Culture Wars vs. Learning Loss As Voter Priority

Throughout the 2024 campaign, the education policy debate has focused largely on cultural issues particularly on the Republican side. Data from the most recent survey for Winning the Issues (September 18-19; 1,000 registered voters) suggests this would not be the strongest message on the education issue. In a direct contrast, voters say that dealing with learning loss from the Covid-19 pandemic and boosting student achievement is more important than dealing with cultural issues in K-12 schools by a margin of over 3:1 (65-21).

Agreement is bipartisan; with two-thirds of Republicans (66-21), 69% of independents (69-15), and 60% of Democrats (60-28) saying learning loss and boosting student achievement should be the priority, though neither party explicitly mentions a forward-looking plan for restoring lost learning in their platform. Even among the conservative GOP base, by more than 3:1, conservative Republicans agree that learning loss should be the priority (70-22).

The same survey for Winning the Issues showed a continued preference for Democrats to handle the issue of education. Voters now favor Democrats over Republicans by a margin of 12 (38-50 R- D), with independents now preferring Democrats 27-46. But among voters that prefer the Republicans on the issue of education, they want a focus on learning loss and student achievement by a 69-19 margin. Those that prefer Democrats also prefer a focus on learning loss, but by the slightly smaller margin of 63-25.

This data does not mean that cultural issues are not important, but it does mean that learning loss overwhelms cultural concerns as the priority in education. The results also indicate a missed opportunity for both parties in 2024. Going into next year, the party that captures learning loss as part of their education platform will have a significant advantage on the issue.

States Get Poor Grades On Learning Loss Transparency

Earlier this month, the Center for Reinventing Public Education released a report intended to answer the following question: how easy would it be for a parent or advocate to compare student performance pre- and post-COVID? The answer, following the report’s analysis of the ease of finding student performance data and other metrics, was that it was not at all easy for a large number of states.

All 50 states and the District of Columbia were assessed based on the ease with which researchers were able to find pre- and post-Covid data on a variety of metrics, including student achievement levels and achievement growth in English language arts, math, science, and social studies. Overall, 13 (25%) earned an F for the ease with with their longitudinal data could be found. (In some cases, the longitudinal data was not available at all). Only 7 (14%) earned an A for the ease with which their longitudinal data could be found, with 9 (18%) earning a B, 14 (27%) earning a C, and 8 (16%) earning a D.

It’s important to note that the CRPE report was not intended to measure the quality of an individual state’s report card. The report itself noted that some states that had earned Fs nevertheless had easily navigable and “visually appealing” report cards. Rather, this report focused on whether states made it easy to compare pre-Covid data with post-Covid data across a variety of metrics. On balance, the answer was no, and even in “A” states, researchers still had trouble finding some of the metrics and/or disaggregated student data.

Still the lack of readily available longitudinal data means the work of ensuring students are getting caught up is that much harder. From the February survey for Winning the Issues, only 11% of voters thought students were where they normally would have been in their learning even accounting for the Covid disruptions. On the other hand, 27% said that they were significantly behind.

Will We See More Campus Protests This Fall?

The fall semester is now in full swing at colleges and universities across the country. In preparation for students’ return, many schools updated their policies around protests, harassment, and discrimination, from the University of California and the California State University systems to Harvard University, Indiana University, the University of Virginia, and NYU. At the end of August, chair of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce Virginia Foxx and Missouri Rep. Jason Smith sent letters to institutions requesting that they share their updated plans for responding to campus demonstrations by September 5. Throughout the summer, several colleges and universities facing Title IV investigations were found to be lacking in their responses to antisemitism.

Protest activity has continued into the new semester, although at this point, it is not at the same scale we saw last spring. Cornell made headlines at the end of last month for campus demonstrations that included vandalism of school property. The Wall Street Journal reported last week that some 50 people protested at Columbia, and that a statue at the center of campus was vandalized with red paint. The story came only a few days after the WSJ also reported that a faculty task force “found antisemitism against students pervasive on the campus grounds—in dormitories, clubs and classrooms—and on social media.”

