Critchfield has served on the Idaho State Board of Education for seven years, two of them as president. She also spent several years as a substitute teacher, and served on the rural Cassia County school board for 10 years.

Idaho, while a deep red state politically, is undergoing dramatic change as newcomers arrive in unprecedented numbers, many of them from the West Coast, where the political climate is decidedly different. This makes Idaho an interesting national case study, especially as a new state superintendent takes office, with strong ideas about strengthening her department’s support and oversight of school districts.

Under the Ybarra regime, districts reported receiving little of either support or oversight. As a result, they tended to ignore state mandates. Idaho EdNews assiduously tracked these departmental oversight failures, and districts’ flouting of state regulations.

During the former state chief’s tenure, districts , and ignored the state’s . Test scores stagnated, and Ybarra  

Ybarra, who took a job as earlier this month, defended her record during the campaign, saying state graduation rates and college and career readiness.

Critchfield, who was sworn into her four-year term Jan. 6, is pledging a new day. 

Idaho has long been a state where the concept of local control of public education is sacrosanct, where parental choice is seen as a top value and where public charter schools have proliferated and thrived.

How does Critchfield envision her new role, and the Idaho Department of Education’s place in the state’s education ecosystem? What lessons can Idaho teach the rest of the country? I recently interviewed Critchfield to get her perspective on these issues. 

The conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

����Ӱ��: What do you plan to change about how the State Department of Education operated under your predecessor?

Debbie Critchfield: Literally everything. The transparency piece is huge. And earning and deserving the respect and trust of our districts and our legislature. We have to reestablish trust around education. There are things that I believe need to happen immediately. The Department of Education is an agency designed to support schools. We need to demonstrate that we do provide that service. I’m looking at standing up some regional support centers around the state so that our folks in the most rural parts of the state and anywhere in the state aren’t dependent upon trying to contact someone in Boise.

What are some of the key issues you want to address early in your term?

I’m a big believer in the science of reading, and I believe that has been pushed to the side, and we in Idaho have not acknowledged sufficiently what it does for kids. You can expect to see that as a main point of conversation when we talk about literacy. Looking at our math scores, we’re no better than most states. I will want to work with our State Board of Education on a major math initiative. I’ve signaled to those folks that that’s a conversation that they can expect.

And then there is the workforce piece. We at the state, as well as local boards and districts, need to be initiating conversations with their community businesses and industries. One of the biggest services that we can do for our students is providing that connection — how what I’m learning in class translates to the outside world. 

I talk to people in schools and districts frequently who are interested in having us help build these types of relationships and programs for their students. They’re not sure how to go about it. Fortunately, there are lots of models out there to draw from.

What made you decide to run for the state superintendent position?

Well, there were two things, actually. First, the COVID experience really highlighted the missed opportunities that Idaho didn’t move on. We had this interesting time in education where everything, all these state and federal laws, rules, requirements, etc. were waived. That created so many opportunities to try new things. But it felt like many of the educational leaders at the state level just kind of held their breath and then it was like, “Oh, OK, COVID’s over, let’s go back to business. Let’s go back to how things were.”

So that’s the first thing that motivated me. A frustration with the lack of vision, the lack of leadership. There was this tremendous opportunity to reimagine and create a system wrapped around what is most valuable for kids. Public education is in many ways still based on an 1850s model. There are some things that still work, and many that don’t. I felt frustration over the missed opportunity.

Second, I also felt frustrated with our lack of progress. We’re moving, but is it forward and is it towards the outcomes and the goals that we have for our kids? What are we preparing our kids to know and be able to do? Having been on the State Board of Education for the past eight years, I had a front row seat. And it became clear to me that I was doing as much as I could as an appointed volunteer. I needed to change roles to really advance some of the things that I heard from communities, parents, students and teachers.

What did you say on the campaign trail that resonated with voters and allowed you to defeat a well-known incumbent?

I would ask people all the time: Can you tell me what the vision is for K-12 education in Idaho? And every group I spoke to, whether it was business leaders, parents, teachers, they’d all look at each other and just shrug. No one knew. I didn’t know. And I’ve been in a position where I should know. No one knew because there was no vision. 

So then I could tell people here’s my plan, my vision. We’ve got to prepare our kids for the jobs and opportunities of a growing state. To me, this means providing a meaningful experience for high school students, and making sure that they’re prepared at the earliest levels. Providing fundamentals of reading and math for our very earliest learners, to make sure that by the time they hit high school, they’re prepared for that next thing, which to me is less about seat time and more about the application of knowledge. I’m a big fan of any type of work-based learning, project-based learning. internships, apprenticeships, particularly for juniors and seniors.

Those seemed like basic, educational, non-political messages, and they resonated.

Idaho has been stagnant or moving backwards for years in what locally is called the go-on rate, the percentage of high school students who go on to some kind of post-secondary opportunity. The rate for the most recent year was just 37%. That might be in part because of the disconnect between schools and workforce experiences. How do you plan to address that?

