American kids take 112 standardized tests K-12. Finland gives one. Our school calendar is a relic of 19th-century farming. We rebuild around how children actually learn.
We're a policy platform with 50 researched positions on every major issue. This page breaks down our education reform plan — but there's much more to explore.
The United States spends more per student on K-12 education than nearly any other country — yet ranks 25th in math, 24th in reading, and produces outcomes that lag far behind nations spending less. The problem is not money alone. It is a system built around the wrong priorities.
Over-testing: American students take an average of 112 standardized tests between kindergarten and 12th grade — a number that has no parallel in any high-performing education system. Finland, which consistently ranks among the top education systems in the world, administers one standardized test, at age 16. The obsession with testing has transformed American schools into test-preparation factories, narrowing curricula to focus on the subjects and skills that appear on exams while squeezing out art, music, physical education, science experiments, and the kind of deep project-based learning that actually builds critical thinking.
The agrarian calendar: The American school year of approximately 180 days was designed for a 19th-century farming economy where children were needed in the fields during summer. That economy no longer exists, but the calendar persists. Japan's school year is 243 days. Germany's is 200. South Korea's is 220. The shorter American year creates "summer slide" — months of learning loss, disproportionately affecting low-income students who lack access to enrichment programs during the break.
Teacher pay and burnout: The average starting teacher salary in the United States is approximately $42,000. The national average across all experience levels is roughly $65,000. In Finland and Singapore — countries with the best educational outcomes — teachers are paid comparably to engineers and doctors, and teaching programs are among the most selective in higher education. In the US, 50% of new teachers leave the profession within five years, citing low pay, poor working conditions, and lack of professional autonomy. The teacher turnover rate of 8% annually costs the system an estimated $7 billion per year.
Unequal funding: Approximately 47% of school funding comes from local property taxes — creating a system where the quality of a child's education depends on the wealth of their neighborhood. This is the single most important structural failure in American education, and it is addressed directly in the Common Good education plan.
The argument that public schools are fundamentally broken is used to justify diverting public money to private schools through vouchers. But the evidence tells a different story: the problem is not public education — it is how America funds public education.
The property tax funding model creates a two-tier system by design. A student in a wealthy suburb of Connecticut may attend a school that spends $25,000 per student per year — with small class sizes, modern facilities, well-paid teachers, and a full range of arts, sports, and enrichment programs. A student in a low-income district in Mississippi may attend a school spending $8,000 per student — with crumbling infrastructure, overcrowded classrooms, underpaid teachers, and no art or music program. Same country. Same grade. Wildly different educations.
Voucher programs make this problem worse, not better. When public money follows a student to a private school, the public school loses funding without a proportional decrease in fixed costs. Large-scale studies in Louisiana, Indiana, and Ohio found that students using vouchers performed the same as or worse than peers who remained in public schools. Meanwhile, private schools receiving voucher money are often exempt from the accountability standards applied to public schools — no standardized testing requirements, no special education mandates, no transparency in how funds are spent.
The evidence on charter schools is mixed. Some charter school networks — particularly those in urban areas with strong accountability — show meaningful gains for students. Others show no improvement or negative outcomes. What the research consistently shows is that the single biggest predictor of educational outcomes is not whether a school is public, charter, or private — it is funding per student and teacher quality.
The funding gap is the opportunity gap. Close the funding gap and you close the achievement gap. That is the central insight of the Common Good education plan — and it is backed by decades of research showing that increased, equalized funding produces better outcomes for all students, particularly those from low-income families.
The Common Good plan rebuilds American education around how children actually learn — not how they are most easily tested. It is modeled on the systems that produce the best outcomes in the world and funded through progressive taxation.
The plan addresses every structural failure in the current system: testing, funding, teacher quality, school design, and early childhood education.
For the complete plan with legislative detail, cost projections, and sourcing, see the full education issue page.
The United States spends among the most per student of any country in the world — yet ranks in the middle of the pack on every international assessment. The difference is not resources. It is how those resources are allocated, how teachers are trained and paid, and how learning is measured.
| Country | PISA Math | School Days | Teacher Salary | Teacher Training | Testing Approach |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 465 | 180 | $65K avg | 4 yrs (BA) | 112 tests K-12 |
| Finland | 484 | 190 | $75K avg | 5 yrs (MA req.) | 1 test (age 16) |
| Japan | 536 | 243 | $70K avg | 4 yrs + exam | Minimal |
| South Korea | 527 | 220 | $68K avg | 4 yrs + exam | 1 major (CSAT) |
| Singapore | 575 | 200 | $80K avg | 4 yrs (selective) | Diagnostic only |
| Canada | 497 | 190 | $72K avg | 5 yrs (many) | Provincial, low-stakes |
The countries that outperform the United States share several common features: they test less, they pay teachers more, they require more rigorous teacher training, they have longer school years, and they fund schools equitably rather than through local property taxes. Not one high-performing country relies on the level of standardized testing that the US uses. Not one underpays its teachers relative to other professions. The path to better outcomes is not a mystery — it is a choice.
