Courtesy: California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office
With each passing year, we learn how a changing climate can affect our lives. For most Californians, two things stand out: bigger, more destructive wildfires and long-term threats to our precious water supply.
There are proven solutions to these challenges, enabling us to shift to prevention instead of simply responding to growing natural disasters fueled by climate change. The longer we wait to make this change, the greater the consequences and the costs.
Proposition 4, on the Nov. 5 ballot, represents a strategic investment in California’s environment, its economy and its people. The $10 billion bond measure dedicates $1.5 billion to preventing wildfires and smoke by creating fire breaks near communities, improving forest health to reduce wildfire intensity, supporting specialized firefighting equipment, and deploying early detection and response systems. To protect safe drinking water supplies, it provides $3.8 billion to treat groundwater contaminants, recharge aquifers, rebuild crumbling water infrastructure, and restore watersheds.
It also provides an important opportunity for California’s community colleges and the students we serve.
Proposition 4 will create important jobs in an evolving green economy. The question is how we build the workforce needed to do the work ahead.
California’s Community Colleges are uniquely positioned to ensure Proposition 4 dollars are leveraged to usher in this new workforce. If it passes, students will see new opportunities in career technical education programs that align with industry needs, including:
Expansion of clean energy training programs: Proposition 4 could support programs in solar energy installation, wind turbine maintenance and battery storage technology. By equipping students with these skills, community colleges can prepare them for high-demand jobs in the renewable energy sector, which is projected to grow as California expands its clean energy infrastructure.
Green construction and sustainable building techniques: The bond could provide resources to expand programs in sustainable construction, teaching students energy-efficient building methods and retrofitting techniques. These skills are crucial as California ramps up efforts to build climate-resilient infrastructure, creating jobs for students in green construction.
Water management and conservation technology: As the state faces ongoing water challenges, Proposition 4 could help community colleges develop programs focused on water conservation and management. Students trained in operating water technologies and wastewater treatment would be in high demand across various sectors, especially agriculture and public utilities.
Electric vehicle (EV) maintenance and infrastructure: With the rapid shift toward electric vehicles, funding from Proposition 4 could be used to expand EV technology programs, preparing students to service EVs and maintain charging stations. This would align with the state’s push to phase out gasoline-powered vehicles, creating opportunities for students in a growing market.
Work-based learning and internships in climate projects: Proposition 4 could enable partnerships between community colleges and green industry employers to provide internships and hands-on experience. Students could work on real-world projects in renewable energy, water management, or green construction, giving them practical skills and a competitive edge in the job market.
By dedicating at least 40% of its investment to disadvantaged communities, Proposition 4 ensures that these communities must be part of the work ahead, not witnesses to it.
As an educator, I see opportunity. California’s 116 community colleges are distributed across the state and are deeply embedded in their communities, particularly those in rural areas. When natural disasters strike, these communities find shelter at their community college campuses. Proposition 4 is a chance for California to build out its climate infrastructure efficiently by leaning on its community colleges in two ways: (1) sites for infrastructure deployment and (2) for workforce development. By expanding access to green job training programs, Proposition 4 will enable Californians from all backgrounds to participate in climate jobs of the future.
The students in our community colleges today will be the innovators, technicians and leaders of tomorrow. Proposition 4, through its focus on climate resilience, offers the chance to support these students in gaining the skills they need to succeed in an evolving job market while preventing wildfires, providing safe drinking water, protecting California’s iconic natural heritage, and contributing to the state’s clean energy transition. If we invest in them now, we invest in California’s future.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
A person stops to watch a screen displaying the U.S. presidential debate in September between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump in Washington.
Credit: Democracy News Alliance/news aktuell via AP Images
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have contrasting visions of schools and the federal government’s role in funding and shaping them. Today, voters will pick a president and his or her educational agenda.
Based on what he said during the campaign, Trump would pursue radical changes from the conservative playbook, such as abolishing the Department of Education, withholding federal funding from states like California that protect transgender students, stripping the department’s Office of Civil Rights of defenders of civil rights, and elevating the case for school vouchers and programs of choice.
Harris also has priorities that would affect the lives of children, including increasing the child tax credit by thousands of dollars and making universal prekindergarten a national priority. During the vice presidential debate, candidates Tim Walz and J.D. Vance found common ground on more federal support for early childhood. Harris wants to expand the federal child tax credit, now $2,000, to $6,000. Vance supports raising it to $5,000, paid for by raising tariffs on all imported goods.
Harris has vowed to find common ground and negotiate with Republicans. Trump is a disrupter who is confident the Supreme Court won’t stand in his way. Much of his rhetoric could prove to be bluster that a narrowly divided Congress will ignore. Harris’ priorities may face the same fate.
Here are some examples of policies that, depending on who wins the presidency, could change the nation’s educational system.
Trump policies could mean big changes
Abolishing the federal Department of Education has been an idea circulating among Republicans off and on since its creation 45 years ago during the Carter administration.
Trump has revived the idea of targeting the department, which he calls a waste of money and an intrusion on states’ authority.
But only Congress can abolish what it established, and it would take Republican control of the House, and perhaps the elimination of the filibuster in the Senate, for this to happen.
Then Congress would have to decide how to handle, up until now, untouchable funding streams for Title I and special education.
A less drastic option would be to transfer the department’s functions to the Labor Department or, for Pell Grants and federal higher education aid, to the Treasury Department. But if that happens, there probably wouldn’t be “much impact beyond the Beltway,” observed conservative writer Rick Hess.
School choice
Trump has pledged to offer “universal school choice” through some form of taxpayer support that could underwrite private school tuition, which also was a major goal of his first administration.
It would not find fertile ground in California. “Twice in the last three decades, California voters have decisively rejected taxpayer-funded voucher plans — the last time in 2020 — and no one has ventured to put a similar initiative on the ballot since. Any such plan would also run into resistance from the state Legislature as well as teachers’ unions, which would see a voucher plan as a threat to public schools.
It is possible, however, that if Republicans gained control of Congress, they could pass one or more variations of a voucher plan — like setting up education savings accounts that for-profit companies could donate funds to in return for tax credits. These funds could then be awarded in the form of scholarships to eligible students and families. If — and it is a big if — the federal government were to set up a program like this, California might have no choice but to allow families to take advantage of it.
“Twice in the last three decades California voters have decisively rejected taxpayer-funded voucher plans –the last time in 2020 — and no one has ventured to put a similar initiative on the ballot since.
Immigration
A Trump win could cause widespread fear for many California children. An estimated 1 million California children — about 1 in 10 — have an undocumented immigrant parent. About 165,000 California students are recent immigrants themselves.
Trump has pledged to deport undocumented immigrants en masse, and has said immigrant children who do not speak English are a burden to public schools, an idea that aligns with a plan from the conservative Heritage Foundation to end the right to public education for undocumented children.
