The 2024 presidential election is less than three weeks away, and one issue has been notably absent from debates, policy platforms, and stump speeches: K-12 education.
During the first and only debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, education was not the subject of any questions, and neither candidate mentioned the issue. The vice presidential debate between Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Ohio Sen. JD Vance did include questions about how the candidates would address school safety, but neither candidate鈥攊ncluding Walz, a former teacher鈥攕hared policy plans for pressing day-to-day concerns like declining student achievement or teacher shortages.
To the extent that education has been the topic of conversation, Harris and Trump have kept their statements broad rather than present detailed policy proposals鈥攍et alone ambitious goals for the nation鈥檚 students.
Trump has said he would eliminate the U.S. Department of Education鈥�an idea that has been floated since the Reagan administration but has never become a reality. He has also asserted without evidence that schools are facilitating students鈥� gender transitions without parents鈥� knowledge, called for universal private school choice, proposed allowing parents to elect their school principals, and said he would remove funding from schools that teach critical race theory, 鈥渞adical gender ideology,鈥� and 鈥渁ny other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content.鈥�
, he鈥檚 barely touched on the topic.
Harris has called for raising teacher pay and pushing back on policies that ban books dealing with race, gender, and sexual orientation. But, for the most part, she has kept her comments on education to criticism of Trump鈥檚 policies.
During the Democratic National Convention in August, Harris said, 鈥渨e are not going to let him abolish the Department of Education that funds our public schools.鈥� And earlier this week , Harris responded to a question about her stance on school choice and charter schools by saying, 鈥淚 have supported public charters,鈥� before shifting the focus to criticisms of Trump and his support for eliminating the Education Department.
鈥淔rankly, I don鈥檛 think he wants to talk about education, which is why it has not become an issue on the debate stage, because he doesn鈥檛 have a plan,鈥� Harris said on the Oct. 14 episode of the Roland Martin Unfiltered podcast.
Harris鈥檚 website features with broad commitments to 鈥渟trengthen public education as a pathway to the middle class,鈥� continue President Joe Biden鈥檚 efforts to get student loan debt relief, and provide affordable preschool. But it lacks specifics on how she will achieve those goals.
While past candidates have made bold proclamations about education, it has never been the driving issue in presidential elections. 69传媒 are largely governed at the state and local levels, and voters this election cycle the economy, health care, Supreme Court appointments, crime, immigration, foreign policy, and abortion rights.
Even so, the lack of attention to education could suggest the candidates aren鈥檛 committed to helping K-12 schools and students thrive, said Bettina Love, an author and professor at the Teachers College, Columbia University.
鈥淚t sends a message that the federal government is not truly concerned about public education,鈥� said Love, who is a regular Education Week contributor and lamented the lack of attention to education from the presidential candidates in a recent essay. 鈥淚 think it also sends a message that they鈥檙e not interested in really solving the inequalities and the serious issues we have facing us.鈥�
How past campaigns have approached education
It鈥檚 not unusual for presidential hopefuls to prioritize the economy, immigration, and other issues over education, but K-12 schools have played a notably smaller role in the past three elections.
In 2016, education failed to capture much attention from either Trump or Hillary Clinton鈥檚 campaigns.
At the time, Education Week wrote that Clinton had a 鈥減lay-it-safe鈥� strategy with education policy, saying she would push for more resources for child care, college access, and student supports. Trump, meanwhile, didn鈥檛 provide specifics other than to call for the elimination of the Education Department.
In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic loomed over the entire election between Trump and Joe Biden, and discussion of education focused primarily on the reopening of schools.
The last time Education Week described K-12 schools as a priority in a presidential election was in 2012 when then-President Barack Obama ran against Mitt Romney. During that race, Obama touted his administration鈥檚 Race to the Top initiative, which incentivized schools to raise academic standards, while Romney proposed a $25 billion federal private school choice program. Even earlier, in 2004, former President George W. Bush made education a primary talking point by touting his landmark education law, No Child Left Behind.
The amount of attention presidential candidates are paying to education reflects a broader shift in how schools are governed. Since the Every Student Succeeds Act reduced the federal government鈥檚 role in school accountability in 2015 and Obama left office in 2017, the federal government has stayed away from sweeping education laws that push for better outcomes.
It sends a message that the federal government is not truly concerned about public education. I think it also sends a message that they're not interested in really solving the inequalities and the serious issues we have facing us.
Big federal initiatives like No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top faced criticism in the years following their implementation for failing to spark the academic gains they promised and punishing schools for low student performance.
Presidents from both parties are often in lockstep 鈥渋n the ways they believe that teacher and education performance can be achieved鈥攖hat鈥檚 through testing, that鈥檚 through requiring teachers to take more tests, that鈥檚 high-stakes testing,鈥� Love said. 鈥淭hose really have not moved the needle in the last 40 years, and so I don鈥檛 think [candidates today] have a bold strategy. I don鈥檛 think they鈥檙e willing to try new things and be innovative.鈥�
Presidential candidates may find it easier to be more general about education rather than try to come up with new, sparkly strategies to win over voters, said Rachel Perera, a researcher at the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution.
鈥淓specially after No Child Left Behind, I don鈥檛 think there鈥檚 much of an appetite to want to expand the role, especially in K-12, around federal education policy,鈥� Perera said. 鈥淓ducation policy, as people perceive it, is more local and state.鈥�
State and local races will mean more for education policy
Even if Harris and Trump made K-12 policy a major priority in their platforms, the presidential election wouldn鈥檛 be the race on the ballot with the most influence over K-12 schools.
The people with the most power over the day-to-day functioning of a school is the local school board, Perera said.
鈥淪chool boards play very consequential roles. They have a lot of authority. They set the budget,鈥� she said. 鈥淚n a lot of places, they hire the superintendent, they鈥檙e setting local policy, they鈥檙e interpreting state policy and shaping how it鈥檚 implemented at the local level. If you care about public schools, you need to be paying attention to your local school boards.鈥�
State races are also highly consequential for K-12 schools. State lawmakers and governors make many decisions about funding, teacher pay, and restrictions on curriculum and instruction.
School boards play very consequential roles. They have a lot of authority.
Many governors also appoint state superintendents, who oversee the implementation of state laws and initiatives to improve student learning, and run state departments of education. This year, 11 states will elect governors and four states鈥擬ontana, North Carolina, North Dakota, and Washington states鈥攚ill elect state superintendents.
While education policy is largely determined at the state level, that doesn鈥檛 mean federal officials should ignore it, Love said.
鈥淭hey are going to rely on the states, maybe the school districts, to figure it out, but that鈥檚 not really a solution,鈥� Love said. 鈥淭he history of this country is that if we鈥檙e going to have innovative, bold solutions that really address inequality, it has to come from the federal government.鈥�
