal funding varies by state, but the federal government provides 13.6% of K-12 education funding across the U.S., according to educationdata.org. The international standard, according to UNESCO, is 15%. In Oregon, where I live, 54% of public K-12 education funding comes from the state, and 32% comes from local sources.
SUMMARY
Burke says the next administration should be guided by these principles:
"Advancing education freedom." This is about education tax credits or accounts "managed by charitable nonprofits."
"Providing education choice for 'federal' children." She says military families, D.C. residents, and tribal members' education "should be housed in agencies that are already serving these families."
"Restoring state and local control over education funding."
"Treating taxpayers live investors in federal student aid." This is attacking student loan forgiveness.
"Protecting the federal student loan portfolio from predatory politicians." Same as above.
"Safeguarding civil rights."
**- "Enforcement of civil rights should be based on a proper understanding of those laws, rejecting gender ideology and critical race theory."
7. "Stopping executive overreach." This is against the president setting policy instead of Congress.
MY OPINION
Number 7 is obviously about COVID, since it specifically mentions national emergency declarations. And it's counter to the rest of the document, which is supportive of executive power.
I'll stop there for now. This is a long chapter. The next section is "Needed Reforms."