Bush Details Sweeping Plan to ‘Reinvent’ U.S. Education

President Bush on Thursday proposed a sweeping package of educational reforms that would add little to federal spending but calls on state and local governments, business and communities to join in an effort to “reinvent American education.”

Meeting with business and government leaders at the White House, the President detailed a program that would create a voluntary national testing program and set up a system of rewards and penalties to prod schools to better performance.

Bush’s “America 2000” program would use $550 million in federal seed money to set up 535 experimental schools and create a nonprofit, business-funded corporation to sponsor research and development into entirely new kinds of schools.

The Administration proposes to spend just $690 million on the program, a small part of an overall fiscal 1992 education budget of $29.6 billion, a proposed increase of 3.7% in total outlays. But Bush said that the country is spending 33% more per pupil in 1991 than it did in 1981, in inflation-adjusted terms, and insisted that more spending is not necessary.

“I don’t think there’s a person anywhere who would say we’ve seen a 33% increase in our schools’ performance,” the President said in a speech from the White House, where he was joined by newly appointed Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and others.

Bush stressed that the nation’s governors would be partners in leading the program and alluded to his 1988 campaign call for volunteerism. “I ask all Americans to be points of light in the crusade that matters most,” he said.

One of the program’s most sensitive proposals calls for parents to be given more choice to choose the schools their children will attend, a change designed to increase pressure on substandard schools to improve their academic programs.

The choice concept provides that parents should be free to send their children to any public school within their district, or even to private schools that conform to government rules in such areas as racial discrimination.

It would provide $200 million in federal grants to states and localities that adopt “education certificate” programs under which parents who opt to send their children to private schools would receive taxpayer funds to help defray the cost.

It also seeks revision of federal regulations so that federal dollars from the government’s big Chapter 1 school aid program could follow a child to private schools if state and local governments approve such arrangements.

Critics of choice contend that the plan would encourage middle-class families to flee public schools. But Administration officials said that they would try to ensure that low-income families would be given the same opportunities as those with more money.

The program’s emphasis on experimentation brought generally favorable reaction from educators as well as congressional Democrats. But the program’s modest federal funding, its call for national testing and its emphasis on parental choice swiftly came under attack.

Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.) said that Democrats welcomed the plan but added: “All of us have seen a large number of White House press conferences before. Too often, effort on behalf of the issue stops when the cameras stop rolling.”

Bill Honig, California’s superintendent of public instruction, praised the Administration initiative. “Overall, it’s a great plan . . . a strategic, comprehensive plan, not just a one-shot deal,” Honig said. “They are obviously in it for the long haul.”

Jackie Goldberg, president of the Los Angeles Board of Education, faulted the program for its modest funding, its call for parental choice and the important role it gives business.

“I was depressed mightily that he’s not interested in increasing dollars to schools,” Goldberg said. “That shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how under-funded public education is.”

Other educators noted that the choice concept received less emphasis than it has in the past under both the Bush and Ronald Reagan administrations. They predicted that the idea would not be at the center of the agenda set by Alexander, who has sought to enlist widespread support for educational reform.

The call for voluntary national tests also is likely to draw continued criticism.

Federal officials believe that by 1994 they can develop a system of individual tests in reading, writing and mathematics for students in the fourth, eighth and 12th grades. Tests in history and geography will be developed later.

Officials contend that a range of tests can be devised to suit different local tastes, although all would be “calibrated” to the same basic standards. That would enable parents in any region to tell how their children compare to those elsewhere.

The education officials also say they will be able to ensure that the tests are not biased against minorities. And while the tests would be voluntary, the Administration would encourage their use by colleges and employers in hopes that they will gain currency as national standards.

“I think teachers are going to bridle against this approach as test-heavy,” said Bruce Hunter, associate director of the American Assn. of School Administrators. Testing suggests that “you can hold teachers solely accountable for students’ failures,” he said. “If they’re trying to humiliate teachers, they’re not going to find it easy to get them on board.”

Such groups as the National Parent Teacher Assn., the National Education Assn. and the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People are on record as opposing national testing.

Perhaps the plan’s most dramatic element is its call for the creation of a New American Schools Development Corporation, which would award contracts next year to between three and seven “R&D;” consortiums.

These consortiums are expected to be combinations of think-tanks, universities, management consultants and high-technology manufacturers. Their charge will be to reconsider all aspects of teaching--from the length of the school day to the organization of the classroom and the relationship of teacher and student.

The group will be headed by Paul O’Neill, chief executive of Alcoa Corp., and will seek to raise an initial $150 million to $200 million through private donations.