What To Expect For Our Education System, From The Perspective Of 5 Educators

What To Expect For Our Education System, From The Perspective Of 5 Educators

5 educators from different backgrounds share their views on Betsy DeVos, education policy, and what's next for the American education system.

On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 Betsy DeVos was confirmed as the next United States Secretary of Education.

As a billionaire donor with no previous experience in public education or any education degree, DeVos' nomination was embroiled in controversy from its inception. She fumbled through her Senate confirmation meeting and was subsequently met with a strong backlash from public school supporters and teachers unions. Senate Democrats debated long into the night and early Tuesday morning; the vote eventually came to a historic 50-50 split down party lines, apart from two Republican Senators who voted against DeVos, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Vice President Mike Pence was called in to cast his vote and break the tie, making history as the first time that a vice president has been summoned to break a tie on a cabinet nomination.

Since then, educators around the country have voiced their outrage. In a press release, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, said "DeVos shows an antipathy for public schools; a full-throttled embrace of private, for-profit alternatives; and a lack of basic understanding of what children need to succeed in school."

To get a better understanding of how those who worked in the education sector felt about the new Secretary of Education, I spoke to five local educators about their views on Betsy DeVos and the potential implications of her confirmation on the future of education in America.*

**Melissa is an administrator in upstate New York, with 20 years of experience in education. She has attended a public school, worked in a public school, and sent her children to public schools. She described the school she currently works for as having average needs.

Amanda is a 5th grade teacher at a charter school in upstate New York, with 5 years of education experience. She has attended a public school, and worked at a public school for 4 years. She described the school she currently works for as having low needs.

Pamela is a chemistry teacher at a public high school in upstate New York, with 18 years of experience in education. She has experience teaching in public schools, and she described the school she currently works for as having high needs.

Vicki is the Director of Curriculum at a private school for children with learning disabilities in New York City. She has 17 years of education experience, has attended a public high school, earned her undergraduate degree at a SUNY school, and earned her graduate degree at a CUNY school. She described the school she currently works for as having low needs.

Kristin is a teacher at a private Catholic school in upstate New York, with 20 years in if experience in education. She attended public school, and she described the school she currently works for as having high needs.

Compared to many other states, New York has high education standards for both educators and students. Betsy DeVos has proposed that we leave education "up to the states." As an educator in New York State, what are your thoughts on leaving these decisions to individual states?

Melissa: "I am supportive [of leaving education up to the states]. It allows for more localized control."

Amanda: "I think that for states that have high standards, it works. For states that don't, there is no accountability. Also, if a student moves [to a different] state, there will be no continuity of standards or curriculum."

Pamela: "New York has had standards and cumulative state assessments since before I started teaching. Massachusetts and California also had similar tests and standards. All three states also required a high level of proficiency and education of their teachers. Because of this, these three states have always had the best education systems in the country. If it was "left to the states," we would be okay. However, I am concerned about other states. With some sort of national standards and benchmarks, other states have been required to hit at least minimal standards for their students. I am afraid that these states will slide backwards without national guidance. I am particularly worried about science education in states that will allow religious groups influence what is taught in science classrooms."

Vicki: "I believe there is a minimal standard of quality we need to establish nationally and a minimum budget that needs to be established so that we do not have grossly underfunded schools in our country."

Kristin: "There needs to be cohesiveness among the states. Children don't generally stay in one area of the country. They need to be prepared to join the work force in any part of the country."

DeVos is a strong proponent of expanding charter schools, school choice, and for-profit education. What are your views on this?

Melissa: "I am strongly opposed. Charters and for-profit [schools] play by their own rules and use public funds to push their agendas. These schools can choose their students while siphoning funds from public schools."

Amanda: "I believe that every parent should have the right to send their child to the best school possible. I don't think that their ability to do so should be dependent on their socioeconomic status, their address, or intelligence. That being said, I don't believe for-profit education is the best way to achieve that."

Pamela: "I am against this. Charter schools, school choice, and for-profit education leach money from public schools, especially in areas that can ill-afford to lose funding. School choice/vouchers tend to benefit white, upper middle class children, and help to re-segregate schools. Moving towards charter schools, school choice, and for profit education will destroy the public education."

Vicki: "I believe those are increasingly important options for families, but [they are] a direct result of poor budgeting, mismanaged educational standards, and [there is] too broad of a focus on an inclusion model for special education, which I oppose."

Kristin: "I haven't listened too much because there was no mention of private or parochial schools."

In her Senate confirmation meeting, DeVos refused to agree with Senator Tim Kaine that all schools receiving federal funding (either public schools, public charter schools, or private schools receiving voucher money), should be held accountable to the same standards. What is your response to this?

Melissa: "They should absolutely be held to the same standards. If you want the funds, play by the rules."

Amanda: "If they are receiving federal funding, [all schools] should absolutely be accountable to the same standards. DeVos refusal to answer [Senator Kaine's question] makes me believe that she will arbitrarily impose these standards to make it difficult for some schools to continue to receive that aid."

Pamela: "I am angry. This is a means of gutting public education, because schools will be compared on different scales. The charter school advocates will then point to data that is not measured on the same scale [as public schools]."

Vicki: "I think we need accountability for all schools receiving public funds, but I am not convinced that the [current] "standards", if we are referring to the Common Core standards, are the correct metric."

Kristin: "Absolutely all schools should have the same accountability [standards], regardless of receiving funding get or not."

People have argued that Trump’s administration can’t cause significant damage if he is only in office for the next four years. What is your response to this?

Melissa: "I feel like things have already changed. I hope we continue to have an appropriate balance of power."