Curriculum
Trump wants to have more say about what students are taught in school. He has said they should be taught reading, writing and math, and not about gender, sex and race. He has threatened to stop funding schools that teach students about topics like slavery or systemic racism.
In California, the State Board of Education sets policy regarding academic standards, curriculum, instructional materials and assessments. Local school districts decide how they will implement curriculum requirements. It isn’t clear whether Trump would be able to make changes at the federal level that would impact the state’s curriculum, including new ethnic study graduation requirements that will start with the graduating class of 2029-30.
Vaccination
Trump has vowed to cut federal funding to schools that mandate vaccinations, a move that runs counter to California’s requirement that all children have 10 vaccinations against disease to attend school. It is unlikely that Trump could simply strip schools of federal funding and, because there is no federal mandate to vaccinate students, stopping them from doing so will almost certainly require congressional action.
Just days before the election, Trump heightened attention to the issue when he told reporters that he will find a place in his administration for campaign adviser Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent vaccine skeptic, and would consider banning some vaccinations.
Water fluoridation
In a late campaign development, Trump said, if elected, he would act on Kennedy’s proposal to remove fluoride from America’s drinking water, although it’s unclear how that would be accomplished.
Fluoride, which helps children grow strong teeth, is also commonly present in toothpaste and mouthwash. Its use across the country and globe, starting in the 1950s, was considered one of the great public health achievements of the 20th century. Studies have shown that poor oral health is linked to poorer academic outcomes.
Kennedy, a former environmental lawyer, has long railed against man-made chemicals and claimed some could be making children gay or transgender. Numerous studies have found that the level of fluoride in drinking water is safe.
Cultural attacks
Conservative groups leveraged parental angst over Covid-19 school closures and masking policies to ignite a “parents’ rights” movement that has since pushed back against educational policies on gender identity and racial equity, which Trump has vowed to eliminate. Some school board meetings have been so incendiary that school districts have had to pay for additional security to keep unruly audiences in order. Some think a Trump victory will further embolden far-right conservative activists.
“I think that a Trump victory will lead some on the right to take the message that these sorts of cultural attacks that have been playing out across the United States, and across California in the last couple of years, are an effective strategy for mobilizing the base and for energizing an electorate,” John Rogers, director of UCLA’s Institute for Democracy, Education and Access, told EdSource.
Higher education
In response to pro-Palestinian sentiment on some college campuses in the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, the Trump campaign in November 2023 proposed “taxing, fining, and suing excessively large private university endowments” and using the money to establish a free, online educational institution where “there will be no wokeness or jihadism allowed.” Politico reported that plans for the new institution — to be called the American Academy — called for giving students credit for previous coursework and granting credentials students could use to seek jobs with the federal government and its contractors.
Harris to focus on early childhood, paid leave
Harris has said she would make child care more affordable for American families by starting a program that limits a family’s cost to 7% of their income. It is unclear how this program would be funded.
Harris also said she would support paid family leave for workers who need to care for newborns or ill family members. So far, attempts to pass paid family leave in Congress have been unsuccessful, and the extent to which a Harris administration would be able to expand child care programs will depend heavily on the makeup of Congress.
Even though the Senate almost certainly will be in Republican hands, child care and preschool is one issue that has significant bipartisan support, so this is one area where Harris could make headway.
Student loan forgiveness
Harris’ platform notes that she plans to “continue working to end the unreasonable burden of student loan debt,” though it doesn’t offer specifics, and she has said little else on the campaign trail. Any significant action hinges on the Democrats winning back control of Congress — an unlikely outcome. That’s because President Joe Biden’s most sweeping actions on student loan forgiveness programs have been blocked by the courts. In 2022, for example, the Supreme Court blocked his plan to cancel more than $400 billion in loans, ruling he didn’t have the authority to cancel that debt. However, the Biden administration was able to have millions of loans forgiven through executive action, and Harris would no doubt seek ways to continue to do that.
Workforce development
Harris has previously promised that, if elected, her administration would remove degree requirements for some careers in the federal government. In remarks last week, she took that commitment a step further, pledging to “eliminate unnecessary degree requirements for federal jobs” through an executive order signed on the first day of her presidency, according to Politico.
For-profit colleges
During her campaign, Harris has repeatedly referred to her record while attorney general of California when she filed a lawsuit against the California-based Corinthian Colleges for false advertising and deceptive marketing practices, especially those targeting low-income students.
The Trump administration reversed Obama-era policies implementing greater regulation of for-profit colleges, and some of these were in turn reversed by the Biden administration. Last year, it introduced regulations intended to ensure that students are prepared by these colleges for “gainful employment.” But the task of regulating for-profit colleges is far from complete, and it is likely that a Harris administration would attempt to extend the efforts of her Democratic predecessors in the White House.
Areas of agreement?
Notwithstanding the candidates’ diametric differences on many issues, there may be opportunities for compromise, whoever wins.
Both parties want more support for career and technical education. Trump’s platform says he favors funding preferences for schools that provide internships and summer jobs aligned to future careers.
Both Harris and Trump emphasized support for historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), which supply 20% of the nation’s Black college graduates. In 2020, Trump reauthorized $225 million in funding for minority-serving institutions, including $85 million in recurring funds for HBCUs. The Biden-Harris administration upped the ante with $17.3 billion during the past four years, including $1.3 billion announced in September.
During the vice presidential debate, candidates Tim Walz and J.D. Vance found common ground on more federal support for early childhood. Harris wants to expand the federal child tax credit, now $2,000, to $6,000. Vance supports raising it to $5,000, paid for by raising tariffs on all imported goods.
Republican Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, stand on stage at an Election Night watch party at the Palm Beach Convention Center on Nov. 6, 2024, in West Palm Beach, Florida.
Credit: AP Photo/Evan Vucci
This story was updated to include comments from Gov. Gavin Newsom and California Teachers Association President David Goldberg.
The re-election of Donald Trump is certain to bring a period of conflict, tension and litigation between the White House and California’s political and education leaders whose policies and values the president castigates. It also could potentially have major implications for California schools.
Trump, whose position on education has focused more on cultural ideology than on policies to improve education, has threatened to cut school funding to states, such as California, with policies that protect transgender students and promote diversity, equity and inclusion in their schools. He also has pledged to deport undocumented immigrants en masse, a move that would impact millions of California families and their children.
“California will seek to work with the incoming president – but let there be no mistake, we intend to stand with states across our nation to defend our Constitution and uphold the rule of law,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom in a statement Wednesday afternoon. “Federalism is the cornerstone of our democracy. It’s the United STATES of America.”