Colleges and universities find themselves in a precarious position with the electorate in how they choose to handle any protests that might arise this semester. From the April survey for Winning the Issues, conducted as the protest activity was ramping up last spring, only 19% of voters approved of how colleges and universities had handled the campus demonstrations (19-53 approve- disapprove). That shrank to 12% approving among independents (12-57).

Similarly, only 23% of voters overall said they agreed with the pro-Palestinian protests happening on college campuses (23-53 agree-disagree). Independents disagreed 19-54.

Voters were clearly dissatisfied with what they saw last spring. That independents were also dissatisfied indicates a larger potential problem that is not inherently partisan in nature. Whether the policy changes that colleges and universities made over the summer will effectively address student concerns and positively impact voters’ views is something we will continue to watch.

Comparing The Republican And Democrat Education Platforms

With the release of the Democratic Party’s 2024 platform for the start of their convention today, this week we take a look at how the Democrats’ platform compares with the Republicans’ on education.

The Democratic Platform: Education comes as part of the third chapter, “Lowering Costs;” the section addresses positions spanning through the education system from pre-K to post-secondary. Among the priorities are free, universal preschool for four year-olds; more affordable post- secondary education, including investments in career and technical education, free trade school and community college, and expanded Pell Grants; and increased investments in teachers.

“Help students learn.” The platform highlights actions the Biden administration took in the wake of the pandemic through the passage of the American Rescue Plan. It then highlights the Biden administration’s support of approaches that are “proven to help students learn,” including a longer school day and year; efforts to reduce chronic absenteeism; tutoring; literacy programs; and “helping schools to lift student achievement, rather than punishing them based on state standardized tests.”

Left undefined was how student achievement would be measured to indicate if improvements could be seen. Though the document expresses support for measures that help students learn, how can we know that the learning loss as a result of Covid-19 is being effectively addressed in the absence of standardized testing data?

The Republican Platform: The full 2024 Republican Party Platform was adopted at the Republican National Convention last month. Chapter 7, “Cultivate Great K-12 Schools Leading to Great Jobs and Great Lives for Young People,” outlines the platform as it pertains to education.

The chapter lists nine aspirations for education under Republican leadership: “Great Principals and Great Teachers,” which touches on schools focusing on “Excellence and Parental Rights” as well as ending teacher tenure in favor of merit pay; “Universal School Choice”“Prepare Students for Jobs and Careers”; “Safe, Secure, and Drug-Free Schools”; “Restore Parental Rights”Knowledge and Skills, Not CRT and Gender Indoctrination”; “Promote Love of Country with Authentic Civics Education”“Freedom to Pray”; and “Return Education to the States.”

Republicans focus on social issues. A major focus of the K-12 education platform is on social issues, including “expos[ing] politicized education models” in favor of career training programs, and “defund[ing] schools that engage in inappropriate political indoctrination of our children using Federal Taxpayer Dollars.” One of the twenty points included in the preamble of the platform is to “cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, radical gender ideology, and other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children.”

Missing from the Republican document is any mention of improving student achievement or overcoming the learning loss students suffered during the Covid-19 pandemic.

A 25 Year Look At Education Issue Handling

Going into an election, one of the important metrics to look at is which party voters have more confidence in to handle issues that are important to them. Data from the latest survey for Winning the Issues (July 23-25) sheds light on which party voters have more confidence in to handle the issue of education, with trending Winning the Issues data allowing us to see voters’ responses in the context of the past. Looking at the long-term and recent past, two conclusions emerge.

1.) Over the last 25 years, Republicans have tied or beat Democrats in education issue handling only three times: February 2001 (+5 Republican Party), January 2002 (even), and April 2022 (even). No Child Left Behind was signed into law on January 8, 2002; the January 2002 survey fielded from the 21st to the 24th.

