This Report was written by Kris Nordstrom, who works for the North Carolina Justice Center. He previously was a research analyst for the North Carolina General Assembly. The report tells the story of a state that was once the envy of the South for its education policies, but is now in rapid decline, copying failed policies from other states,
PRESS RELEASE and SUMMARY
By Kris Nordstrom
Contracting Analyst, Education & Law Project
North Carolina was once viewed as the shining light for progressive education policy in the South. State leaders—often with the support of the business community—were able to develop bipartisan support for public schools, and implement popular, effective programs. North Carolina was among the first states to explicitly monitor the performance of student subgroups in an effort to address racial achievement gaps. The state made great strides to professionalizing the teaching force, bringing the state’s average teacher salary nearly up to the national average even as the state was forced to hire many novice teachers to keep pace with enrollment increases. In addition, North Carolina focused on developing and retaining its teaching force by investing in teacher scholarship programs and mentoring programs for beginning teachers.
North Carolina innovated at all ends of the education spectrum. The state was one of the first in the nation to create a statewide pre-kindergarten program with rigorous quality standards. At the secondary level, North Carolina was at the forefront of dual credit programs for high school students, and the Learn & Earn model (now known as Cooperative Innovative High Schools) became a national model, allowing students to graduate with both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree in five years. Students graduating from North Carolina public schools could enroll in the state’s admired, low-cost community college system or its strong university system, most notably UNC Chapel Hill. For much of the 1990s through early 2000s, policymakers in other states often looked to North Carolina’s public schools as an example of sound, thoughtful policy aiming to broadly uplift student performance.
Unfortunately, over the past seven years, North Carolina has lost its reputation for educational excellence. Since the Republican takeover of the General Assembly following the 2010 election, the state has become more infamous for bitter partisanship and divisiveness, as reflected in education policies. Lawmakers have passed a number of controversial, partisan measures, rapidly expanding school choice, cutting school resources, and eliminating job protections for teachers.
Less discussed, however, has been degradation in the quality of North Carolina’s education policies. General Assembly leadership has focused on replicating a number of education initiatives from other states, most lacking any research-based evidence of delivering successful results to students. The General Assembly has compounded the problems though by consistently delivering exceptionally poorly-crafted versions of these initiatives.
Sadly, these controversial, poorly-executed efforts have failed to deliver positive results for North Carolina’s students. Performance in our schools has suffered, particularly for the state’s low-income and minority children.
So how did we get here? How is it affecting our students?
Lack of transparency leads to poor legislation
The past seven years of education policy have been dominated by a series of not just bad policies, but bad policies that are incredibly poorly crafted. This report provides a review of the major education initiatives of this seven-year period. In every case, the major initiatives are both:
Based on very questionable evidence; and
Crafted haphazardly, ignoring best practices or lessons learned from other states.
These problems almost certainly stem from the General Assembly’s approach to policymaking. Over the past seven years, almost all major education initiatives were moved through the legislature in a way to avoid debate and outside input. At the same time, the General Assembly has abandoned its oversight responsibilities and avoided public input from education stakeholders. The net result has been stagnant student performance, and increased achievement gaps for minority and low-income students.
One commonality of nearly all of the initiatives highlighted in this report is that they were folded into omnibus budget bills, rather than moved through a deliberative committee process. Including major initiatives in the budget, rather than as stand-alone bills, is problematic for three reasons:
Stand-alone bills are required to be debated in at least one committee prior to being heard on the floor. Committee hearings allow public debate and bill modifications from General Assembly members with subject-area knowledge, and can permit public input from stakeholders and other outside experts.
Stand-alone bills require majority of support to become law. While the budget bill also requires majority support to become law, there is great pressure on members to vote for a budget bill, particularly one crafted by their own party. Budget bills are filled with hundreds of policy provisions. As a result, members might vote for controversial programs that are incorporated into the budget that they would not support if presented as a standalone vote.
Budget bills are very large, and members are often provided limited time to review the lengthy documents. For example, the 2017 budget bill was made public just before midnight on June 19 and presented on the Senate floor for debate and vote by 4 PM on June 20. As a result, members are unable to adequately review programs and craft amendments that could improve program delivery.
Compounding matters, the General Assembly has effectively dismantled the Joint Legislative Education Oversight Committee (Ed Oversight), while joint meetings of the House and Senate Education Appropriation subcommittees (Ed Appropriations) are becoming increasingly rare. In the past, these two committees were integral to the creation and oversight of new initiatives.
From its formation in 1990 through 2015, Ed Oversight regularly met during the legislative interim to recommend ways to improve education in the state. However, the committee met just once in the 2015-16 interim, and not at all during the 2016-17 interim.
Similarly, Ed Appropriations—which is responsible for crafting the state budget for public schools, the community college system, and state universities—is meeting less often. Historically, Ed Appropriations meetings during long sessions have been the venue through which General Assembly members undertake detailed, line-item reviews of each state agency’s budget.
2017 marked the first time in known history that Ed Appropriations meetings featured zero in-depth presentations of K-12 funding issues. The General Assembly’s education leaders stood out for their lack of effort. Every other budget subcommittee received detailed presentations covering all, or nearly all, agency budgets.
North Carolina’s teachers, Department of Public Instruction employees, and the academic community are an incredibly valuable resource that should be drawn upon to strengthen our state educational policy. Instead, these voices have increasingly been ignored. As shown below, the net result has been a series of poorly-crafted policies that are harming North Carolina’s children.

