Testing times ahead for US schools

Bush on the stump in Oregon - which voted Democrat

A George W Bush presidency is likely to see a drive towards more testing in American schools.

During the election campaign, he proposed a $47bn spending plan over 10 years.

His emphasis would be on improving students' performance in maths and science in particular.

Most controversially, he also advocated the use of "vouchers" as a way for parents to get their children out of failing schools.

The issue of testing points up one of the big differences between the American and UK education systems: the autonomy of individual states.

Much of what happens in American schools is decided at state or even district level and federal money accounts for only about 8% of their funding.

As the Bush campaign promised "States will be offered freedom from federal regulation" this is unlikely to change.

But he did say they would be held accountable for their results, advocating mandatory annual testing of children in publicly-funded schools.

Variations

Nineteen states do test pupils against locally-set standards and advocates argue that this provides a useful way of gauging what children have actually learnt.

But the tests vary widely from state to state so comparisons are not possible.

The losing candidate in the presidential election, Al Gore, wanted mandatory testing of schools that would have allowed for this.

Mr Bush said testing - "accountability" as he calls it - had been the cornerstone of school reform in Texas during his governorship, with results published on the internet and parents encouraged to compare schools.

But he would leave the arrangements up to each state.

Vouchers

Mr Bush's scheme would involve the parents of children in schools failing for three years getting $1,500 a year to use for public or private education.

"Instead of continuing to subsidise failure the money would go to the parents," he said during one of the televised election debates.

There are already publicly funded voucher schemes operating in various ways in a number of areas - Maine, Milwaukee, Vermont, Cleveland, and in Florida, where Mr Bush's brother Jeb is governor.

Opponents of the scheme - who include the teachers' unions - say that in practice this would be a system for state subsidy of private schools.

More work for the lawyers

Legal challenges have been mounted on the basis that this can mean crossing the strict dividing line in the US between church and state.

Only this week, an appeals court in Cleveland ruled that the scheme operating there was unconstitutional.

It found that most of the more than 3,800 students benefiting from it were attending schools subsidised by churches - which amounted to government funding of religious education.

But courts in other states have upheld similar schemes, and some constitutional experts suggest they are legally viable provided they do not discriminate between religious and non-religious options but allow parents to decide what to do with the money.

It seems likely that the policy - like the election itself - could end up having to be resolved in the US supreme court.

Different schools

Mr Bush is also a supporter of charter schools, of which there are now more than 2000 across the US.

Charter schools, introduced in 1992, are opened and run by individuals or groups such as parents, teachers or community organisations.

They receive state funding, subject to meeting certain targets, so are free to all pupils.

Opinion is divided on whether they have been as innovative as their supporters claim.

Whatever George W Bush does decide to adopt by way of education policy, he will be up against one big problem highlighted by the election.

The country is divided politically. His Republicans have only a slender majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate is equally split.

So getting anything done could prove difficult and is likely to require compromise and consensus.