2.) Recently, the gap in education issue handling has been growing in Democrats’ favor, although not to the same extent seen in the late 2000s. Currently, education issue handling stands at +15 Democratic Party (36-51 Republican Party-Democratic Party), but the margins were as high as the mid-20s and 30s for Democrats at points in 2007-2009. Independents currently prefer Democrats on education 30-47, while parents prefer Democrats 32-50.

In the month prior, voters preferred Democrats by a margin of 10 (37-47). Independents were slightly less strong in their preference for Democrats (26-44), as were parents (39-44). Democrats went from 83% preferring their own party (7-83) to 91% preferring their own party (3-91).

As preference for Democrats on education appears to be growing, it remains to be seen if Republicans can get the policy discussion back to significantly improving student outcomes.

Universal School Choice And International Standing

The full 2024 Republican Party Platform was released and adopted earlier this month at the 2024 Republican National Convention. The platform devotes a chapter to education (“Cultivate Great K-12 Schools Leading to Great Jobs and Great Lives for Young People”), which focuses on issues like parental rights, career preparation, and a call for universal school choice.

The natural next question is what impact voters think universal school choice would have on K-12 education. Data from the latest survey for Winning the Issues (July 23-25), shows that, while voters believe universal school choice will improve educational outcomes for our K-12 students, it a plurality rather than a majority (43-29 believe-do not believe). Parents come closer to a majority (47-30), compared to Democrats (41-27) and especially independents (36-30). Republicans have the highest level of belief, but even then it is only one in two (50-30) for this plank of the party’s educational platform.

Voters were also asked to react to a second statement on education, this one adapted from a speech given at the convention: “In 2016, many people began to doubt the promise of America. … Our standing on the world stage was weak at best. … Our educational system was broken, ranked 30th in the world.”

Overall, 82% believed that the US education system is 30th in the world and that we need to take steps to increase our standing and not fall behind other countries (82-9). This statement had strong, bipartisan levels of belief (84-10 among Republicans; 81-8 among independents; 82-9 among Democrats), and a high level of belief among parents (79-12).

Clearly, voters understand that the US has improvements it could make when it comes to education.

Do Voters Connect Academic Subjects With Real World Skills?

One issue that has been of interest to us is connecting academic subjects with the concrete, usable skills they impart. To what extent do voters connect academic subjects with the real-world skills that students will need as adults?

To begin to answer this question, we asked voters two questions on our latest survey for Winning the Issues (June 14-16). First, how important is it for students graduating high school to understand variables and equations? Then, how important is it for students graduating high school to understand how a mortgage works, including what the monthly payments would be and how long it would take to pay it off? Understanding variables and equations, the foundation of algebra, is arguably foundational for being able to understand the mechanisms of taking out and repaying a loan for a house.

As shown in the table below, majorities of voters said both would be important, but with a gap between the importance of understanding variables/equations (79-18 important-not important) and the importance of understanding a mortgage (92-6). This was similar among parents (78-19 for understanding variables/equations; 93-5 for understanding a mortgage).

The difference in perceived importance is even greater when looking only at those who called each “very important.” Overall, 41% of voters said understanding variables and equations was very important. In contrast, two-thirds (67%) said understanding how a mortgage was very important, a difference of 26 points. The margin was only a little narrower among parents (18 points), with 46% saying that understanding variable/equations was very important and 64% saying that understanding a mortgage was very important.

While understanding both algebra and a mortgage are seen as important, voters clearly place more emphasis on the mortgage, demonstrating the disconnect between the academic subjects typically taught at school and the types of “real-world” skills parents typically say they want for their kids. Last week, we highlighted the recent NPR/Ipsos survey, showing that 40% of parents were concerned about students being prepared for the future. While there are many ways K-12 education could (and should) address this concern, a good first step might be to more closely demonstrate the links between what students are already expected to know when they graduate and the skills they will need as adults.

What Makes Parents Worry About K-12 Eduction?