Newsom, who has been a high-profile adversary to Trump, foreshadowed the coming tensions between the president-elect and the nation’s largest and, by some measures, bluest state in a statement on X, or Twitter, on Oct. 18.
“Donald Trump just said he will take away $7.9 BILLION in school funding from California’s kids if we don’t do whatever he wants. This man is unhinged and unfit to be President,” wrote Newsom.
Donald Trump just said he will take away $7.9 BILLION in school funding from California’s kids if we don’t do whatever he wants.
The $7.9 billion represents the total annual federal K-12 funding for California, about 7% of the total California spending on education in 2024-25, according to state Department of Finance figures.
California officials preparing
Attorney General Rob Bonta has said that his team has been preparing for possible litigation to stop many of President Trump’s expected policies, including attacking rights and protections for transgender children and youth, mass deportation of undocumented immigrants and ending protections for immigrants brought to the U.S. as children.
California has sued the federal government more than 100 times over Trump’s past rules and regulatory rollbacks, according to CalMatters.
Bruce Fuller, professor of education and public policy at UC Berkeley, worries that Trump’s tax cuts to the rich will be paid for by budget cuts in public education.
“The president-elect’s commitment to cutting taxes for affluent Americans means there will be no new funding for public schools,” Fuller said. “Watch out for efforts to expand vouchers and tax credits for well-off parents who opt for private schools.”
Trump proposals often contradict policy
Michael Kirst, former president of the State Board of Education and chief education advisor to former Governor Jerry Brown, said there is a contradiction between what Trump proposes and federal education policy.
“He says he wants to turn control back to locals, but his campaign platform and statements indicate a deep interest in getting involved in local decision-making: having parents elect principals, cutting back teacher tenure and instituting merit pay,” Kirst said. “He wants to examine the curriculum of schools for ‘woke’ ideology.”
The Every Student Succeeds Act, the primary law governing federal education policy, limits federal involvement in education, Kirst said. ESSA bans federal intervention in setting curriculum and federal involvement with teacher evaluations, which will affect Trump’s plan to offer merit pay.
“Some of his aides talk about slashing K-12 spending, but who knows what will happen?” Kirst said. Congress could transfer some funding for schools to create incentives for school choice, but that would require changes in school law, he said.
Student debt relief at risk
A second Trump administration could have far-reaching consequences for Americans with student debt, said Mike Pierce, the executive director of the Student Borrower Protection Center, in a statement.
“President-elect Trump’s dark vision for millions of American families with student debt is as extreme as it is unpopular—dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, undoing hard-fought protections for student loan borrowers, driving millions into the open arms of predatory for-profit schools and private lenders, and leaving millions drowning in student debt,” Pierce said. “The threat posed by these plans is real and will imperil the financial stability of millions of working families.”
Deportation promise causing fear
The Trump proclamation that has evoked the most fear for Californians is his pledge to deport undocumented immigrants en masse. An estimated 1 million California children – about 1 in 10 – have an undocumented immigrant parent. About 165,000 California students are recent immigrants themselves. In 2016, after Trump’s first election, attendance at schools dropped.
In a call with reporters last week, Newsom said that Trump’s promise to deport undocumented immigrants would be devastating to California’s economy, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
“No state has more to lose or more to gain in this election in November,” he said.
Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas told reporters the state would be ready to forcefully protect its immigrant population, which could face major upheaval under Trump’s proposed mass deportation program, according to Politico.
“We’ll do everything we can to ensure that people feel protected, and they feel welcomed,” he said, though he did not discuss specifics.
Manuel Rustin, an American History teacher at John Muir High School, an early college magnet program in Pasadena Unified, said his students have expressed concern and angst over what a second Trump presidency might be like, considering the intense anti-immigrant sentiment of his campaign and his promise of mass deportations.
“I expect students today will be very quiet, melancholy, confused, and worried like I witnessed them back in 2016,” Rustin said. “My plan: Similar to 2016, I plan to hold space for students to safely express their thoughts, reactions, and questions.”
Scott Moore, head of Kidango, a nonprofit that runs many Bay Area child care centers, fears that many of the families he works with will be terrified today.
“What is sad is that today, children will come to Kidango, and some of them will be crying and scared that their parents or a close relative will be taken away from them,” Moore said. “This is what happened in 2016.”
Teachers in the crosshairs
A Trump presidency also could have a big impact on how educators teach and on whether they choose to stay in the profession. Trump has claimed teachers have been indoctrinating children with anti-American ideologies. His solution: create a new credentialing agency to certify teachers “who embrace patriotic values and understand that their job is not to indoctrinate children, but to educate them.”
He also wants to abolish teacher tenure and to give preference in federal funding to states and school districts that support his efforts to do so.
“He will go after teacher associations backing Democrats, with a vengeance,” Fuller predicts.
California Teachers Association President David Goldberg said that, as a union of 310,000 educators, CTA has the strength to fight for the state’s students, schools and communities.
“We are prepared to stand up against any attacks on our students, public education, workers’ rights, and our broader communities that may come,” Goldberg said. “We’re committed to fight for the future we all deserve.”
This story was updated to note that the full board of regents voted to approve the tuition increase.
The University of California will increase annual tuition by $3,402 for out-of-state undergraduate students who enter the university next fall, under a plan approved Thursday by the system’s board of regents. That will bring the total cost of tuition for nonresident students to $52,536.
Tuition for incoming California residents will not be impacted by the policy, but those students still face separate, inflation-based increases that UC previously approved. Next year’s incoming class of Californians will pay about $500 more in tuition than the 2024-25 cohort, bringing the total to $14,934 before campus fees.
The supplemental tuition charged to UC’s nonresident undergraduates will go from $34,200 to $37,602 — a 9.9% increase. The supplemental portion is on top of UC’s base tuition charged to in-state students. The total $52,536 price for nonresidents will be frozen for that cohort of incoming students for up to six years.
The hike, which was opposed by student leaders, was approved by the full board Thursday. It had cleared the regents’ finance and capital strategies committee on Wednesday.
Nonresident students in fall 2023 made up 16.6% of UC’s total undergraduate enrollment, or 38,701 students from other states and nations. More than half of those, just under 21,000, are international students.
The share of out-of-state students varies greatly across the campuses, with Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego campuses enrolling the most. In recent years, however, those three campuses have started to reduce enrollment of nonresident students at the direction of state lawmakers, who have provided UC funding to replace spots for nonresidents with Californians at those campuses.
The increase for now is a one-time hike, but UC could raise tuition further for future entering classes when it sets its budget for future years. Short of that, those future cohorts could also still be subject to inflation-based tuition increases, thanks to the plan UC previously approved for annual tuition hikes that apply to both resident and nonresident undergraduates.
