Nationalize the Schools (...A Little)!

March 5, 2008

Watch Event Video:

Read more about the event

Local control has been a foundation of the American school system for decades. But Matt Miller says the United States needs to think beyond the school board if our education system is to improve dramatically. Over the next few years, the United States is likely to “reach a more robust national consensus about the need to nationalize the schools a little,” said Miller, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress at an event today.

Miller’s new report, “Nationalize the Schools (…A Little!),” sheds light on the issue of local control and the future of education in America. His controversial proposals include national standards for achievement in core subjects, an increased federal role in school financing, federal support for research and development in education, and requiring a cosmopolitan outlook in public school curricula.

At the event, Miller argued that the tipping point in public opinion for nationalizing some components of education is near. ”We are spending more on education than other advanced, wealthy nations, but score in the middle of the pack” on international tests, said Miller. The system can be replaced with a system that is more efficient with taxpayer dollars and better prepares students for the global economy.

Uniform “American standards” for education would eliminate the hodgepodge standards currently in place across different towns, cities, states, and regions that contribute to current educational inequalities. A significant increase in federal funding should accompany the new standards to equalize funding across the country. Federal funding should make up 25 percent to 30 percent of each district’s budget, instead of the current average of 7 percent to 9 percent.

The federal government should also invest significantly more in education research and development to develop better educational products and tools to speed the school improvement process.

Perhaps Miller’s most controversial critique of the current system is to remove power from local school boards. In many urban areas, teachers unions have too much control over school boards and ultimately use them to negotiate at the expense of children’s education, he says.

Reginald M. Felton, Director of Federal Relations for the National School Board Association, delivered a particularly poignant rebuttal of Miller’s argument, citing what he classified as “the good, the bad, and the ugly.” Unfortunately, he said, the ‘good’—increased resources from the federal government to support its mandates—does not mitigate the ‘bad’—advocacy for federal standards which is not comprehensive in acknowledging the politics and complexity of the issue. The ‘ugly’—total elimination of school boards—was simply unacceptable. Eliminating the boards would be “failing the core values of our American democratic society,” said Felton.

Roy Romer, Chairman of Strong American Schools, embraced strong national standards for students and teachers alike. “Education is key to moving forward on other issues” said Romer, and strong education policy should be a top priority of the new president. By focusing on national standards, enforced through regular assessment, the United States can remain competitive in the global market.

It’s time for the federal government to take a more active role in education, at least through funding schools to reduce inequities and increase investment in research and development. In other key areas—such as school boards and adoption of a national standard—more discussion should take place in the context of making the education system work best for America’s children. However, in order to remain globally competitive as a nation, America will need to make major changes soon to its education system.

Read more about the event