Forgotten Leaders: Reviving State Leadership in American Education Reform
In Education Gadfly’s “Help Wanted: Ed-Reform Governors Needed (Again),” Fordham Institute President Chester E. Finn, Jr. reflects on the golden era of education reform in the 1980s and 1990s, when governors—both Republican and Democrat—drove significant K–12 improvements through bipartisan collaboration. Leaders like Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Bill Clinton (D-AR), and others championed higher standards and, in some cases, school choice initiatives, often working through organizations like the National Governors Association (NGA) to shape national policy. Their efforts led to landmark initiatives like the Charlottesville Summit, Goals 2000, and the expansion of charter schools and vouchers.
Today, however, education reform has lost momentum. Partisan divides and cultural battles have overshadowed substantive policy debates, and the NGA’s focus on education has become sporadic. While recent governors like Glenn Youngkin (R-VA) and Jared Polis (D-CO) have pushed for reforms, the broader trend shows a retreat from the bold, sustained leadership that once defined state-level education policy.
The decline of gubernatorial leadership in education is troubling. The federal government’s growing influence—through No Child Left Behind (NCLB), Common Core, and ESSA—has diluted state autonomy and stifled innovation. The best reforms historically came from governors who understood local needs and implemented solutions without federal overreach, and they were able to do so without significant red tape. More experimental approaches, like merit pay, were piloted only when states competed to improve, rather than waiting for Washington’s directives.
Some of us in education have begun to advocate for a return to this model: empowering governors to dismantle bureaucratic obstacles and restore accountability in schools. The NGA, while imperfect, could be a valuable forum for sharing successful state-based reforms, that is, if governors prioritize education over short-term political wins.
Teachers might see the NGA as distant from classroom realities, but its influence trickles down to us, inevitably. When governors collaborate on teacher issues like licensure reforms, those policies directly impact educators. The NGA also shapes national conversations—if it pushes for higher standards or better career-technical education, states often follow. Teachers should be motivated for this reason to engage with state leaders for reforms that are practical, and not just political.
If governors once transformed education through bold, bipartisan leadership, what will it take to revive that spirit today, and who will step up to lead the charge? Should education reform return to the states, and is federal oversight still necessary?