Issue Position: Education

Issue Position

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was originally enacted April 11, 1965 to assist the funding of elementary and secondary education in the United States. This program was notably reauthorized in 2001 through the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, which became public law in January 2002. These well-intentioned programs sought to "level the playing field" for students all across the country to promote excellence, opportunity, and achievement through goal and standard setting at the national level along with accountability and eligibility requirements.

My mother, a long-time public school librarian, instilled in me at a young age the value of quality education. With two daughters in public school, I am personally invested in the outcome of our nation's education system. I have heard from many educators, administrators, school board members, parents, and students about the quality of and issues surrounding education in our state. Many of them have said that federal policies are difficult to implement, lack sufficient funding to meet federal mandates, and provide an impenetrable layer of bureaucracy between students and education. In every area of the nation, great parents, teachers, and local administrators make the real difference in a child's education. A well meaning federal bureaucracy can write guidelines and mandates, but only a parent and a local teacher can provide the foundation for lifelong learning and job skill preparation. The more the federal government seeks to "fix" education, the more the problem accelerates. National mandates and a common curriculum do not solve the problems in our educational system, they increase them.

States and school districts must have greater authority to prioritize their own spending, which will allow them to accurately target the needs of students in their specific area. Reducing the massive amount of paperwork to comply with federal education mandates will help districts focus on the classroom, not the administration building.

I support a state and local education policy that allows for local accountability, flexibility, and achievement. Far too often, federal rules and mandates limit the choices parents have in serving their children's academic needs. Any effort to provide students with a top-quality education must include the participation of parents in the primary role of decision-making when it comes to their child's education. These efforts should include giving parents the option to choose better performing schools.

A one-size-fits-all, national approach to education is not the answer to improving education in school districts in the Fifth District of Oklahoma. Students, teachers, and parents in our state say Oklahoma's students deserve things like access to better technology, arts and humanities education programs, facilities and programs for students with disabilities, access to physical and health education programs, safer classrooms, education that applies to the real world, and locally accepted standards that prioritize the basics. Educators and administrators struggle every day to make sure our students are prepared to succeed. They are often forced to utilize old textbooks and dilapidated facilities, and they are asked to cut costs around every corner. I believe we can do better.

Source