In defending the tuition raise, Nathan Brostrom, UC’s chief financial officer, cited a challenging 2025-26 budget outlook for the university. As part of this year’s state budget agreement, UC was told to prepare for annual budget cuts of 7.95% beginning in 2025-26. “So that was why the timing made sense,” he said.
UC officials also said UC’s tuition for nonresident students is relatively low compared to peer institutions. At public universities in Virginia and Michigan, out-of-state students pay $7,000 and $11,500 more in nonresident fees than students at UC, according to UC officials.
“We were quite a bit behind. And so that’s why we looked at whether we had some headroom to raise it,” Brostrom said in an interview.
Separately, a UC spokesperson said in a statement that the increase will “support core operations” amid anticipated state budget cuts “without raising costs for current students and California residents.”
The cost of UC’s supplemental nonresident tuition has steadily increased over the years. The regents approved a $762 hike in 2019, and the supplemental portion has been subject to further increases since the 2022-23 academic year as part of the annual tuition increases UC approved in 2021. But the increase approved Thursday represents by far the largest of those hikes.
The approval of the tuition hike came over the objections of several students, including Eduardo Tapia, who is the university affairs chair for the UC Student Association.
“Opportunity to higher education should not face any more barriers,” Tapia said during the Wednesday’s public comment period. “Instead of increasing the salaries of UC administrators, let’s make sure college is more affordable for all.”
Francis Villanueva, an undergraduate student at UCLA, expressed concern that the tuition increase would impact the “most underserved, underprivileged, and marginalized” students across UC.
“UC claims that the UC system is already cheaper than other institutions across the nation,” Villanueva added during Wednesday’s public comment period. “But in such a crucial time as this one where futures are on the line, how can the UC claim to care about students and making higher education affordable?”
Brostrom, the UC chief financial officer, said he appreciates the students’ “passion” about the policy, but added that UC’s out-of-state students skew toward higher income brackets. Nonresident students aren’t eligible for Cal Grants, the financial aid awards available to California residents. Domestic out-of-state students can qualify for federal Pell Grants, but international students do not.
National University President Mark D. Milliron, right,,congratulates a graduating student at the university’s 2023 commencement.
Courtesy: National University
In the year since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision to end race-conscious college admissions, the predicted impact has become a troubling reality. Many selective universities are reporting significant decreases in Black student enrollment this fall. This latest development continues a broader trend of declining Black postsecondary enrollment, which since 2010 has fallen at all U.S. colleges by nearly 30%.
These dire enrollment reports are emerging now as a growing number of states are eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs and services — and just four years after a nationwide reckoning on racial injustice. Whether colleges have become even more exclusive or if Black students are turning away from higher education, the results are the same: Our nation’s colleges and universities are becoming less diverse — and yet another barrier has been erected on the road toward increasing the number of Americans able to go to and graduate from college.
Despite bleak national trend lines, the state of California has just enacted a creative policy solution that will shine a spotlight on institutions that excel in educating and serving Black students. Senate Bill 1348, also known as the “Designation of California Black-Serving Institutions Act,” creates a state-level designation (BSI) to recognize the state’s public and independent colleges and universities where at least 10% or 1,500 students are Black.
The BSI designation is not just about enrollment numbers. It requires institutions to commit to providing essential services and resources to foster Black students’ academic success and meet their basic needs. For this reason, this proposal is a sound and logical policy prescription for California, which has the country’s fifth-largest population of Black people. It’s also a legislative innovation that other state and national policymakers should consider as American higher education is struggling to close completion and equity gaps and college demographics continue to grow more diverse.
The BSI concept draws inspiration from the success of historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) — postsecondary institutions established before 1965 with the principal mission of educating African or Black Americans. Today, the nation’s 107 HBCUs have an impressive track record. They have graduated 40% of the nation’s Black engineers, 50% of America’s black lawyers and 80% of Black judges. Perhaps more than any other institution in this country, HBCUs have helped create economic and social mobility for millions of Black Americans.
However, most HBCUs are at least 75 years old — the majority were established in the 19th century — and are rarely found outside the South. For newer colleges and universities outside the South that serve diverse populations, a BSI designation would strengthen institutions and communities in multiple ways. It would offer a state seal of approval to institutions that are committed to serving Black students and willing to hold themselves accountable for the results. It also would help policymakers identify colleges and universities to receive targeted financial support and other resources.
This shift is particularly relevant given the changing demographics of today’s college students. Nontraditional, working and military students are fast becoming the norm. A third of today’s undergraduates are 25 or older. A quarter of them are raising children. About 40% of full-time students — and three-quarters of part-time students — are working while they’re in school. Because so many students are older, working full-time or raising families, it’s essential that institutions adapt to this new reality by offering flexible schedules, stackable credentials and comprehensive support services.
The BSI designation could be a valuable tool for states beyond California. In states with substantial Black populations but few or no HBCUs (California has just one HBCU, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science), it could help increase college access, improve completion rates and build a more skilled and educated workforce to fuel economic growth.
California’s proposal to recognize Black-serving institutions is a necessary — and long overdue — step toward acknowledging their critical role in reversing the decline in Black student enrollment and increasing access to higher education for historically underserved communities. Just as HBCUs have broadened access to education, California’s Black-serving institutions bill will reward colleges and universities statewide that are doing the vital work of serving the underserved students our economy and society need.
By investing in institutions committed to supporting Black students and other underserved groups, states can help foster stronger, more inclusive colleges and universities. Ensuring that more Black learners are on track to access and complete higher education will help California and other states produce the talented and inclusive workforce they need to compete in today’s fast-changing economy.
•••
Mark D. Milliron, Ph.D,is president, National University, a nonprofit private university based in San Diego with campuses across California as well as online. Thomas Stewart, Ph.D, is executive vice president and co-chair of the Social Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Council, National University.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
As anti-immigrant and anti-LGBTQ+ policies and rhetoric spread across the nation in the wake of Donald Trump’s re-election for presendent, the Los Angeles Unified School District board affirmed its commitment to members of these communities by unanimously passing four resolutions on Tuesday.
“The district will continue to do everything in its power to protect and defend the kids in our care,” one of the resolutions reads. “Doing so is the responsibility of all LAUSD employees.”
Here’s an overview of LAUSD’s efforts from Tuesday’s regular board meeting and what to expect in the two months leading up to Trump’s inauguration.
LAUSD as a sanctuary district
After Trump vowed to declare a national emergency and bring in the U.S. military to facilitate mass deportations, the district passed a resolution reaffirming that it will remain a sanctuary and safe zone for families.
“We survived the pandemic because we stood together,” said Mónica García, who authored the original sanctuary resolution in the 2016-17 academic year and previously served as the president of LAUSD’s board. “… It is so important that, as we may see policies that we do not support … that we stand together in response to the times.”
