Sign Up For Our Newsletter

The State of the Union is a President’s wish list, a manifesto, and an opportunity to lay the gauntlet down for upcoming policy and budget negotiations. The President must outline how he plans to achieve unfinished business, and establish what his legacy will mean to our nation. When President Obama takes the podium on Tuesday, he will no doubt boast of his accomplishments, and present his case for the work that remains outstanding. With the Race to the Top initiative and Student Success Act behind us, we suspect that our President will largely ignore the importance of the real unfinished business of education.

And so we offer this platform. The recommendations on this year’s wish list reflect the philosophies of those who work on the ground daily to advance innovation, freedom, and flexibility in American education:

Education is not about space, a place, or time. Education is not a brick and mortar building; it is not about one person, concentrated on one methodology, or about one option. Innovative education transcends such confines to ensure that our students are prepared to be the future of our country.

In his first State of the Union address in 2009, President Obama stated, “that is why it will be the goal of this administration to ensure that every child has access to a complete and competitive education, from the day they are born to the day they begin a career. That is a promise we have to make to the children of America.”

We’ll give the Obama Administration credit for keeping education in the public eye, for drawing more Democrats into discussing reforms such as charter schools, and by elevating the debate. There is a long way to go to remedy the top-down approach to education reform that has occurred over the last 7 years, especially the Obama Administration turning a blind eye toward school choice for the poor, but thanks are in order for giving progressive Democrats numerous reasons to become more actively involved.

Unfortunately, this activity does not produce the results needed to help our students succeed. Despite national graduation rates touted at 82%, our students still lack proficiency in the basic necessities of life such as reading and mathematics; and do not possess the knowledge necessary to preserve our freedom and ensure America’s national and international success.

America needs educational opportunity for every child, regardless of zip code, time, and place. From Pre-K through post-secondary education, President Obama could consider informing the American people that ‘one size fits all’ education is an archaic vision that negatively impacts our children, specifically those who lack opportunity. Students of all ages should have the opportunity to access classes, programs, and schools both online and on site; and be rewarded for their unique contributions and accomplishments.

“Let’s think big and bold”, he might consider telling us… and erase artificial boundaries that lock kids into seats at the expense of progress.

Opportunity isn’t something that the President can or should define…this definition should be left to American citizens. To accomplish this goal, citizens need the freedom to spend their tax dollars where they choose, and the ability to support the concept that parents should be recognized and empowered as the first and most important teacher that children have.

Each state has tackled innovation and reform in different ways. Charter school laws differ state to state, and scholarship and voucher programs vary in scope and substance. Many states employed rigorous, high-stakes standards of learning prior to the national debate over Common Core. Equally, there are still states that have their heads buried in the sand, in desperate need of a jolt to get on board with innovation, equality, and opportunity.

There is no education issue that has not already been debated, discussed, or dueled over…

Similarly, there is not one issue that has not been studied, researched, validated and also dismissed. The states have been and continue to be laboratories of innovation. The states are where the status quo in education was first challenged, and where a new paradigm for schooling will continue to evolve.

We know now, and have always known what works. We need the courage to say so – at all levels. Without a President willing to exercise his bully pulpit to shine the light on success, to ensure that federal policy follows state policy, and to call attention to that which we have failed to achieve, we will not succeed.

To remind President Obama about the unique research we created to shape his agenda, he (and you) may consider reading (or rereading?) Mandate for Change, a compilation of diverse voices on every issue from teacher quality to transparency.

We also suggest guest appearances! NO state of the Union would be complete without a few special guests in the First Lady’s box. An opportunity minded president would invite:

REBECCA FRIEDRICHS – A veteran educator who, along with nine other California teachers, fearlessly spoke up for teacher freedom by bringing a case against the state requirement that they must fund their teacher’s union (even if they aren’t members) all the way to the Supreme Court.

CLINT BOLICK – Arizona’s newest Supreme Court Justice who has fought for School Choice since the beginning! In 2003, American Lawyer recognized Bolick as one of three lawyers of the year for his successful defense of school choice programs, culminating in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris in the U.S. Supreme Court.

MICHAEL CROW – President of Arizona State University who’s school topped U.S. News & World Report’s list of the most innovative schools in the 2016 college rankings. During Crow’s time at ASU, the university has significantly expanded online programs to reach thousands more and put its education school in the schools! ASU increased the number of National Merit Scholars by 61%, and helped improve access with the number of low-income Arizona freshmen enrolling each year has grown nearly ninefold and the population of minority students has jumped 62%.

HOWARD FULLER – He remains the Godfather of Educational Opportunity and his path-breaking book No Struggle No Progress said “Make no mistake about it: Education reform is one of the most crucial social justice issues of our time, and I will spend the rest of my days fighting for my people, most especially those without power themselves.”

We wish you luck this evening, Mr. President!

by Jeanne Allen
National Review
January 11, 2016

In the past 40 years, labor unions have taken their place among the biggest power brokers on all social-policy issues concerning the education of our youth. While the unions’ involvement was once intricately linked to teacher professionalism and school success, today they are focused almost entirely on protecting collective-bargaining rights and ensuring that tenure, seniority, and uniform pay scales remain inviolate.

Indeed, these issues were at the heart of today’s oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court. In Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association et al., ten public-school teachers are asking the Court to strike down Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, a 1977 case that sanctioned agency-shop rules permitting unions to dock a teacher’s pay regardless of whether the teacher wants to be a member of a union. Laws in 23 states require workers who decline to join a union to pay certain fees anyway. Today’s plaintiffs and other teachers around the country believe that this legal structure is anathema to teacher freedom and a violation of First Amendment rights.

