ABSTRACT
US equity policy in education can be framed in two lights. Equity among students may be best helped by relatively uniform government standards evenly applied across districts, schools and classrooms. In theory, this will ensure that teachers and students in all classrooms will meet the same standards no matter their backgrounds, and no matter the local funding or staffing situation. An unusual bipartisan consensus around this approach drove US education policy in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001. Alternatively, if teachers and schools are given liberty from uniform standards and are allowed to tailor instruction to the distinct needs of their very diverse student populations — diverse in family background, income and ethnicity — they could ensure equitable outcomes if not identical education. School organisations, teachers’ unions, partisans and parents had long bristled at NCLB’s desire for uniformity, and they sought a return to a more co-operative, governance-based approach to schooling. This has become the theory of action for NCLB’s successor, the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA). Nevertheless, states have been hesitant to use this freedom, and it is an open question whether disadvantaged students can benefit from the shift to governance. To the extent that governance allows dozens or hundreds of approaches to meeting standards, it can transform American education, empower teachers and improve school–family connections. To the extent that it allows patchwork educational standards, equity will suffer. If the states set unequal finish lines in school, no amount of training will enable all students to compete as productive, thoughtful citizens. ESSA seems to tilt towards the former: value non-academic indicators, incorporate stakeholders, count the costs, but above all, hold fast to the faith that all students can meet high standards.
