Standardized Education in America: The Case for Federal Control

Image By: Politico

In the United States, public education is “primarily a state and local responsibility.” This has led to an unbalanced standard of education across states as each prioritizes different programs and applies different levels of funding to their schools. As a remedy, standardization must become the federal government’s responsibility. Currently, the federal government only contributes about 8% of the total education budget across all fifty states. Despite its limited financial stake in the sector, the federal government retains some jurisdiction over education.

The federal government only began to play a role in students’ education following World War II. There was an expansion of federal influence on education through the National Defense Education Act (NDEA), established in 1958, which increased loan support for college students and pushed the advancement of subjects such as science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), and language programs in schools. This came in response to the Sputnik launch by the USSR, and the US government’s desire to establish a technological advantage relative to the Soviet Union through improved education of the American population. Moreover, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), established in 1965, was passed to provide schools with increased funding based on meeting certain federal requirements. For instance, Title I gives more money to low-income schools; other titles exist for things like disability and bilingual education programs.

In the past decades, more legislation has been passed in efforts to equalize education quality and opportunities across all states. In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was established to “close the achievement gap” through greater teacher training, accommodations for students with limited English proficiency, and testing for “adequate yearly progress” in all schools as a way to gauge areas in need of improvement. A major flaw of this program was the lack of differentiation for diverse student populations. For instance, schools geared towards gifted students may fare better in testing than traditional schools. Areas with higher income may also do better than poorer counties. Furthermore, little help and resources were provided to struggling schools. Ultimately, NCLB is widely criticized as a failure of the Bush presidency.

Nine years later in 2010, the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSS) was introduced. This set clear goals for each grade level from kindergarten through grade twelve, and drew on international models of education programs for all stages of development, in the hopes of improving teaching practices. CCSS has also received criticism from the public due to fears of losing funding and loss of local oversight in education, among other things. This is because of a misunderstanding that under CCSS the federal government only allocates funding to states that adopt its standards. Consequently, local school boards worry that their values and priorities will be lost due to an overly general program forced upon them by the federal government. However, this is untrue as state and municipal jurisdictions may still apply for federal grants, they must simply have high education standards if not specifically those of CCSS.

A final program, implemented as recently as 2022, is the Engage Every Student Initiative. This involves the American Rescue Plan (ARP) which increases funding to programs that give resources for “students’ academic, social, and emotional needs.” It also serves to counteract the impact of COVID-19 on attendance rates, mental health, and gaps in foundational knowledge as a result of ineffective instruction during lockdown. Another part of the program is the US Department of Education’s partnership with various organizations to create more after-school and summer learning programs for student enrichment and to provide childcare for working parents.

Despite the federal government’s efforts to curb education inequality across the United States, there still exists a divide in terms of the standard of education afforded to students across the country. Income persists as a primary contributor to this disparity, as it impacts the level of access to resources that a community has. Low-income areas are often also the ones most in need of guidance counselors, psychologists, and materials, yet they are least able to fund such things. Moreover, states still have disparate  priorities for what their schools should teach. For instance, in Florida, the Parental Rights in Education (commonly known as "Don't Say Gay”) and Individual Freedom (commonly known as “Stop WOKE”) Acts have been used by counties to ban books and course curricula on LGBTQ+ and Black history. In addition, state values can impact how much of their budget they wish to allocate to public education.

All in all, effective standardization would ultimately improve the education system across the board. For this to happen, the federal government must take into account the unequal distribution of wealth across the United States and solve this issue first. Wealth inequality creates the ultimate disadvantage for students and has become a systemic issue much deeper than national education standards. Fixing the greater flaws of the country would benefit public education because it isn’t enough to keep putting a new bandaid on it every 10 years.