Idaho+schools%E2%80%99+leader+shares+thoughts+on+state+of+education+and+school+funding (2025)

Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield is no stranger to change. During the past quarter century, she has served in a variety of positions within the state’s public education sector.

In November 2022, she was elected to her current post overseeing the Gem State’s education system. Prior to assuming this role, her journey in the education field included seven years as a trustee with the Idaho State Board of Education, and 10 years as a Cassia County school board member.

As the state’s top education official, she is tasked with managing and navigating an ever-changing public education landscape. Critchfield recently discussed some of her views on an array of hot button topics and issues, including school choice, the potential dismantling of the Department of Education, advancements in technology, a call by many for a return to the basics that helped define the U.S. public education system, and what she sees looking into the future for Idaho’s school children.

This interview has been edited for content.

Idaho Business Review: What do you see as some of the unique changes you’ve encountered in your quarter century in education?

Debbie Critchfield: I think how we deliver education and how our students have changed are probably the two biggest factors. We were leading up to them, but after COVID it’s really accelerated. We see more families who want more flexibility in the learning day. And we see high school students who expect to have more of a relevant experience.

IBR: A wise educator once wrote, “schools are not about teaching subjects, but rather about teaching children subjects.” Does this statement accurately portray the purpose of education?

DC: It’s very true. Fundamentally, public education is serving as the foundation of an informed, capable society. Every day our schools are providing access to learning opportunities because an educated citizenry is what’s driving or will drive innovation and productivity. And when you have an educated population, those individuals are more likely to participate in our democracy and contribute in meaningful ways. We want students to learn math, to learn to read. But the big picture is we’re really teaching students how to analyze information, how to think critically and form their own opinions. That leads to a functioning society of future business owners and leaders.

IBR: You recently wrote, “Leaders are always in the process of learning and adapting to change.” Were you alluding to the possible shuttering of the Department of Education by the federal government?

DC: When I think about the Department of Ed going away, I say good riddance to the bureaucracy. I’m not worried about our state. I can’t speak for every state that may have a greater dependence or reliance on the federal government. But in Idaho, we’re not looking to the feds to solve our problems. Yes, we get federal funding, but day to day our local boards are already doing that job, and I’m doing that job. And if resources now come in the form of a block grant that positions the state to take care of education, then that’s the right place for us. We’re not going to panic. Last week, I had the opportunity to formally meet Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. I asked how she sees this coming about, and she simply said, “money to states and less bureaucracy.” And I’m not going to argue that.

IBR: Famed economist Milton Friedman once wrote “government should fund education, not control it.” Your thoughts?

DC: A lot of the compliance and a lot of the burdens that we hear about from our districts and charters is the state at times has a tendency to act like the federal government. The real pressure comes from federal regulations that come at a percentage of the funding. So you have 100% of the rules and a fraction of the resources to meet those requirements.

IBR: Funding public schools involves a mix of federal, state and local dollars. But it’s not one big pot of money. Do you often find a need to explain this complicated process?

DC: Absolutely. These bureaucratic rules are a frustrating part of the process. But funding has morphed into all sorts of tentacles that are less about the access because we provide the access. And in some ways, it’s also served as a vehicle for executive orders or social issues. If you get the money, then you have to implement X, Y or Z. In my opinion, this oversteps state laws you may have with some of those issues. We get criticized a lot that we’re not spending enough money on students. For me, it’s how we are aligning the dollars with our priorities, and how we are maximizing the appropriation from the legislature.

IBR: Gov. Brad Little recently singed House Bill 93, Idaho’s first private school choice program. This law will likely never make all parties happy, and some argue this legislation will financially deplete Idaho’s public education system. What are your initial thoughts?

DC: Well, I agree with strong educational freedom in Idaho. That existed before this bill was signed. This money is not coming out of the public schools budget. There’s no reduction to the budget as a line item. Now, you can say that overall state revenue is reduced, but it isn’t directly coming out. The concern may be $50 million today, what does that look like down the road? As with any new program it should be carefully watched and monitored. Tomorrow, I believe our public schools and charters will still be teaching kids, still doing their job.

IBR: Regarding choice, is it fair to say that a one-size-fits-all system doesn’t work?

DC: Absolutely. I don’t know of anyone that’s argued that. I think the first place we start is that parents know they’re the expert on their child and meeting their needs. I think that’s one of the things that we can celebrate and champion in Idaho is that we’ve had a variety of ways to meet those needs. Indeed, it is not one-size-fits-all.

IBR: Many people believe more money is always the answer. But there is no direct correlation between dollars spent and classroom results. Is this a misunderstood concept?

DC: We get criticized a lot that we’re not spending enough money on students. But I think what Idaho is showing is that high quality education can happen without excessive spending. We must align the dollars with our priorities. Maximizing the appropriation from the Legislature is a goal of mine. Idaho students are performing among the top 10 in the nation on assessments like NAEP. In fact, our eighth-grade scores in reading and math were outperforming the national average.

IBR: Speaking of NAEP (National Assessment Education Progress), the recent report card showed Louisiana as the only state to recover its pre-pandemic reading scores, up six points since 2019. The state credited the bump to a return to teaching the basics. Do we need a stronger emphasis on reading comprehension and balanced literacy in Idaho?

DC: Yeah, you just stole my talking points. Back to basics has been our theme and message the last two years, particularly with phonics. When I travel the state and visit with school leaders, one of the first things I ask is if their books are based in phonics. We confidently know that that’s the most effective way to teach kids how to read. In the last two years, we’ve had an 8% growth for our third graders in reading. And I’m going to directly attribute that to our focus on phonics. Looking back 20 years, I wonder why we got away from it.

IBR: Technology in the classroom can be a double-edged sword. It works, it helps, but can it also hinder the learning process?

DC: Technology is a component of everything we do, but there is no question phones have become a distraction to learning. However, having students become critical consumers of technology is not something I believe education has made a standard practice. Technology is a tool that must add value to the lesson. With the advancements and availability of [artificial intelligence], we just throw it out there and talk about it now. When in real time we’re all still learning and developing. We want students to use it in a way that is responsible.

IBR: In terms of the business community, you recently mentioned proposed legislation for a digital learning certificate as a graduation requirement. Talk about that.

DC: Ultimately, the Legislature puts the final seal of approval on graduation requirements. This could include a digital literacy class. We’re looking at what those standards could be relating to the business world and all industries. Technology is not going away. It’s embedded in ways that the expectation is going to be that our students show up in all of their professions with a level of proficiency.

IBR: In the next five years, where do you hope to see education in Idaho?

DC: I’ve got a couple of goals. For our earliest learners, we want them to be reading by third grade and to be on grade level for math. Those are two of the most important building blocks, getting back to basics. And we want to prepare our kids for what’s next. I have a real focus on that preparation piece. We want pathways that align with the options and opportunities that are in our state. It is not a one-size-fits-all when you graduate. I want that diploma to mean more than something that says I sat at a desk for 12 years. We want our students to feel as though they have the skills and the preparation to go pursue whatever their interest or their abilities. I am less set on what they do and very focused on how we get them to where they want to be. We don’t want them to be held back because they didn’t get the preparation that they need.