Tuesday’s action comes about eight years after the original sanctuary resolution passed; it also requires district Superintendent Alberto Carvalho to present a plan to the board within 60 days, in time for implementation by Jan. 20, when Trump returns to the White House.
The resolution says Carvalho’s plan should involve training LAUSD educators, administrators and staff on responding to federal agencies and anybody else who seeks information or attempts to enter a campus.
Meanwhile, the resolution insists that LAUSD will “aggressively oppose” any laws forcing school districts to work with federal agencies and personnel involved with immigration enforcement.
“The good news is that we have seen it before, and we are in a position to act,” García said at Tuesday’s meeting. “The challenge … [is] there are families who are separated and who are traumatized because of the fear of what is to come. And we will continue to ask them to come to school and give us their very best.”
She added, “Whether it is two years or it is four years, it is every day that we exercise love and the power of this institution on behalf of children and families.”
A safe place for LGBTQ+ and immigrant communities
The second resolution would require LAUSD to add gender identity and expression to the list of groups covered by its “To Enforce the Respectful Treatment of All Persons” policy and require the district to update district policy bulletins as needed.
It also calls on the district to support legislation backing immigrant and LGBTQ+ communities — and to provide educational and mental health resources.
A response to Project 2025
A third resolution passed Tuesday promises that LAUSD will remain “inclusive, safe, and welcoming” for all communities in the face of any “immediate, incalculable, and irreparable harm” to public schools caused by Project 2025, a set of detailed policy proposals authored long before the election by hundreds of high-profile conservatives in the hope that Trump would push them if elected.
It states that LAUSD will defend all students’ right to a public education and protect them from potential harm.
Carvalho will have to report back to the board within 60 days — and present an overview of the potential impacts of Project 2025 as well as a district response, the resolution states.
“This resolution is a bold and necessary shield against the looming threats to public education — a public good that we must protect fiercely and defend,” board member Rocío Rivas said Tuesday.
A new political education course
The fourth resolution emphasizes the importance of turning LAUSD students into critical thinkers capable of discerning facts from falsehoods and ready to participate in the American political system.
“We’re not talking about [being] a Democrat or a Republican,” said board President Jackie Goldberg, who authored all four resolutions, during her last full board meeting Tuesday. “It’s about understanding the actual way the government works — as opposed to what the Constitution says. And there’s a big difference.”
The resolution asks Carvalho to look into creating a high-level political education course and report back to the board in 160 days.
His considerations, according to the resolution, would include whether the course would serve as a requirement, areas that the curriculum would cover, the types of professional development that would be needed and the ideal grade levels to teach it.
The resolution also asks Carvalho to consider any other curricular changes in the grade levels leading up to the course to make sure students are prepared.
Anely Cortez Lopez, student board member, said at Tuesday’s meeting, “The understanding of the political landscape of the United States is vital in our schools as we continue as the change-makers of tomorrow.”
After years of preparation inside and outside the state Capitol (shown), California has launched a website that gathers all sorts of education and career data in a single, searchable place.
Credit: Kirby Lee / AP
Higher revenues than Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislators predicted will likely produce a modest increase in funding in 2025-26 for TK-12 schools and community colleges, the Legislative Analyst’s Office projected on Wednesday.
The growth in revenues will also pay down a big portion of the state’s debt to education, with enough to sock away money into a rainy day fund for education that was depleted by the Legislature last year. But at the same time, a rarely invoked constitutional provision would deny schools and community colleges billions in funding that they would otherwise get, the LAO said.
The LAO’s annual state budget forecast is the first hint of how much funding schools and community colleges can expect when Newsom releases his budget in early January. How to spend the new funding amid pressure from competing interest groups — always a challenge — will be up to Newsom and the Legislature.
The LAO is projecting only a $1.5 billion increase (1.3%) for 2025-26 above the $115.3 billion approved in June for 2024-25 for Proposition 98, the quarter-century-old voter-approved formula that determines the minimum amount that must go to schools and community colleges. It comprises 40% of the state’s annual general fund.
But combined with an additional $3.7 billion freed up from expiring one-time costs and Proposition 98 adjustments, schools and community colleges can anticipate a 2.46% cost-of-living-adjustment for programs like the Local Control Funding Formula, the primary source of spending for TK-12. That will leave $2.8 billion in new, uncommitted spending. (The LAO suggests using a piece of that to wipe off $400 million in “deferrals,” late payments to schools that will be carried over from year to year unless paid off.)
Even though California’s economy has been slowing and the unemployment rate is higher, the 2024-25 Proposition 98 level is projected to be $118.3 billion, $3 billion more than the Legislature set in June; however, none of the increase will go to the pockets of school districts and community colleges. All of it, by statute, will be deposited into the Proposition 98 reserve account unless the Legislature overrides the law.
“I think that’s the element of our forecast that will surprise school groups the most,” said Ken Kapphahn, principal fiscal and policy analyst for the LAO. “I think many people do understand revenue is up in 2024-25. What isn’t as well understood is that the increase is going into the reserve and not available for them.”
“Building reserves is a good use of one-time funding,” he said. “We just saw how valuable those reserves can be when we went through $9.5 billion from the reserve. That was a big reason why the state didn’t have to cut ongoing school programs last year. In some ways, making a deposit makes sense right now; it’s an opportunity to rebuild that reserve.”
A big increase in tax receipts from capital gains income, which governs when and how much is deposited into the rainy-day fund, is the source of the money, the LAO said. Much of it is from stock options and reflects the wealth gap between well-compensated high-tech employees and other workers.
There’s also expected to be enough money by the end of 2024-25 to pay off nearly two-thirds of the $8 billion debt to schools and community colleges in 2022-23, caused by a revenue shortfall resulting from a short Covid-19 recession.
The Proposition 98 debt to schools is called a “maintenance factor.” Repaying it becomes the top state priority once more revenue becomes available — to the extent of capturing 95 cents of every new dollar in the general fund. The LAO projects that the maintenance factor will be lowered $4.8 billion this year, leaving $3.3 billion unpaid.
Proposition 98 is a stunningly complex formula, and the higher 2024-25 funding level will add a new twist. Usually, the Proposition 98 level from one year becomes the base funding level for the next year. But the increase in 2024-25 is expected to be big enough to trigger a rarely used “spike” protection, limiting the increase in 2025-26; without that restriction, Proposition 98 would be $4.1 billion higher than LAO’s forecast.
The rationale behind its adoption is to create stability in the non-Proposition 98 side of the general fund. Education advocates view it differently, as a way to fund schools at the minimum constitutionally required level — and no more.
“The maintenance factor payment increases Prop. 98 on an ongoing basis. On the other hand, the state is making the spike protection adjustment to slow the growth in Prop. 98,” said Kapphahn. “Both of those different formulas are part of the constitution, and they happen to be working in opposite ways.”
