Ronald Reagan's Education Policy: A Nation at Risk and the Pursuit of Excellence

Ronald Reagan's presidency marked a turning point in American education. While his foreign policy reshaped the world, his domestic policies, particularly concerning education, initiated a sustained and far-reaching reform effort. This article examines the key aspects of Reagan's education policy, its impact, and the ongoing debates it sparked.

The Imperative for Educational Reform: "A Nation at Risk"

In 1983, the Reagan administration released "A Nation at Risk," a seminal report that served as a wake-up call for American education. This month marks the 35th anniversary of the report that changed the face of American education. The report took a critical look at the state of American public education. It was, to put it mildly, not a pretty picture.

The report presented alarming statistics: SAT scores had fallen from 20 years prior, only a third of public school students could complete multi-step math problems, and just 20 percent could compose a persuasive essay. These findings led to a call to action, urging all Americans to unite in creating a society characterized by learning and excellence. This society would be “prepared through the education and skill of its people to respond to the challenges of a rapidly changing world.”

Reagan's Strategy: Rhetoric, Leadership, and Decentralization

Unlike previous administrations that relied on federal intervention and funding, the Reagan administration mobilized reform with minimal federal expenditures and no direct intervention into state and local educational affairs. This approach was driven by the belief that education is primarily a state and local responsibility.

Reagan and his Secretaries of Education, Terrel H. Bell and William J. Bennett, skillfully used their offices as "bully pulpits" to advocate for educational improvement. With effective rhetoric and symbols, they reshaped the semantics and agenda of American educational policy.

Key Elements of Reagan's Education Policy

Emphasis on Basics and Higher Standards

The Reagan administration advocated for a greater emphasis on basic subjects such as math and English, more rigorous and measurable standards, and higher expectations for student performance and conduct. The commission dubbed “the five new basics” - i.e., 4 years of English, 3 years of mathematics, 3 years of science, 3 years of social studies, and one half year of computer science. (Two years of language were strongly recommended for college-bound students.)

School Choice and Competition

Reagan's constant call for school-choice vouchers laid the groundwork for subsequent voucher programs. This focus on parental choice and institutional competition aimed to improve educational outcomes through market-based mechanisms.

Merit Pay for Teachers

Reagan advocated for merit pay, arguing that teachers should be rewarded for outstanding performance. The common-sense appeal of merit pay was extraordinarily powerful. The belief that we need to demand and reward better performance from both teachers and students is at the heart of the commission’s report, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform.

Measuring Educational Success by Results

Fordham Foundation president Chester Finn notes that Reagan changed the way educational success is measured, from inputs such as spending amounts and numbers of programs to results and effectiveness. This shift towards accountability and outcomes-based education has had a lasting impact on the education system.

The Impact and Legacy of Reagan's Education Policy

State-Level Reforms

The "Nation at Risk" report and the Reagan administration's rhetoric spurred significant reform activity at the state level. Governors, particularly in the South, recognized the connection between improved schooling and economic development, making education a hot political issue.

Read also: Parking at UCLA Westwood

The "Three Cs"

Bennett and his team created a formal policy agenda for K-12 education reform, an agenda that would be based on “A Nation at Risk” but also aligned with the administration’s political and policy priorities. For Bennett, content was about curriculum. He was clear that the federal government is prohibited from prescribing curriculum for states and localities. For Bennett, the mastering of content developed intellect, which goes hand-in-hand with developing character - what the report called “student conduct” while acknowledging that developing intellect is no guarantee of good character. Schools must also have character themselves; that is, they must model what they want students to develop. Educators must articulate ideals to students, develop a school ethos, and transmit it to them by example. To Bennett, a key problem with schools was - and still is - that they cannot be directly held accountable by parents. Finally, while not explicitly calling for the agency’s abolition - Bell had earlier failed to locate any congressional support for such a move - Bennett made clear that the role of the department vis-à-vis the “three C’s” was “limited by the fact that education in America has been and always should be a local and state responsibility … [and that] real reform … cannot come from inside the Department of Education in Washington. In short, the three Cs and that legislative agenda would frame many of the education reform conversations that occurred over the following 30-plus years (and that continue even now).

Framing the Education Reform Conversation

The three Cs and that legislative agenda would frame many of the education reform conversations that occurred over the following 30-plus years (and that continue even now). Significant elements of that agenda were taken up by the nation’s governors under their multiyear project that spanned 1985 to 1991 called “Time for Results” and also in their 1989 education summit in Charlottesville, Virginia, with President George H.W.

Criticisms and Challenges

Despite the successes of Reagan's education policy, it also faced criticisms and challenges.

Inconsistency with School Improvement Principles

Critics argued that the reform strategy was inconsistent with what was known about organizational renewal and school improvement. The national-commission reports suggested that we can change schools by external mandates, that we can, in effect, “legislate learning” by heaping new requirements and accountability demands on schools. But this approach neglects the internal workings of schools and what we have learned from the “effective schools” movement. Instead, it focuses on such matters as course and certification requirements, the length of the school day and year, and supervision of instruction. Thus, some reform policies are helpful and highly visible, but do not address much of what goes on in schools; other policies attempt to alter behavior in schools, but without understanding the underlying organizational dynamics.