Because the evidence demonstrates that issues covered by collective bargaining have nothing to do with the quality of teaching, it is mind-boggling to consider the unions’ intransigence on this and other issues regarding educational productivity and educational success. According to researchers, next to the family, the most important factor in whether students succeed is their teacher. As Harvard scholar Thomas J. Kane puts it, “A teacher’s track record of producing student achievement gains does one thing better than any other measure (even if it does so imperfectly): it signals whether a teacher is likely to achieve similar success with another group of students.” Citing Raj Chetty, John Friedman, and Jonah Rockoff, he also shares evidence about the impact of great teaching, arguing, “Being assigned to a teacher with a track record of student achievement gains is associated with higher earnings and rates of college going.”

With so much evidence, it’s difficult to understand why this case had to go to the U.S. Supreme Court for the public to recognize that labor unions, which create and defend laws that treat all teachers the same, are at odds with sound social science and what it takes to effectively teach kids. One reason is because policymakers in many states will not consider changes to collective-bargaining laws, largely because teachers’ unions are their largest contributors. Just consider how much political clout the American Federation of Teachers alone, the smaller of the two national teachers’ unions, has committed to elections in this cycle alone — $20 million.

But this case itself, while the unions are fighting it, has little to do with the union. It really is about whether teachers have the right to opt in or out, because even those states that allow teachers to opt out of unions still require teachers to pay “agency fees” to unions — supposedly to cover the costs of collective bargaining, from which all teachers supposedly benefit. The problem with this is that collective bargaining is inherently political — government unions devote more resources to their political agenda than just the small portion of dues that goes directly to support their political causes.

What’s worse is that many teachers have experienced the frustration of unclear, hidden, or moving deadlines of when to file paperwork for opting out, and have even felt intimidated and coerced by their very own union.

“We’re asking that teachers be able to decide for ourselves, without fear or coercion, whether or not to join or fund a union,” says Rebecca Friedrichs, a veteran public-school teacher in Buena Park, Calif. “It’s that simple.”

Between 2008 and 2012, the teaching profession grew by 48 percent, while student enrollment saw only 19 percent growth. Despite little evidence that class size correlates with better education, fully 21 percent of the growth of the teaching profession is a result of various class-size mandates. The rest may be related to the rise in special education and specialty teachers. Regardless of the reason, teacher quality is directly correlated with student outcomes, and for that reason and that reason alone, teachers and schools should be free not only to make employment agreements, but also to earn rewards for work well done.

Performance-pay programs, which provide hope that individuals could enter teaching and increase their pay at much higher scales correlated to their outcomes, have the potential to recapture some of the higher-quality women who otherwise find more personal and intellectual satisfaction in other fields. Men would also probably be more likely to enter the profession, given the improved status and pay potential that would result. Yet despite growing acceptance of such efforts and the prominence of these issues in the public eye today, as well as the evidence that performance pay as a policy option has worked, there is still much confusion and misinformation, and enormous political pressure to maintain fixed pay scales based on experience, seniority, and other input-related factors.

I have witnessed firsthand the impact of hiring and rewarding teachers based substantially (though not entirely) on outcomes. From districts such as Washington, D.C., to most charter schools, human-capital management based on the quality of the individual’s capabilities, knowledge, and aptitude for the profession does result in better objective measures of school success.

There are many indicators of this. First, there are comparisons of schools in Washington, D.C., before and after teacher-quality reforms employing performance-pay measures. Second, there is the comparison of teacher competency in traditional and charter-sector schools (which are more than 91 percent non-union and have operational autonomy). According to Stanford University economist Caroline Hoxby, “Charter school teachers have higher aptitude, took more math and science courses, work longer hours, and take on more extra duties.”

Regardless of the data, however, this week’s chapter in the evolution of teachers’ unions’ collective-bargaining power may expose more of the public to these issues, and that is a good thing. More than 50 percent of the general public do not know how teachers are paid, how they are hired and retained, or that unions are even part of influencing mandates about all aspects of education’s human-capital supply.

Whether or not one agrees with the premise at the heart of the Friedrichs case, education is central to our personal productivity and our global success. For that reason, we should welcome the controversy and the debate as a pathway to progress.

— Jeanne Allen is founder and president emeritus of the Center for Education Reform.

Each year we’ve hoped the President’s State of the Union Address gives attention to issues and ideas that can create substantive change for schools and students across the country.

While there have been some bright moments, each year what needs to be addressed continues to garner less concern than due- real, proven and effective approaches to fixing our broken system.

Last year we heralded tremendous innovations being produced across all sectors, and stressed the urgency that our Executive Branch begin to utilize the cutting edge developments being created and make the way for policy that would allow for their integration into schools and application in the classroom.

In 2014, we urged the President to send a signal to advocates of critical school choices for children — be they digital, in private schools or public schools — that his second term would be more about good ideas, no matter from which side of the aisle they come.

In 2013 we urged the president to encourage parents to learn about their power, or if they have little, to take action to get it at the local level. We stressed that it’s time for the Obama Administration to reward states which offer children in failing schools quality alternatives– among both public and private schools.

Prior to then, we’ve reflected on the SOTU address in a few additional manifestations:

“From the Cutting Room Floor” -2010

And during George W’s Administration…

“President Bush’s School Choice Legacy (Dan Lips)” -2007

“Please Save the Baby in the Bathwater, President Bush!” -2007

“Chalk Talk – State of the Union” -2005