The “spike” clause has been triggered several times before during years of unusual growth in Proposition 98. What would be different this time is that 2025-26 funding of $116.8 billion would be $1.5 billion less than LAO’s projection for 2024-25.
TK-12 revenue is tied to student attendance, which has been declining in most districts. Attendance statewide fell by nearly 550,000 (9.3%) from 2019-20 to 2021-22 during the height of the Covid pandemic, and has recovered gradually. The LAO expects overall attendance to increase slightly by 12,000 students (0.2%) in 2024-25 and 26,000 (0.5%) in 2025-26 due to the expansion of transitional kindergarten for 4-year-olds. The LAO projects attendance will drop each of the three years after that by about 60,000 students primarily because of a smaller school-age population due to lower births.
During small group reading instruction, AmeriCorps member Valerie Caballero reminds third graders in Porterville Unified to use their fingers to follow along as they read a passage.
Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource
Twenty-three-year-old Valerie Caballero worked with seven third-graders, guiding numerous activities on decoding words, on Thursday at Roche Elementary in Portersville. In another small group of three students, teacher Shelly Noble focused on building reading comprehension. The rest of the class, also in small groups, read independently or completed literacy assignments online, until it was time for the groups to change stations – to go to Caballero or Noble.
Caballero is one of 85 community members trained as AmeriCorps volunteers to tutor and support over 2,000 students at 10 elementary schools in Porterville Unified.
The AmeriCorps program deployed her and others to third to fifth grade classrooms to provide students with additional time for reading and math intervention that they wouldn’t get elsewhere.
“Families rely on programs like AmeriCorps to give their child one-on-one support and attention that they need,” Caballero said.
Fifth grader Jizelle Alvarado, who has benefited from the AmeriCorps program since her third grade year, said volunteer Stephanie Rector has helped her read at a better pace and to multiply three-digit numbers. Without hesitation, the fifth grader said she and other students would still be struggling with reading and math if not for Rector’s daily support.
Last Friday, the program was one of many whose survival became uncertain because of the reduction of federal AmeriCorps grants by the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, under the Trump administration.
Nearly $400 million in AmeriCorps funding was cut, jeopardizing more than 1,000 programs and the jobs of tens of thousands of employees, tutors, mentors and volunteers, the national volunteer service organization reported.
Attorney General Rob Bonta announced in a statement earlier this week that California has “taken action to hold the Trump Administration and DOGE accountable to the law.” Two dozen states, including California, filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the Trump administration for “dismantling AmeriCorps.”
Unless the lawsuit prevails, the AmeriCorps funding cuts – estimated at $60 million for educational, economic, environmental, health and disaster response services in the state – will impact 87 programs and over 5,600 positions, according to Cassandra González-Kester, communications manager for California Volunteers, the state service organization that receives most AmeriCorps grant funding and disperses it to schools, nonprofit organizations and other entities to address critical community needs.
“These cuts affect service members who responded to the LA Fires, the tutors and mentors for our young students, as well as those who care for seniors,” she said. “School districts and non-profit organizations throughout the state are already feeling these severe impacts.”
But the nearly 14,000-student Porterville Unified has decided to use its own funds to continue the program until May 30, the last day of school — something not all schools and organizations will be able to do, so many communities will be left without critical services.
Thousands of students receiving support through AmeriCorps may have those services upended or interrupted – if they haven’t already – by the sudden cancellation of grants by the Trump administration.
The cuts are hurting the most vulnerable: kids in need of reading and math intervention; students struggling with chronic absenteeism; families experiencing housing instability; and communities recovering from natural disasters. The end of services could exacerbate existing inequalities and worsen future prospects.
“If we aren’t able to continue this work (beyond this school year),” Warren said, “it’s going to leave a huge void, and our students are definitely going to feel the effects of that.”
People supporting their community
AmeriCorps, an independent agency of the U.S. government, supports volunteer and service efforts in California and across the country by providing opportunities for community members to meet local needs and address pressing issues, including academic support and intervention for students, youth mentoring as well as homelessness, food insecurity, health and other key areas in communities.
Due to the range of programs that AmeriCorps supports, thousands of families in California alone will lose services, if they haven’t already.
“We recognize the impact this has across all programs and staff, not just in our state but nationwide,” said Monica Ramirez, the executive director of First 5 Madera, which operates the Madera Family Resource Center in the Central San Joaquin Valley.
The Madera Family Resource Center, a comprehensive hub for families with children aged 0 to 5, is partially funded by federal AmeriCorps money. The center provides weekly playgroups, preschool readiness programs, developmental screenings and resource referrals to support early childhood development. After getting notice about the AmeriCorps funding cuts, which had, in part, made services possible, the resource center, which extends services to Chowchilla, Eastern Madera County, and the Madera Ranchos, closed its doors this week.
Porterville Unified’s ‘Building Communities, Changing Lives’ is largely funded by AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps awarded the district more than $1.6 million in federal funds and the district matched those funds with about $1.2 million this school year.
Most of that funding goes toward living stipends for AmeriCorps members, community members and college students who may be tutors, mentors or in other roles.
Covering the operating costs for 85 AmeriCorps members who provide 35 hours of weekly student intervention and support is approximately $210,000 for May, an expense the district likely won’t be able to foot without the AmeriCorps funds.
“I don’t see another way to move forward without the AmeriCorps funding,” Warren said.
State agencies, such as California Volunteers, are trying to fill the void for impacted groups, Fresno State College Corps director Mellissa Jessen-Hiser said. The state, she said, will fund the college corps members’ continued work at places such as the food bank, Poverello House, a homeless shelter in Fresno, and Fresno Unified schools for the rest of the semester.
The federal government has provided more than half of the funding for some of California’s AmeriCorps programming, with the agency’s members supporting 17,000 foster youth with education and employment, and tutoring or mentoring 73,833 students in 2023-24, according to California Volunteers.
Volunteers play a ‘vital role’ in student progress
Of the more than 2,000 students that Porterville Unified AmeriCorps members provide one-on-one and small-group instruction, tutoring and intervention to, 1,657 are in need of academic support, based on this year’s district assessments.
Members work with at least 25 students each day over 10 months of the school year; they focus on reading and literacy, helping struggling students get to grade level.
“It’s going to create a larger learning gap if they’re not receiving this extra support,” said Caballero, the tutor.
Based on mid-year data from this school year, 44% of students served by AmeriCorps members have improved by at least one proficiency level on their reading assessment, demonstrating meaningful academic progress, Warren, the program director, reported.
Lasherica Thornton/ EdSourceLasherica Thornton/ EdSourceLasherica Thornton/ EdSourceRoche Elementary third grade teacher Shelly Noble said students receive at least three rounds of daily reading intervention from their time with her, with AmeriCorps volunteer Valerie Caballero and from the school’s intervention specialist. Through Valerie Porterville Unified’s ‘Building Communities, Changing Lives’ AmeriCorps program, Cabellero not only provides small group instruction but also supports students individually.