Amanda: "It only takes one bad piece of legislation, one year of minimal funding, or one year of chaos in schools to permanently affect a child's education and future."

Pamela: "Of course he can. Four years can dismantle the Department of Education, which will be impossible to reassemble afterwards. It can also gut federal funding for public schools, which will cause public schools to close."

Vicki: "When a child's quality of education is on the line (4 years is one third of their educational experience), it is a very long time for them."

Kristin: "Four years is one third of a child's education. There is never any time to waste!"

Finally, what would you say to those who are worried about or most affected by these proposed policy changes?

Melissa: "Poor students need a champion and so do public schools. I'm deeply disheartened."

Amanda: "Advocate, advocate, advocate. It is not simply enough to complain or share articles; we must make our voices heard. We have immense power if we use it correctly. With many officials up for reelection next year, it is imperative that we advocate for what is right."

Pamela: "I would say that teachers will fight anything that will impact our students in a negative way. We have been rolling with changes for years, and we have spoken up about the harm we have seen. We are not quiet, and we will not let our students suffer."

Vicki: "Get involved in your child's education. Pay attention at IEP meetings, get a second opinion, listen carefully to your child's teacher, and read to your child every night. Parents of special needs children, protect your child like a mama bear."

Kristin: Harass your representative to make sure your voice is heard.***

* Some answers have been edited or condensed for clarity

** For privacy purposes, some details regarding the names and workplaces of those who were interviewed have been changed or excluded.

*** To contact your local representative, call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be transferred.

Cover Image Credit: Reuters/ Jonathan Ernst

Popular Right Now

5 Perks Of Having A Long-Distance Best Friend

The best kind of long-distance relationship.

Sometimes, people get annoyed when girls refer to multiple people as their "best friend," but they don't understand. We have different types of best friends. There's the going out together best friend, the see each other everyday best friend and the constant, low maintenance best friend.

While I'm lucky enough to have two out of the three at the same school as me, my "low maintenance" best friend goes to college six hours from Baton Rouge.

This type of friend is special because no matter how long you go without talking or seeing each other, you're always insanely close. Even though I miss her daily, having a long-distance best friend has its perks. Here are just a few of them...

1. Getting to see each other is a special event.

Sometimes when you see someone all the time, you take that person and their friendship for granted. When you don't get to see one of your favorite people very often, the times when you're together are truly appreciated.

2. You always have someone to give unbiased advice.

This person knows you best, but they probably don't know the people you're telling them about, so they can give you better advice than anyone else.

3. You always have someone to text and FaceTime.

While there may be hundreds of miles between you, they're also just a phone call away. You know they'll always be there for you even when they can't physically be there.

4. You can plan fun trips to visit each other.

When you can visit each other, you get to meet the people you've heard so much about and experience all the places they love. You get to have your own college experience and, sometimes, theirs, too.

5. You know they will always be a part of your life.

If you can survive going to school in different states, you've both proven that your friendship will last forever. You both care enough to make time for the other in the midst of exams, social events, and homework.

The long-distance best friend is a forever friend. While I wish I could see mine more, I wouldn't trade her for anything.

Cover Image Credit: Just For Laughs-Chicago

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

The Disrespectful Nature Of My Generation Needs To Stop

Why choosing phone games over a Holocaust survivor was my breaking point.


While many students that attended Holocaust survivor Hershel Greenblat's talk were rightfully attentive, I noticed, out of the corner of my eye, a few outlier students tapping away on their phones. They were minute movements, but inappropriate nonetheless.

Immediately I became infuriated. How, I thought, fuming, did my generation become so blithely unaware to the point where we could not proffer basic respect to a survivor of one of the most horrific events in human history?

Perhaps the students were just texting their parents, telling them that the event would run a bit long. 10 minutes later, my eyes diverted from Greenblat back to the students. They were still on their phones. This time, I could see the screens being held horizontally—indicating a game or a show was being played. I wanted to get up, smack the distractions out of their hands, and ask them why they thought what they were doing was more important than a Holocaust speaker.

I will not waste any more time writing about the disrespectful few. Because they could not give Greenblat the time of their day, I will not give them mine. Instead, I want to focus on a massive trend my generation has mistakenly indulged ourselves in.

The Greenblat incident is only an example of this phenomenon I find so confusing. From young, it was instilled in me, probably via Chinese tradition, that elders should be respected. It is a title only revoked when unacceptable behavior allows it to be, and is otherwise maintained. I understand that not everybody comes from a background where respect is automatically granted to people. And I see that side of the story.

Why does age automatically warrant respect? It is the fact that they have made it this far, and have interesting stories to tell. There are exceptions, perhaps more than there are inclusions.

But this fact can be determined by the simple act of offering an elderly person your seat on public transportation. Sure, it can be for their health, but within that simple act is a meaningful sacrifice for somebody who has experienced more than you.

Age aside, at Greenblat's talk, majority of the disrespect shown might not have been agist. Instead, it could have been the behavior students just there for the check-in check-out extra credit that multiple classes and clubs were offering. While my teachers who advertised the event stressed the importance of attendance not just for the academic boost, but for the experience, I knew that some of the more distracted students there must have been those selfish, ignorant, solely academic driven cockalorums.

I stay hopeful because majority of my classmates were attentive. We knew to put aside our Chromebooks, regardless of note-taking, and simply listen to what Greenblat had to offer.

It would be wrong to label my generation as entitled— that's a misnomer for the generation before. We are still wavering between the line of automatic respect and earned respect, but we need to set a line for people whom we know the stories of. Especially a Holocaust survivor.

Related Content

Facebook Comments