For a detailed side-by-side comparison of party positions on education, see the Compare Parties page.
Finland consistently ranks among the top education systems in the world — with higher reading scores, stronger math performance, and better overall outcomes than the United States. It achieves this with less testing, less homework, more play, and a fundamentally different philosophy of what education is for.
No standardized tests until age 16. Finnish students take one standardized test — the National Matriculation Exam — at the end of upper secondary school (age 16-18). Before that, all assessment is done by classroom teachers using professional judgment. There are no bubble sheets, no high-stakes exams tied to school funding, and no state-mandated testing regime. Teachers assess students through observation, projects, and individualized feedback.
Highly trained, well-paid teachers. Every teacher in Finland must hold a master's degree. Teaching programs are among the most selective in Finnish higher education — accepting fewer than 10% of applicants. Teachers are paid well (comparable to engineers), given significant professional autonomy, and treated as experts. In the US, teaching is often a fallback profession. In Finland, it is one of the most respected careers in the country.
Play-based learning in early years. Finnish children do not start formal academic instruction until age 7. Before that, education is play-based — focused on socialization, motor skills, creativity, and exploration. The research supports this: children who begin formal academics later show no long-term disadvantage and often show better social-emotional outcomes than children who begin academic instruction at ages 4-5.
No homework until high school. Finnish students in elementary and middle school receive little to no homework. The Finnish philosophy holds that children learn best when they have time for unstructured play, family, and rest — not when every evening is consumed by worksheets. International research on homework is consistent with this view: homework has minimal academic benefit in elementary school and modest benefits in middle school.
A trust-based system. The Finnish system is built on trust: trust in teachers to assess students, trust in schools to design curricula, and trust in children to learn at their own pace. The US system is built on distrust: distrust of teachers (hence constant testing), distrust of schools (hence rigid standards), and distrust of children (hence zero-tolerance discipline). The outcomes speak for themselves. For more on what we can learn from Finland and other top-performing systems, see the full education issue page.
The education reform debate in the United States has been dominated by myths that protect the status quo and divert attention from the structural changes that would actually improve outcomes. Here are the four most persistent myths — and what the evidence actually shows.
Myth: "More testing improves outcomes."
Reality: The United States tests more than any other wealthy country — 112 standardized tests between K and 12th grade — and ranks 25th in math and 24th in reading. Finland gives one test and ranks in the top 10. Japan gives minimal standardized tests and ranks in the top 5. There is no evidence — zero — that increasing the volume of standardized testing improves educational outcomes. What testing does is narrow curricula, demoralize teachers, stress students, and create a multi-billion-dollar testing industry that profits from the very problem it claims to solve.
Myth: "School choice fixes everything."
Reality: Large-scale voucher studies consistently show that students who use vouchers to attend private schools perform the same as or worse than peers who remain in public schools. Charter school results are mixed — some networks show gains, many do not. What the evidence consistently shows is that the biggest predictor of outcomes is funding per student and teacher quality — not whether a school is public, charter, or private. School choice without equalized funding simply allows wealthier families to exit public schools while draining resources from the schools that serve everyone else. See the education policy for the full evidence review.
Myth: "Teachers are the problem."
Reality: Teachers are not the problem — they are the most under-resourced solution. American teachers work more hours, receive less support, earn less money, and are given less professional autonomy than teachers in any high-performing education system. The average starting salary of $42,000 is lower than the starting salary for most other professions requiring a four-year degree. Fifty percent leave within five years. The countries with the best educational outcomes — Finland, Singapore, South Korea — treat teaching as one of the most important professions in society: competitive pay, rigorous training, high status, and genuine trust in professional judgment. Blaming teachers for the failures of an underfunded, over-tested, inequitably funded system is not reform — it is scapegoating.
Myth: "Throwing money at schools doesn't work."
Reality: Decades of research — including landmark studies by Jackson, Johnson, and Persico (2016) — show that increased per-pupil spending produces meaningful improvements in educational outcomes, particularly for students from low-income families. Court-ordered funding increases in states like New Jersey and Massachusetts produced dramatic gains in test scores, graduation rates, and college enrollment. The "money doesn't matter" argument was always contradicted by the behavior of wealthy families, who spend enormous sums on private schools, tutors, and enrichment programs — because they know money matters. It matters for their children. It matters for every child. The full education plan details how equalized funding would be implemented and financed.
Click any question to expand the answer.
Have a question not answered here? Read the full education issue page or visit our site-wide FAQ.
Check back soon for policy analysis of education news.
112 standardized tests. 47% of funding from property taxes. 50% of new teachers leave within 5 years. Finland solved this. Singapore solved this. Canada solved this. Read the full plan and see how we do the same.