Side-by-side analysis of what each approach would mean for your kids' schools, their teachers, and whether every child gets a fair shot at a quality education.
We're a policy platform with 50 researched positions on every major issue. This page compares education reform approaches across parties — but there's much more to explore.
The United States spends more per student on K-12 education than nearly every other developed nation — approximately $16,080 per pupil per year. And yet, American students rank 36th in math, 13th in reading, and 18th in science among OECD countries. The achievement gap between wealthy and poor students is wider in the US than in almost any peer nation. One in three 4th graders cannot read at a basic level. Teacher shortages have reached crisis proportions in 44 states. The system is not working — and the debate over how to fix it has been stuck in the same partisan trenches for decades.
The education debate in America has been reduced to a false binary: more money for public schools versus school choice and vouchers. This framing ignores the deeper structural problems: a funding system that ties school quality to neighborhood wealth, a testing regime that measures compliance rather than learning, teacher compensation that drives talented people out of the profession, and a one-size-fits-all model that ignores how students actually learn. The question isn't whether public schools should exist — it's how to make them work for every student.
This page compares three approaches to education reform: the Democratic approach, the Republican approach, and the Common Good Party's structural redesign of American education.
How the three approaches stack up on the issues that matter most to students, parents, and teachers.
| Issue | Democrats | Republicans | Common Good |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standardized testing | Reduce but maintain accountability | State-level choice | Replace with portfolio assessment |
| School funding | Increase federal Title I funding | Local control, block grants | Weighted formula, equity-based |
| Teacher pay | Increase (no national minimum) | Merit-based, local decision | $60K minimum, professional scale |
| School choice / vouchers | Oppose vouchers, support charters | Universal vouchers, ESAs | Oppose vouchers, invest in public |
| Class size | Support reduction (inconsistent) | Local decision | Cap at 18 (K-3), 22 (4-12) |
| School calendar | Status quo (180 days) | Local decision | 200 days, redesigned calendar |
| Pre-K | Universal Pre-K (proposed) | Private market, tax credits | Universal Pre-K, ages 3-4 |
| Curriculum | National standards (Common Core) | Parental rights, local control | Evidence-based, critical thinking focus |
| Special education | Increase IDEA funding | Flexibility, vouchers for SPED | Fully fund IDEA at 40% promise |
| Higher ed pathway | Free community college (stalled) | Market-based, reduce regulation | College + trades equal, free CC |
Sources: National Center for Education Statistics, OECD PISA, Economic Policy Institute, National Education Association, party platform documents. See the compact comparison view for a quick side-by-side summary.
The Democratic approach to education centers on increasing federal funding, strengthening public schools, and expanding access. Key proposals include universal Pre-K, tripling Title I funding for high-poverty schools, increasing teacher pay through federal grants, making community college free, expanding Pell Grants, and providing student debt relief. Democrats generally support Common Core or similar national standards, oppose voucher programs, and have been mixed on charter schools (supporting some while pushing for greater oversight). Democrats also support reducing standardized testing burden while maintaining some accountability framework.
Democrats are correct that public education is a public good that requires public investment. Title I funding does help high-poverty schools, and increasing it would make a real difference. Universal Pre-K has overwhelming evidence behind it: children who attend quality pre-school programs are more likely to graduate high school, attend college, and earn higher wages as adults. The Democratic defense of public schools against defunding through voucher programs is supported by the evidence — public schools serve 90% of American students and must be the foundation of any serious education system.
More money for the same system does not fix the system. The United States already spends more per student than nearly every country that outperforms us. The problem is not just funding levels — it's how schools are designed. Democrats have been unable or unwilling to challenge the standardized testing regime, despite overwhelming evidence that it narrows curricula and fails to improve outcomes. They have not addressed the fundamental inequity of property-tax-based school funding at a structural level. And free community college, while valuable, was dropped from the Build Back Better agenda when corporate donors pushed back. The Democratic approach adds more resources to a broken design rather than redesigning the system.
For more on education policy, see the education deep-dive explainer.