And with an extra person in the classroom working alongside them, teachers gain the ability to focus on the academic struggles of students who need it most.
Without AmeriCorps, “we will not see the growth in reading and writing that we see because the majority (of the work) will be put on myself,” said Noble, the third grade teacher.
The AmeriCorps members also build meaningful connections with students, extending their support beyond academics and making students feel valued, thereby creating an engaging and supportive learning environment.
“We’re able to really see the effects of having those members work with those students and the impacts that they’re making,” Warren said.
Federal funding cuts trickle down to schools
The California Reading Corps and Math Corps, or Ampact Educational Programs, across Fresno, San Mateo, San Joaquin, Merced, Tulare, Santa Barbara and Riverside counties have supported thousands of students with academic intervention, including over 6,000 students last school year. AmeriCorps members prepare students for kindergarten, get elementary students on track to grade-level proficiency by third grade and have seventh graders algebra-ready by eighth grade, according to program information for this school year. Its more than $3.1 million in federal funding is one of California’s 87 impacted programs.
Thomas Elementary in Fresno Unified, which has used the AmeriCorps reading support program, doesn’t plan to use the Reading Corps next school year due to the possible federal cuts, the district confirmed.
Under the 30-year-old Kern Community Mentoring program, three dozen AmeriCorps members have mentored over 700 high-needs students in the urban and rural communities of Kern County each year, according to Robert Meszaros, communications director with the Kern County Superintendent of Schools that administers the program.
By providing encouragement, guidance and support, they address the “whole child”, a philosophy that is evident in several AmeriCorps programs, specifically those focused on mentorship.
Each year, mentors help at least 20 students improve their academics, attendance, behavior and engagement, and based on data from the program, more than half of the mentees improve their attendance and reduce suspensions.
With the cuts to AmeriCorps, Meszaros said, it may mean the loss of the program.
Alternative funding, other options
Programs impacted by the federal funding cuts are exploring options to continue serving the community. Some are seeking support from their state representatives, who can advocate on their behalf at the state and possibly national level.
“Not sure what the next steps are,” Warren said. Porterville Unified is looking for alternative funding sources, such as state grants.
So is the Kern County education office for the AmeriCorps mentoring program it runs.
“Ultimately if that funding can’t be sourced from other resources,” Warren said, ”then it goes away and we’re left with a big void.”
While it’s unclear at the moment whether the multimillion-dollar cuts will stand, the people working in AmeriCorps programs urged decision-makers to realize the people affected.
In the words of Caballero, the Porterville Unified tutor: “think about students’ needs.”
Linda McMahon, former administrator of Small Business Administration, speaking during the Republican National Convention on July 18, 2024, in Milwaukee.
Credit: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
President-elect Donald Trump’s selection of a close ally and the co-chair of his transition team indicates that education could be a major priority of his administration, even though it did not feature prominently in the 2024 presidential campaign.
The institute has issued a detailed education policy agenda that is likely to serve as a guide for McMahon, and the Trump administration in general, should she be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
For those reading the political tea leaves, it was notable that in nominating McMahon, Trump did not explicitly charge her with shutting down the U.S. Department of Education, and that the agenda of the America First Policy Institute does not call for it either. Instead, Trump called on her “to spearhead efforts to send education back to the states” an expansive and undefined charge, especially because by law education is already mostly a state and local function.
Regardless of the fate of the department, the contrast between President Joe Biden’s and Trump’s education agendas — and between McMahon and current Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona — could not be wider.
Cardona is a lifelong educator, becoming secretary after a career as a teacher, principal, district administrator, and state commissioner of education. McMahon spent most of her career building the WWE, founded with her husband, Vince McMahon.
Cardona’s net worth is estimated by Forbes magazine to be $1 million, most of it tied up in his principal residence, retirement savings, and a 529 college savings account for his children. By contrast, Forbes places McMahon and her husband’s net worth at $2.5 billion.
The only thing they seem to have in common is that they are both from Connecticut.
But even though McMahon has a slim resume regarding education, she is not entirely an education neophyte. She studied to become a French teacher in college. She has been a trustee of Sacred Heart College, a Catholic college in Fairfield, Connecticut, for years. She was appointed to the Connecticut State Board of Education in 2009, although she left after a year to run for the U.S. Senate in 2010 and again in 2012 — both times unsuccessfully.
McMahon is more of a traditional conservative Republican than several of Trump’s other Cabinet nominees. In some ways, she is more similar to Betsy DeVos, another billionaire, who was Trump’s first secretary of education. But unlike DeVos, she has had experience in government, as head of the Small Business Administration during Trump’s first term.
In 2019, she left that post, not under a cloud or fleeing vitriol from Trump like many others in his administration, to head the America First PAC, which raised funds for Trump’s re-election bid in 2020.
On the explosive issue of “school choice,” publicly, at least, she has mostly called for expanding charter schools, rather than taxpayer-funded vouchers. “I am an advocate for choice through charter schools,” she declared in her 2010 campaign for Senate.
She also has some bipartisan instincts, even getting support from the Democratic senators she had previously runagainst, when they had to approve her nomination to head the Small Business Administration. Sen. Richard Blumenthal called her “a person of serious accomplishment and ability,” and Sen. Chris Murphy described her as a “talented and experienced businessperson.”
As SBA administrator, she drew high praise from some Democrats for increasing loans to women-owned businesses, and for making the agency more efficient, including from then-Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., the ranking member of the Small Business and Entrepreneur Committee.
Another sign of her bipartisan inclinations came in a September commentary in The Hill newspaper, when she argued for a radical revision of the Pell Grant, the main form of federal student financial aid.
While most Pell grants go to full-time students, McMahon argued that the grant should also be available to students enrolled in “high-quality, shorter-term, industry-aligned education programs that could lead to immediate employment in well-paying jobs.”
To that end, she endorsed a bill known as the Workforce Pell Act, sponsored by lawmakers usually on far opposite sides of the political aisle — Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., and Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Calif., Bobby Scott, D-Va.
Arguably one of her key qualifications is that she and Trump have a positive relationship. Unlike many who served in his first administration and left reviled by their former boss, when she stepped down as SBA administrator, Trump praised her as a “superstar.” “Just so smooth,” he said. “She’s been one of our all-time favorites.”
But her most important credential may well be her role as chair of the board of the America First Policy Institute, which she helped start.
Its 150-person staff includes well-known Trump staffers like Kellyanne Conway and its executive director, Chad Wolf, the former secretary of homeland security. Pam Bondi, the head of the institute’s legal arm, was just nominated by Trump to be attorney general in place of Matt Gaetz, who withdrew his nomination.