If North Carolina has a problem with bad policy ideas, perhaps that is because the state policy ideas have been paid for by the not so subtle flow of money to the Hunt Institute in Durham and affiliated operations, all to promote bad ideas from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, $15,584,781 at minimum. The Hunt/Gates agenda includes mischief in extends to invention of a bizarre definition of “teacher quality” and marketing the idea that higher standards and more tests will address almost every problem.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike
“Since the Republican takeover of the General Assembly following the 2010 election”
That should be corrected to “since the ed reform takeover of the general assembly”
This is no longer partisan. It’s defined only by membership in the “ed reform movement”. That’s it’s all conservative policy is ALSO true, but ed reform is an echo chamber. Republican, Democrat, doesn’t matter. They’re all exactly the same.
If there’s two “sides” they break out not along partisan lines but along “privatizers” and “public school supporters”. I suppose there could theoretically be public school supporters even among conservatives at some point.
LikeLike
Well said. Thank you.
LikeLike
You say, “North Carolina innovated at all ends of the education spectrum. The state was one of the first in the nation to create a statewide pre-kindergarten program with rigorous quality standards. At the secondary level, North Carolina was at the forefront of dual credit programs for high school students, and the Learn & Earn model (now known as Cooperative Innovative High Schools) became a national model, allowing students to graduate with both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree in five years. Students graduating from North Carolina public schools could enroll in the state’s admired, low-cost community college system or its strong university system, most notably UNC Chapel Hill. For much of the 1990s through early 2000s, policymakers in other states often looked to North Carolina’s public schools as an example of sound, thoughtful policy aiming to broadly uplift student performance.”
This is exactly the stuff I write against. Pre-K is NOT needed. Look at Finland. They do not start to educate their young until age 7 and not 3 or 4. Plus pre-school gains go away by 3rd grade. So, why push it so hard?
Dual-credit enrollment is also not needed. What is the rush? Only 4% of the jobs will require an Associate’s degree. If there was a great need for this then maybe but only maybe.
Most jobs that an Associate’s degree will get you will not get you into the Middle Class, which starts at $40k a year. So, why get it and especially why rush to get it? Why is this a good policy for any state to have? We have had dual enrollment here in Texas, too. My daughter took two college courses while still in high school that she did not need, as it turned out, for her Bachelor’s degree.
Dual enrollment actually hurts the kids general knowledge base. One can substitute a college course in American History for a high school course in it. This sounds good but it is not. Most courses K-14 are survey courses and are therefore likely to be different. So, someone with a 2-year degree will take only one year of American History instead of two. You have just shortchanged our kids and the knowledge. When we add in all of the courses that substitute we really hurt them. You have actually cheapened both high school diploma and the Associate’s degree.
I am not an advocate of charter schools but I am also not a advocate for progressive schools either.
AP courses should be done away with, too. If you want to take college courses wait for college to take them!!!
You wrote a book about a century of failed progressive education reforms published in the year 2000, if memory serves me. I am surprised that you push their agenda.
Insofar as, legislation goes: it seems to be norm that national legislation, at least, is drafted in private. From the USAPATRIOT ACT to Obamacare, which were rammed down our throats, secrecy seems to be the name of the game nowadays, unfortunately.
LikeLike
schiltz3, I think it’s important to note that North Carolina’s Learn & Earn program was targeted at first-time college goers. The program is designed to introduce these students to the college experience, provide two years of free tuition/credit, with the idea that they will then go on to complete a four-year degree. What you’re criticizing is not the model mentioned in my report.
LikeLike
S3: I agree that dual credit is a bad idea. I disagree that pre-k is a bad idea. All this is really beside the point this author is making. I witnessed the excellence of North Carolina public Ed. What has happened there is criminal, I assure you
LikeLike
The usefulness of any program probably depends on who uses it. Pre-K for low income kids may very well give them access to resources they would otherwise not have access to. To say all gains disappear by 3rd grade probably means that test score differences are no longer discernible. If that is your only measure of success, than you are doomed to create programs that warp what education should be, especially if they are limited to a couple of years. I don’t know about any of you, but it took me a lot longer than the pre-K years to raise my children. Why would we think that a few years support would erase inequities? I would love to see quality childcare programs that could take the place of some pre-K programs, but that is even less likely to happen. Everyone knows that the only people deserving of quality care are those who have the resources to pay for it. Doesn’t anyone “get” the cost to society when we set up half our population for a subsistence lifestyle? Does no one see the benefit in doing all we can to give a chance at a decent life to all children? We are going to pay for our indifference one way or another. It really does take a village to raise a child.
LikeLike
Did you mean that as a reply to what I said? I am in favor of pre k. My daughter had a wonderful pre k experience.
LikeLike
Well, the NC ISD has its first school:
School board surrenders Southside-Ashpole [to NC ISD] –
http://www.robesonian.com/news/106439/school-board-surrenders-southside-ashpole
This is an article from their local newspaper, which has been very vocally supportive of the ISD for months.
Interesting how Dr. Hall changed the narrative just like he had previously said he wanted to do… but he did not make it about something other than power and control after he had previously complained that we needed to “transcend” power struggles. His new narrative became “The people don’t want the school board to close this school.” AKA, shifting blame to the (admittedly seemingly unpopular school board) and away from the ISD itself and acting like it was originally the will of the people, who have now overcome the school board to rescue this school.
Here we go…
LikeLike
Also, this is the news this week:
Lawmakers: No class size fix this week
http://www.wral.com/lawmakers-no-class-size-fix-this-week/17245336/
Partisan gerrymandering: Republican map of North Carolina ruled illegal
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/09/north-carolina-republican-gerrymandering-judges-rule-illegal
(Oh, look we’ve now made international news…)
LikeLike