Opposition from Professional Groups

The major professional groups in education opposed nearly all the reforms that came in the wake of the "nation at risk" crisis. This opposition stemmed from the "top down" nature of the reforms and the lack of sensitivity to the "bottom up" realities of organizational change.

Read also: The Making of Reagan

Insufficient Funding

Critics also pointed out that the strategy of reforming schools "on the cheap" by arguing that federal dollars aren't needed was a weakness. Some argued that increased spending on schools and colleges was necessary to address the challenges facing the education system. Last November, for example, “To Secure the Blessing of Liberty,” a report of a 22-member panel prepared for the American Association of State Colleges and Universities and chaired by former Secretary Bell, said the United States was in grave danger unless it sharply increased spending on its schools and colleges. The report called for a domestic Marshall Plan to nearly double the number of college-educated adults by the turn of the century, and it excoriated cutbacks on spending for remedial programs: “Public officials who propose budget reductions in education at a time when the republic is handicapped by the burden of an undereducated populace are unthinkingly abetting an act of national suicide.” In addition, it claimed that the real value of federal aid to students had dropped 25 percent since Mr. Reagan took office in 1981.

The California Context: From Master Plan to Privatization

The Reagan era also had a profound impact on higher education in California. As governor of California in the 1960s, Reagan cut state funding for higher education, laid the foundations for a shift to a tuition-based funding model, and called in the National Guard to crush student protests. This marked the beginning of the end of public higher education in the United States as it had been known.

The Master Plan for Higher Education

For the first half of the twentieth century, the University of California was a nearly sacred institution in the Golden State. The 1960 Donahoe Act, better known as the Master Plan for Higher Education, was a blanket commitment from the state to educate all the California students who wanted an education and, in doing so, to facilitate the kind of class mobility that has placed public education at the center of American civic life. The doors of the University of California were thrown open, tuition-free, for the top 12.5 percent of high school graduates. The top 33.3 percent could find a place in one of the California State Universities, which were also tuition-free. Everyone else, if they so chose, could go to one of the many California Community Colleges, which were open not only to high school graduates but also to qualifying non-traditional students. Perhaps most important, community college graduates had the opportunity to transfer to one of the UCs or CSUs to finish their bachelor’s degree, if their grades were above a certain point. In theory and to a significant extent in practice, anyone from anywhere in California could, if they worked hard enough, get a bachelor’s degree from one of the best universities in the country (and, therefore, in the world), almost free of charge.

The Shift to Tuition-Based Funding

Reagan began the process of privatization in 1969, convincing the state to relax its restrictions on the level of fees that could be assessed. By 2011, UC officially switched from a system of fees to an explicitly tuition-centric model.

The Decline of Public Higher Education

Along with pushing instructional costs onto students, the state of California has made it easier for state universities to balance their budgets by accepting more out-of-state students (and thus, fewer and fewer Californian students). Over the last three decades, the state has given up on increasing the total institutional capacity-the classrooms, dorms, and new campuses-that a continuously growing university-age population requires.

Proposition 13 and the Prison Boom

Two specific developments in post-Reagan California help to explain why this is happening: in 1978 California passed the infamous Proposition 13, greatly restricting the state’s capacity to raise revenue through property taxes; and in the 1980s it began one of the great prison-building booms of our time, expanding the incarcerated population in California by 500 percent between 1982 and 2000. While Proposition 13 dramatically limited the total revenue in the state‘s coffers, the prison boom diminished the percentage of total funds available for higher education. The portion of the shrinking general fund that could go to expanding public institutional capacity has decreased from around 17 to 10 percent since the late 1970s.

The Future of Education: Addressing Modern Challenges

Three and a half decades after "A Nation at Risk," the world is changing more rapidly than ever. We need an education system that can prepare students to meet these challenges.

Technology in the Classroom

Advancements in classroom technology allow unprecedented levels of connectivity and access to information. However, many studies show that technology in the classroom can be a distraction, and the pace of technological development makes it difficult for schools to keep up. We must prepare students to have the nimbleness and flexibility they’ll need to succeed as technological changes become more and more rapid.

Adult Education and Automation

Automation has put thousands of workers all across the country out of a job but created new, previously unimagined jobs for many. We must consider the possibilities of adult education, equipping older workers to adapt alongside technology.

Civics and Democracy

We must educate students on the unique privileges and responsibilities of citizenship. A 2017 Brookings Institution study showed alarming misunderstandings about the nature of the First Amendment among university students.

Higher Education and the Job Market

The purpose and power of higher education is coming under increased scrutiny. Some important voices have started wondering if college is even worth it in the first place; others have called on universities to better prepare students for the job market.

tags: #ronald #reagan #education #policy