 I like to reference two numbers together because I believe they tell an interesting story. First of all, the go-on rate is not a perfect measure because it does not capture everything. It misses, for example, military service. But having said that, it is a data point we have to work with, 37%. But at the same time, 80% of graduating high school seniors have taken at least one dual credit class (high school and college credit).

When I look at those numbers side by side, what it tells me is that students want to jumpstart their future. They want the ability to learn from things that are going to benefit them from outside of high school. There are a lot of opportunities that we are not bringing into the schools, that would indicate to a student that there are a lot of ways that you can be prepared for life after school, and to have early access to things that you’re interested in. That may not always look like college.

For the past eight years, the Department of Education has not fulfilled its accountability role. How do you turn that culture around?

It is going to be a process. Over the past few years, local control became this pat answer, and a cover for a lack of leadership. When our districts asked for support with something, they’d often hear, “Oh, sorry, that’s a local control issue.” Local decision-making the way I define it does not mean being left alone. 

I celebrate local decision-making. But how about if I help you look at and have access to all the best information that’s out there? So before you choose curriculum, which is your decision, and I don’t look to change that, why don’t I offer you some information that might help you make a decision? Did you know that there are several factors that you could consider before you decide? Did you know that these other districts are having success with this particular curriculum?

I’ve heard all over the state that districts have really felt left alone, they feel as though they’re in silos and it really has been every man for himself. Again, it’s under that guise of, “Oh, sorry, local control, can’t help you.” I don’t accept that.

What’s your view of the impact charter schools have had on Idaho public education?

I think there are missed opportunities here. What I mean by that is that we have charter schools that are doing incredible things across the state, and these are things that district-run public schools can do as well. But here’s a real disconnect. I hear about this not just from parents, but from people involved in education. “Well, they’re a charter so they get to design their start and stop times and they get to design the projects that they do.” And I tell them: so do you. You get to do that same thing. 

I believe I can do a lot of matchmaking between innovative charters and district schools. But we have to break down some of the misconceptions, that charters aren’t public schools, and they are not held to the same if not higher standards of accountability.

Finally, what makes Idaho a special place that other states might want to look to for ideas and inspiration?

We’re geographically spread out and diverse in our communities in a number of ways. But statewide we’re talking just over 300,000 students. That gives us the ability to really impact and effect change quickly. We don’t have to wait five or 10 years to really see the result of the work that we’re doing. That’s something that I believe makes Idaho unique. We’ve just lacked the leadership to make it happen.

Republican Tom Horne, a 77-year-old Harvard-educated attorney, is returning to the job he held from 2003 to 2011, before completing a four-year stint as state attorney general. His critics worry he will reverse progress made under Democratic incumbent Kathy Hoffman, whom he narrowly beat, and will relax standards around the state’s newly expanded and long fought-over voucher program. 

His re-emergence alarms those who remember how he proudly dismantled bilingual education in the state earlier in his career and pushed to ban an ethnic studies program credited for better engaging Hispanic students by teaching them about their own history. Now, Horne is fixated on another topic, a new iteration of one of his older concerns: critical race theory. 

The catch-all term used by conservatives to describe the teaching of systemic racism is, in Horne’s view, an extension of the problem surrounding ethnic studies, in which children, he argues, are taught to view each other through the lens of race.

“What matters is what we know, what we do,” Horne told ����Ӱ��. “Race is entirely irrelevant. My opponents say race is primary. I don’t want to teach kids that race is primary, but that they have to treat each other as individuals.”

A court ruled in 2017 that the ethnic studies ban he lobbied for against the Tucson Unified School District was and But Horne disagrees, maintaining the same position more than a decade later. 

Horne, who calls himself “the opposite of a racist,” said he supports teaching history in totality, including “the horrors of slavery, Jim Crow…[and] what happened in Oklahoma,” a reference to the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre. He advocates for a curriculum that teaches every student about the contribution of all groups, he said.

A former state legislator who also served on the board of Phoenix’s Paradise Valley School District from 1978 to 2002, Horne has made numerous other pledges which he believes will bolster student performance and make campuses safer. 

He vowed to renew the state’s focus on testing, turn away from social-emotional learning, push for more guns on campus, impose stricter school discipline — and amp up newly expanded universal Empowerment Scholarship Accounts, signed into law by outgoing Gov. Doug Ducey in July. The program gives families approximately $6,500 a year per student to spend on private school tuition or other educational costs, like tutoring. It was initially offered to only a limited number of students, including those who attended failing schools or were in foster care, but is now available to all.

Critics say the new program will benefit the rich, not the poor as Horne has previously stated. But parents across the country, frustrated by school closures and disastrous distance learning efforts, are pushing for greater flexibility in their children’s education: A ballot measure to kill the voucher expansion in Arizona failed to gain enough signatures this election cycle.

Beth Lewis, co-founder and executive director of Save Our Schools Arizona, which formed in 2017 to oppose universal vouchers, has worked in education in the state for 12 years, with half of that time spent as a teacher in a Tempe elementary school. She said Horne’s plan will exacerbate inequality. 

“I’ve always taught in extremely low-income schools,” she said. “I see the impact of defunding public education … to not have counselors, aides, books and computers … and to have that money go [instead] to families already sending their kids to elite private schools — and who make millions — is painful,” she said. “It’s outright lying.”