Previously, we have taken a look at the issue of chronic absenteeism, specifically a study that indicated parents both underestimate their child’s absences and are not all that concerned about the issue either. New data from a recent NPR/Ipsos survey reinforces this conclusion, but it also sheds light on what parents say they are concerned about.

Chronic absenteeism falls low on the list of potential concerns, coming in last (excluding “other”), with 5% of parents reporting being concerned. Other issues liked standardized tests (#11, 9% concerned) and learning loss (#8, 14% concerned) also fell lower in the list of priorities.

What are parents worried about? The top two concerns were bullying (39% concerned) and young people not being prepared for the future (40% concerned). The latter concern is especially shared by those who are not parents. Some 43% of US adults also said that they were concerned about the ability of our K-12 education system to prepare students for the future.

This is a concern that many have shared for some time, though it seems to be growing for parents. Data from a November 2021 survey for Winning the Issues showed only a bare majority of voters overall (52%) were confident in the ability of the US education system to prepare students for the future (52-42 confident-not confident). Parents, however, were more confident (64-32), in contrast to the 40% presently saying this is a concern.

The Cost Of Student Loan Forgiveness In Context

At the end of last month, President Biden announced the latest round of student loan debt cancellation, wiping out $7.7 billion in loans for some 160,000 people. Combined with the other, more targeted student debt cancellation measures Biden has pursued as a piecemeal alternative to the mass cancellation the Supreme Court struck down last year, President Biden has now canceled around $167 billion worth of loans.

To put that number in context, we again took a look at that total cost in the context of funding for other agencies as we did last year for the mass cancellation. For the current purposes, we use the 2024 estimated budget authority for various agencies from the OMB Historical Tables (see table 5.2: Budget Authority by Agency: 1976-2029). So far, the cost of piecemeal student loan forgiveness exceeds the estimated 2024 budget authority for the Departments of Commerce, Energy, Justice, and State combined.

To check our work, we performed the same exercise looking at the estimated outlays for 2024 (see table 4.1: Outlays by Agency, 1962-2029). The conclusion was nearly the same. The cost of Biden’s student loan cancellation to date virtually matches the estimated outlays of the same four agencies combined.

In other words, the cost of loan cancellation to date would have funded four different agencies for this fiscal year. President Biden may not have been able to pursue loan cancellation as he originally envisioned, but the cost of doing so still meets or exceeds the cost of running multiple agencies.

Biden Ad Analysis By Level Of Education

Recently, the Winston Group released its latest video analysis, looking at the Biden campaign’s “For You” ad. The analysis confirmed what we have observed in past surveys and analyses: President Biden has a credibility problem, especially when it comes to the economy, and has made many statements that voters do not believe. This is particularly true when it comes to key voter groups like independents.

Voters were shown the ad and rated it second by second on a 1-9 scale, with 1 being much less favorable to Biden, 5 being neutral, and 9 being much more favorable to Biden. At the end of the ad voters overall rated it at a neutral 4.9. Among voters with less than a bachelor’s degree (4.8), bachelor’s degrees (5.1) and postgraduate education (4.8), reaction was similarly muted. Typically a 6.0 is a good positive response, and 5.5 a reasonable response. In this case none came close to either of those levels.

The chart below shows the statements in the order they appeared in the ad. Looking at the first three, which set the tone for the remainder of the ad, none of them were believable, for voters overall or by level of education completion. This was especially true for the statement that the US has the strongest economy in the world (30-58 believe-do not believe among voters overall).

Not all of the statements in the ad were unbelievable. A majority overall and by education level believed that Joe Biden passed the law that lowered prescription drug prices and caps insulin at $35 a month for seniors (62-28 among voters overall; 60-29 among voters with less than a bachelor’s degree, 67-26 among voters with a bachelor’s degree, and 66-27 among voters with a postgraduate education).

Overall 9 out of 10 statements did not have a majority believing it. That was true for those with less than a bachelor’s degree. For those with a bachelor’s degree it was 5 out of 10, and among those with a postgraduate education, it was 4 out of 10. That lack of believability resulted in an ineffective ad.