New state school superintendent speaks on education policies – KFYR-TV

Report on North Dakota’s Educational Policy and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: Leadership and Commitment to Sustainable Development

Incoming State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Levi Bachmeier, outlined his educational policy priorities, demonstrating a strong alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). This report analyzes his initial statements following his appointment to succeed Kirsten Baesler.

Policy on Educational Funding and Equity: Upholding SDG 4 and SDG 10

Mr. Bachmeier’s remarks centered on ensuring equitable access to quality education for all students, a core principle of SDG 4. His position on a recently vetoed bill concerning educational savings accounts (ESAs) highlights a commitment to reducing educational disparities, directly addressing SDG 10.

• Support for Veto: The Superintendent-designate concurred with the governor’s veto of the ESA bill, citing concerns that it was too narrow in scope.
• Critique of Inequitable Policy: He articulated a clear principle for the use of public funds, stating, “It’s ‘is the policy promoting equal and fair choice for all?’ or is it benefiting a small subset of the population?” This position directly supports SDG 10.2, which aims to promote the inclusion of all, irrespective of economic or other status.
• Commitment to Inclusive Dialogue: Mr. Bachmeier expressed a willingness to engage in future conversations to develop policies that ensure all students receive the best possible education, reflecting the collaborative spirit of the SDGs.

Charter Schools as Innovation Hubs for System-Wide Improvement

The Superintendent-designate identified charter schools as potential “centers for innovation,” framing them as a mechanism to advance the quality of the entire public education system. This approach aligns with SDG 4.1, which seeks to ensure all children complete free, equitable, and quality education leading to effective learning outcomes.

1. Fostering Innovation: Charter schools are viewed as environments where new educational opportunities and methods can be developed and tested.
2. Replicating Success: Mr. Bachmeier emphasized that lessons learned and successful practices from charter schools can be replicated within the broader public school system.
3. Enhancing Public Education: This strategy aims to leverage specialized programs to improve learning outcomes for all students, thereby strengthening the public education infrastructure in line with SDG 4.

Governance and Institutional Integrity

The role of State Superintendent is a non-partisan position, which reinforces the principles of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) by promoting effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. Mr. Bachmeier’s transition into this role marks a continuation of institutional processes governing public education in North Dakota. His future plans regarding the 2026 election remain under consideration.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   The article primarily addresses issues related to two Sustainable Development Goals:

   • SDG 4: Quality Education

     The entire article revolves around state education policy in North Dakota. The State Superintendent’s comments on ensuring “all students get the best education,” the role of charter schools as “centers for innovation,” and the debate over educational savings accounts are directly linked to the goal of providing inclusive and equitable quality education.

   • SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

     The superintendent’s concern about education policy is rooted in equity. His argument against the vetoed bill was that it was “too narrow.” His core question, “is the policy promoting equal and fair choice for all? or is it benefiting a small subset of the population?” directly connects the discussion to the goal of reducing inequalities in opportunities and outcomes.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Based on the article, the following specific targets can be identified:

   • Target 4.1: Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education.

     The superintendent’s desire to have “conversations on how to make sure all students get the best education” aligns with this target’s focus on quality and equity in education for all children.

   • Target 4.5: Eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education… for the vulnerable.

     This target is reflected in the superintendent’s concern about policies that might benefit a “small subset of the population” rather than promoting “equal and fair choice for all.” This highlights the importance of ensuring that educational policies do not create or worsen disparities for vulnerable groups.

   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome.

     The debate over educational savings accounts and the superintendent’s stance on where “public dollars should start and where they should stop” is fundamentally about ensuring equal opportunity in education. His opposition to a policy perceived as benefiting a select few is a direct reflection of this target, which aims to reduce inequalities of outcome through fair policies.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   The article does not mention explicit statistical indicators, but it implies several ways progress could be measured:

   • Implied Indicator for Target 4.1: Replication of innovative educational practices.

     The superintendent calls charter schools “centers for innovation” and notes “there’s a lot of things we can continue to learn in the public school system” from them. An implied indicator of progress towards quality education would be the rate at which successful and innovative teaching methods and opportunities from charter schools are identified and replicated in the broader public school system.

   • Implied Indicator for Targets 4.5 and 10.3: Distribution of educational funding and enrollment across different school types.

     The superintendent’s question, “is it benefiting a small subset of the population?” implies a need for an indicator that measures equity. Progress could be measured by analyzing the socioeconomic distribution of students who would benefit from policies like educational savings accounts. A successful policy, according to his logic, would show an equitable distribution of public funds and opportunities, rather than a concentration among a specific group.

4. SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

   SDGs	Targets	Indicators (Implied from the article)
   SDG 4: Quality Education	Target 4.1: Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education.	The rate at which innovative and effective educational practices from “centers for innovation” (like charter schools) are replicated across the public school system to benefit all students.
   SDG 4: Quality Education & SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities	Target 4.5: Ensure equal access to all levels of education for the vulnerable. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome.	The proportion of students from various socioeconomic backgrounds benefiting from educational choice policies (e.g., educational savings accounts) to determine if a policy provides “equal and fair choice for all” or benefits a “small subset of the population.”

Source: kfyrtv.com