Williams: The Temptation To Compromise With Trump On Schools — And Why It Might Kill Education Reform

Williams: The Temptation to Compromise With Trump on Schools — and Why It Might Kill Education Reform

Living in Washington, D.C., the political hub of the country, after last year’s presidential election was a truly strange experience. Despite Donald Trump receiving only 4 percent of the vote in this city, the aftermath of November 9 brought a gloomy atmosphere. Even on sunny days, there is a constant stream of pessimistic news that adds to our anxieties.

These are challenging times for progressives, especially for those of us who were proud supporters of Obama’s education reforms. President Obama was a strong advocate for educational change, focusing on school choice, early education, teacher evaluation, academic standards, and more. Now that Trump has taken office, it is important to ask what lies ahead for progressive education reformers.

In the past, when criticized by others on the left for our support of charter schools and school accountability based on achievement, we could refer to Obama and other reformers as evidence that our views aligned with progressive thinking. However, with Trump’s election and the abandonment of conservative reformers, we are now devoid of ideological support.

Here in Washington, D.C., most of the education policy analysts lean towards the Democratic party, with the few Republicans around being #NeverTrump. However, some staunch conservatives are starting to see a glimmer of hope as the electoral flood recedes. It is beginning to feel like a new season is approaching, where opportunities for progress may arise.

As the possibility of unified Republican control of the federal government becomes more evident, some Republicans are realizing that Trump may have the necessary influence to advance reform priorities. Yet, it is crucial to acknowledge that Trump is not redeemable; his bigotry runs deep.

Following the aftermath of Trump’s presidency, conservative education reformers are reaching out to the remaining members of the education reform movement from the center and left, urging us to put aside our concerns and collaborate with the incoming administration "for the kids."

I spoke with Shavar Jeffries, president of Democrats for Education Reform, a prominent progressive reform organization, about the dynamics of this situation. He explained that although they strongly disagree with the president-elect on many policies, there may be areas of agreement that could benefit the families they advocate for. Therefore, even if it is just one issue out of a hundred, they are committed to ensuring a positive outcome.

Other progressive reformers share this perspective. Ned Stanley, deputy director of the New York Campaign for Achievement Now, stated that educational focus goes beyond conservatism or progressivism. They are driven by the belief that a larger number of students should have access to greater opportunities in their lives. This is a moral question, not necessarily a political one.

And the political question that follows this moral dilemma is relatively straightforward: Why shouldn’t progressive advocates for school choice support a hypothetical proposal from the Trump administration to expand it?

However, "do it for the kids" is a more complex request than it appears. Many of the old bipartisan priorities in education reform are ambitious ideas that invite disagreements when it comes to the details. For example, school choice is not a cure-all solution. Well-designed choice programs can provide opportunities for underprivileged children, but poorly implemented ones with limited oversight often fail to benefit students. While it is impossible to predict Trump’s plans, there is no indication that his team is interested in incorporating oversight and accountability into their school choice proposals.

Okay, not a great example.

However, the main point is clear – even if the Trump administration’s approach to school choice (or school accountability, teacher evaluations, etc.) is not ideal, progressive reformers need to consider the potential benefits and drawbacks. Currently, there is little evidence to suggest that progressive reformers focused on equity and accountability would be interested in Trump’s reform proposals.

It’s not just about standard bipartisan compromises though. Trump also presents a challenge for progressive reformers who support charter schools but also work on issues related to immigration or civil rights. Let’s consider a possible scenario: the Trump administration moves forward with plans to deport undocumented immigrants and restrict Muslim entry into the country. Meanwhile, the Department of Education announces a large federal grants competition that would provide funding to states for expanding charter schools. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that the grants competition includes measures to ensure that underserved children benefit from the program.

Progressive education reformers who want more high-quality school options for these children would be tempted to support such a proposal. However, engaging with this initiative would also imply acceptance of the damage that Trump’s immigration proposals would do to politics, governance, and civil society. Civil rights organizations that support education reform might be confused to see progressive allies denouncing Trump’s immigration policies but assisting his education agenda. Is it worth moving forward with education reform if it means losing the support of existing allies and supporters in the long run?

Jeffries states, "Trump has acted in a variety of bigoted ways. It makes it difficult for people to work with him. Many of his policies, not just his rhetoric, are xenophobic and Islamophobic… He has made misogynistic and racially insensitive remarks, and that makes it hard to work with him."

In other words, this would not be just another bipartisan policy-making process. Trump is different from the norm, as conservative education reformers in DC acknowledged when they declared themselves #NeverTrump. It should not be a surprise if progressive reformers hesitate to support Trump and allow his abhorrent behavior to seep into American politics and governance.

The Song of Solomon verse mentioned earlier continues beyond the quoted pastoral passage, stating that in times of change, "the voice of the turtle is heard in our land." While this may sound strange to us today, the biblical "turtle" actually refers to a turtledove, which symbolizes peace, tolerance, and friendship. As the turbulent Trump era approaches, conservatives hoping to restore harmony in the education reform movement should remember that this moment of rebirth is being heralded by a less graceful creature’s voice.