Prior to the expansion, just 12,127 children participated in the ESA program, state education officials said. The figure shot up to 42,842 by early December: Approximately 67% of the applicants did not have a prior record of public school enrollment. It’s unclear how many were already enrolled in private school or who were being taught at home. 

But the voucher program is not Lewis’s only concern: She worries Horne’s election will mark a major regression in other, critical ways. 

“There is a fear we will take 10 or 20 steps backward,” she said. “He has an antiquated belief system. It’s not just that he’s conservative but an extremist, authoritarian. He’s all about forcing guns on campus. It’s all about the tests, this grind culture, punishment — a punitive nature around school. As a teacher, I just don’t think that’s what our kids need or deserve.”

Nicky Indicavitch, a parent and volunteer in her local school district, said Horne’s vow to dismantle social-emotional learning — he calls it “a front for CRT” — will take away a critical tool teachers use to help students manage their stress, bolster their performance and improve the classroom environment. 

“I have seen firsthand what happens when young people are not given the skills they need to manage complex social settings and how disruptive their behavior can become,” said Indicavitch, who has experience in social work. “Tom Horne vowing to remove this valuable piece of education will only cause our children, their classmates and educators to struggle more.” 

Controversial record perhaps forgotten

Bill Scheel, a long-time political consultant, said Horne has always been a divisive candidate centering on race-based issues. 

“He really has not changed his stripes or tactics in 20 years,” he said.

Horne was wise to stay away from the public spotlight since he last held office in 2014, Scheel said. Prior to that, he was investigated by numerous entities, including the FBI, for . 

He paid a $10,000 fine and no criminal charges were filed: Horne said he was .

“Under the First Amendment, if you run for public office, people can lie about you without any consequence,” he said. “There is a lot of lying that goes on.”

Horne also was criticized for hiring an assistant attorney general, Carmen Chenal, despite her : He said recently that she was amply qualified and did an excellent job, particularly by utilizing her skills as a Spanish speaker. 

Horne also was alleged to have left the scene of a in 2012, an incident that led to yet another scandal: Chenal was with Horne when the accident occurred in a parking lot near her apartment. The two married in 2020. 

As for the damages done to the other vehicle, Horne said at least some of it can be attributed to the vehicle  

All of these incidents come decades after the released damning findings about Horne’s previous business, allegations he dismissed in a recent email because they happened in the 1970s.

“He kept himself under the radar and I guess, to his credit, he did not attach himself to the Trump ticket,” Scheel said. “That kept some of that fire away from him.”

Trump-backed candidates across the country, including in Arizona, suffered : Kari Lake, a MAGA Republican who narrowly lost the race for governor of the state, has . Attorney general candidate Abe Hamadeh, another Trump pick, is just hundreds of votes behind his Democratic opponent and is .

Raised and spent over a $1M 

Horne stuck with CRT longer than others, but it’s not clear if his desire to limit classroom discussions of race — along with his opposition to bilingual education — were persuasive in a year when Arizona voters also approved a measure .

Beyond the low profile nature of the race, Scheel noted Horne far outspent Hoffman. The former preschool teacher and speech language pathologist was not a career politician, he said: She was elected amid a swarm of similar victories for . 

“He raised and spent over $1 million,” Scheel said. “She had $300,000.”

Hoffman’s nearly non-existent campaign allowed her challenger to be largely unharmed by a revelation that might have leveled another candidate. Horne was found to be in close ties with disgraced former state Rep. David Stringer, who was accused, in 1983, of with him. 

Stringer rather than disclose documents related to the case. 

Most recently, . Horne initially Stringer but later stepped away from him, telling ����Ӱ�� he paid Stringer cash to return his in-kind contribution to the campaign. 

The issue never really gained traction with voters. 

“That’s where more money could have elevated that current scandal and really damaged him,” Scheel said. 

Douglas Cole, chief operating officer of HighGround, a Republican-leaning political consulting firm, said Horne has long remained focused on the issues. 

“He’s a policy wonk,” Cole said. “He always has been. He was that way as a [state] legislator, in the House of Representatives. He takes on controversial issues he believes in and fights for them. He gets pretty passionate about where he thinks things should go.”

No matter his ambitions for schools, his is a supervisory and regulatory position: Scheel isn’t sure how far Horne will get with a Democratic governor and, likely, attorney general. Cole agreed. 

“If he wants to make sweeping changes, he would have to convince 16 senators, 31 members of the House and a governor of the opposite party,” Cole said. “He’s operating in a different paradigm. He’s not a lawmaker.”

Despite this, Horne, a lifelong pianist who plays with local orchestras and supports funding for the arts, is determined to make change. 

He promises to investigate and quash any ethnic studies programs that have cropped up since he last held the post, saying the situation is much worse now than it was a decade ago: The teachings, he said, are more widespread.

“I have been fighting CRT since 2010, for 12 years, and for a long time felt like a voice in the wilderness,” he said. “It wasn’t until the last couple of years that the rest of the world caught up.”