The Republican approach to education emphasizes parental choice, local control, and market competition. Key proposals include universal school vouchers and Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) that allow families to use public education funds for private schools, homeschooling, or tutoring. They support eliminating or dramatically reducing the federal Department of Education, returning curriculum decisions to parents and local school boards, merit-based teacher pay rather than seniority-based scales, and opposing national standards like Common Core. Republicans have made "parental rights" in curriculum — including decisions about what books, topics, and materials are available — a central issue.
Republicans are correct that parents should have a meaningful voice in their children's education. The one-size-fits-all model of American education does not serve every student well. Local flexibility can allow schools to adapt to community needs. The critique of educational bureaucracy — where administrative spending has grown far faster than instructional spending — is valid. And merit-based teacher evaluation, when well-designed, can identify and reward excellent teaching while supporting improvement where it's needed.
School vouchers do not improve educational outcomes — the research is clear on this. Large-scale studies in Louisiana, Indiana, Ohio, and D.C. found that voucher students performed the same as or worse than their public school peers. Meanwhile, vouchers divert funding from the public schools that serve the vast majority of students. In Arizona's universal voucher program, 75% of recipients were already in private schools, and the program cost $900 million more than projected in its first year.
Eliminating the Department of Education would remove civil rights enforcement, special education protections, and financial aid administration — functions that states have neither the capacity nor the track record to handle equitably. "Local control" of curriculum, when used to ban books, remove historical topics, and restrict what teachers can teach, is not educational freedom — it is educational censorship. The Republican approach treats education as a consumer product rather than a public good, and the evidence shows that market-based approaches produce segregation by income, race, and disability rather than innovation.
For a deeper analysis of school choice evidence, see our education reform explainer.
The Common Good Party proposes a fundamental redesign of American education based on what actually works. Our plan replaces high-stakes standardized testing with comprehensive portfolio-based assessment that measures real learning. School funding is restructured through a weighted student formula that provides equitable resources regardless of zip code. Teachers receive a $60,000 national minimum salary with a professional pay scale, loan forgiveness, and mentorship programs. Class sizes are capped at 18 for grades K-3 and 22 for grades 4-12. The school year is extended to 200 days with a redesigned calendar that reduces summer learning loss. Universal Pre-K is available for all 3- and 4-year-olds. Curriculum emphasizes critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity alongside core academics. IDEA is fully funded at the promised 40% level. And college and trade pathways receive equal investment, respect, and institutional support.
Unlike the Democratic approach, the CGP plan doesn't just add money to a broken system — it redesigns the system. Replacing standardized testing changes what and how teachers teach. Equity-based funding breaks the link between zip code and school quality. Professional teacher pay transforms who enters and stays in the profession. Unlike the Republican approach, we don't treat education as a market — we treat it as the most important public investment a society can make. The CGP plan learns from the countries that are actually succeeding at education and applies those lessons to the American context.
Finland eliminated standardized testing, invested in teacher quality, and equalized school funding — and went from mediocre outcomes to the top of the world in one generation. Singapore pays teachers professional salaries and provides extensive training, attracting top university graduates into the profession. Japan's extended school year and emphasis on depth over breadth produces students who consistently outperform American peers. Canada, which has equity-based funding and strong teacher unions, outperforms the US on every international assessment while spending less per student.
The evidence is overwhelming: the countries that invest in teacher quality, equalize funding, reduce testing, and extend learning time produce the best results. The United States has done none of these things at scale. The CGP plan does all of them.
Education policy affects every family. Here's what the Common Good education reform plan would look like for real families in different situations.
Education reform connects to affordability, childcare, and workforce development. See how the CGP addresses all 50 issues.
Explore the Full PlatformCommon questions about education reform and how the three approaches compare.
Have a question not answered here? Read the full education reform explainer or visit our site-wide FAQ.
Dive deeper into education reform and related policy.
The countries that invest in teachers, equalize funding, and rethink assessment produce the best results. We can do the same. Read the plan and join the movement.
Paid for by The Common Good Party (thecommongoodparty.com) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.