Like Project 2025, the conservative blueprint issued by the Heritage Foundation, which Trump has disavowed and says he had no role in crafting, the America First Policy Institute has also drawn up a similar detailed policy framework, including one on education. Yet the institute has not done much to publicize its proposals, which Trump has reportedly appreciated.
The institute draws a sharp contrast between its “America First” polices and what it calls “America Last” policies championed by Democrats.
“America Last” policies, it argues, “prioritize radical ideologies and failing public schools.” These include promoting “transgenderism” and “radical ideologies over core subjects,” while fighting “school choice expansion,” and parent notification policies regarding curriculum and gender identification.
The institute calls for reinstating Trump’s 1776 Commission to promote “patriotic civic education” and removing critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion from what it alleges are requirements for federal grants.
And instead of supporting “leftist teachers unions” and teacher tenure, it advocates for “reduced union influence, and increasing flexibility in hiring and firing.”
For these and other reasons, it is to be expected that key education groups would oppose McMahon’s nomination.
“Rather than working to strengthen public schools, expand learning opportunities for students, and support educators, McMahon’s only mission is to eliminate the Department of Education and take away taxpayer dollars from public schools,” said President Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, the largest teachers union in the U.S.
But for conservatives like Frederick Hess, director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, McMahon is an unknown quantity when it comes to education, and he made a pitch for approaching her nomination with an open mind. “I’m looking forward to learning more about her views and approach to the role in the weeks to come,” he said. “I’d avoid gross assumptions based on biography. Those seeking reflexive celebration or condemnation should look elsewhere. “
Controversy has already surfaced about her nomination. Media reports point to an October lawsuit in Maryland alleging McMahon and her husband failed to stop a prominent WWE ringside announcer in the 1980s and 1990s from sexually abusing 12- and 13-year-olds known as “ring boys” who were hired to do errands in preparation for wrestling matches.
What is still an open question is whether Trump will move to eliminate the Department of Education, or how aggressively he will do so. His administration may decide that it is more important to keep the department intact for any number of reasons, including transforming its influential Office of Civil Rights into a weapon to impose his education agenda onto states or schools.
And it is possible that McMahon will continue to voice her praise for teachers, and for public schools, including charter schools. “We have a very good system of public and private schools,” she said in an interview a decade ago. “I’ve watched some masterful teachers who are innovative and who are reaching kids who are below grade level in many of the subjects. To see how they get turned around is heartwarming and astounding.”
A student in Oakland’s Skyline High School Education and Community Health Pathway sculpts a clay model of the endocrine system.
Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education
It’s time to balance out our lopsided education system. Millions of parents and students have long struggled with our one-size-fits-all model, which primarily teaches to, tests for and celebrates students as theorists, not practitioners.
Our current system acts as a gatekeeper to the middle class by doling out opportunity based on grades and test scores in a traditional classroom setting, but rarely recognizes competencies and interests beyond standardized exams and essays.
Fifty years ago, students could opt into publicly funded trade schools and apprenticeships or enroll in practice-based classes like home economics and shop in traditional academic schools, which taught skills that led to well-paying jobs in carpentry, culinary arts and other trades. But over time, public funding for such programs dried up. The share of federal spending on vocational instruction as part of elementary and secondary education dropped from roughly 30% in 1970 to just 7.5% in 2022. Even as elementary and secondary education spending ballooned from $5.8 billion a year to $96 billion during this period, the vocational component grew only from $1.8 billion to $7.2 billion.
Most publicly funded instruction now happens at desks, with grading based on written exams, essays and problem sets rather than demonstrations and hands-on learning. Some students are more prepared than others to succeed in such a system, exacerbating existing inequalities.
Research by the Economic Policy Institute found that social class, as defined by parental income, education and job, is the leading predictor for a student’s school readiness: Kindergartners from the highest social class possess more theory-based skills and perform an entire standard deviation higher on math and reading tests than kindergartners from the lowest social class. The gaps are particularly high for Black and Hispanic students, who are more likely than white children to live in poverty. When some students inevitably falter, the system tells them they are failures and offers trade schools and technical colleges as second-tier alternatives they often must pay for themselves.
It didn’t have to be this way. The United States originally based its system on a German/Prussian model, which prioritized efficiency by tracking students into “academic” or “vocational” tracks at age 10. In that model, still in place in Germany today, students are expected to know what they want to do by adolescence, and many simply end up in the same track as their parents.
The United States, hoping to advance a true meritocracy, did not want a system that limited intergenerational mobility in this way, and over the 20th century we adopted a liberal arts approach that was supposed to prioritize economic and social mobility. But in a myopic attempt to get rid of tracking, we inadvertently eliminated vocational education and simply tracked all our students into the academic model. The result? The worst of both worlds for less traditional students who struggle in a sink-or-swim academic system.
Student outcomes now depend a lot on parents’ backgrounds, just like in Germany.
There is another possibility. Consider Finland, which in the 1970s switched from the German model to one that teaches a combination of academic and technical subjects until age 16, when students choose a track. The vocational path for students interested in highly -skilled trades includes carpentry and culinary arts, but it also offers applied sciences, health care, and social services, which in the United States would require attending traditional academic universities.
Finland’s vocational path is highly competitive and includes matriculation at rigorous polytechnic universities with high-level training in subjects like business, engineering and nursing and quality instructors with connections to actual companies — not an alternative education. With a system that celebrates the value of highly skilled thinkers and workers, Finland recently ranked first out of 143 countries on the World Happiness Report for the seventh consecutive year, and as of 2021, its income inequality is eighth lowest among 37 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (the United States ranks 23 on the World Happiness Report, and its income inequality is down at 33, beating only Turkey, Mexico, Chile and Costa Rica).
Of course, the United States is not Finland, and we cannot simply adopt its system. (Though before you discount Finland because of its smaller or more homogeneous population, consider that its size and composition are comparable to many U.S. states, and much of U.S. education policy is decided at the state level.) What we can do is stop deciding who is educated, intelligent and successful based on only one type of student. Instead, we should recognize the value of all students, and offer more mainstream career and technical opportunities across K-12 education.
States and the federal government should fund more career and technical education, including apprenticeships, hands-on learning courses and training and recruitment for vocational teachers. They should work with employers, schools, training organizations and other groups to tie education to the workforce needs of their region.
Everyone should be given the opportunity to pursue a traditional academic education, but they should also be able to pursue an equally rigorous vocational one, equipped with public resources and support. Only then will the middle class truly be open to all.
•••
Eric Chung is a lawyer, a Paul and Daisy Soros Fellow, and a Public Voices Fellow of the OpEd Project. His work focuses on law and policy related to economic mobility and educational opportunity.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
