NSBA President: A novel idea: aligning federal education laws

By Joan E. Schmidt

08/02/05 -– What if federal education laws were aligned with each other? What if those laws actually supported state education efforts? And what if all of this met the common-sense standard? These are novel ideas in today’s political climate.

Sensible is not a word that comes to mind when thinking about federal education policy. But earlier this summer, the National Governors Association (NGA) took on the challenge by hosting a roundtable discussion on “Sensible Solutions to Align Federal Education Laws.”

Governors Mark R. Warner of Virginia and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota chaired the session. There was diverse representation from the worlds of education, families, business, and government, including several former governors. I had the privilege of representing NSBA.

Although the roundtable grew out of issues affecting state government, it was immediately evident to me that any movement to align federal education programs would have profound implications for those who serve on school boards.

All too often, federal education laws have been developed and implemented in isolation. As a result, new programs are created as stand-alone silos. The roundtable participants agreed that a more systemic approach is needed, in which federal laws are designed to work together toward a common purpose.

The roundtable agenda fostered thoughtful discussion on the education system as a continuum from preschool through postsecondary schooling. This P-16 paradigm calls for an alignment among preschool, K-12, and higher education.

For school board members, the focus on raising student achievement forces a close look at the issue of readiness for K-12 education. After all, the most devastating achievement gap may well be the one that exists between the haves and have-nots on the day they enter kindergarten.

The luckiest children have been in a preschool operated by experts in child development. These children know how to sing, dance, and play a musical instrument. They read and compute and have some knowledge of a second language. And they chew with their mouths closed.

The children who lost out in the prenatal lottery hoard food. They have never visited a museum or a library, never held a book in their hands. And nobody taught them how to hold a fork.

Head Start is the federal program designed to prepare low-income children for kindergarten. Operated under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), this program provides an array of early childhood development services.

HHS has established standards related to health, parent involvement, nutrition, social activities, and education for Head Start children. As part of the National Reporting System, 4 and 5-year-old children in Head Start programs are assessed on language, literacy, and numeracy. Head Start offers measurable benefits to children who live in poverty.

But the standards and assessments for Head Start are national in scope, and they have no specific connection to state standards for young schoolchildren. Imagine the potential for improved student achievement if state and local jurisdictions had the ability to create meaningful links between Head Start and K-12 programs.

A similar case could be made for creating meaningful links between K-12 and higher education programs at both the federal and state levels. Universities now provide a shocking number of remedial courses to their students. Perhaps the problem is not so much the quality of K-12 education as it is the lack of alignment between K-12 and higher education standards.

Federal education laws are intended to provide for the common good. But the lack of coherence across federal laws and programs undermines state and local reform efforts, confuses the public, and distracts us from the important business of raising student achievement.