The three Republicans campaigning to be Idaho’s next schools chief have stumped across the state in at least five debates and forums, countless campaign events and a series of appearances in front of local GOP committees.
Here’s another chance to hear from them ahead of the fast-approaching May 17 primary.
EdNews surveyed the field’s three candidates, former State Board of Education President Debbie Critchfield, former Democratic state Sen. Branden Durst and incumbent Superintendent Sherri Ybarra, on some of the most pressing issues in Idaho education.
Read their unedited responses below.
Debbie Critchfield:
A fourth-generation farm family, my husband Dave and I live in Oakley, where we raised our four children in rural public schools. I have been the Public Information Officer for Cassia School District for the last 9 years. I am the former President of the Idaho State Board of Education and seven-year board member. I served as Chair of the Policy and Planning Committee, and the Instructional, Research and Student Affairs Committee. I was a member of the State’s Accountability and Oversight committee and chaired the Board’s Audit Committee. I was Co-Chair to Governor Little’s Education Task Force and committee chair for Governor Otter’s Higher Education Task Force. I served as a school board member in Cassia County for ten years, five as chair, and was on the executive committee for Idaho School Boards Association. I chaired Re-Opening Idaho Schools and was a member of Governor Little’s K-12 council. I am active in my community, serving as a former Library Trustee, Arts Council president, and Republican central committee precinct chair. I worked for the College of Southern Idaho as a GED instructor and substitute taught for six years. I have established relationships and know how collaboration can drive change and efficiency as we work with our education partners and legislators to ensure parents, educators, and students have what they need. I know how to listen and lead.
Branden Durst:
The state superintendent is not the state’s top educator. This role, statutorily, is the head policy and public administration professional for Idaho’s education system. While my opponents boast of their years of experience in the education system, they lack the public administration and policy experience that is vital to the successful execution of the state superintendency. I am uniquely prepared for this role. I have been a successful legislator in both the Idaho House and Senate, serving on the education committees in both chambers. I have written significant education law in Idaho, including much of the Advanced Opportunities program along with my former legislative colleague, Steven Thayn, the current chair of the Senate Education Committee. I have also served as a small business owner, licensed pastor, instructor, curriculum developer and child custody mediator. Academically, I have a master of public administration (MPA) in public policy and will earn an education specialist (EdS) in executive educational leadership in the next couple of weeks. Given the statutory responsibilities of this role, this academic training is ideal. Idaho has never elected a former legislator to serve as state superintendent, in spite of the fact that many elected state superintendents throughout the country regularly follow that same trajectory. Why? Because they understand that the role of the state superintendent is complex and requires a strong command of the legislative process and state government generally. You don’t get the necessary experience to understand those things working in the same field for your entire professional career or as a political appointee. My background, academically and professionally have prepared me to hit the ground running from the first day in office. I am ready to lead Idaho education.
Sherri Ybarra:
I am the only certified and experienced K-12 educator in this race, with nearly three decades of experience as a classroom teacher and an administrator at the school, district, and state levels. In addition, I have done this job as Superintendent of Public Instruction for the past seven years, with measurable success. Idaho has improved up from 31st to 17th in the nation for student achievement in the past five years. We are 5th in the nation for high school graduates who are college and career ready, and we are number 1 in the nation for college credits earned by students still in high school. Our 5-year graduation rate is at an all-time high. My track record of success speaks for itself, so I humbly ask the voters of Idaho to stay with me while I take us to the Top 10 in the Nation for education.
Critchfield:
Early literacy has been a priority for me and it is important that this additional investment is directed to help our youngest students be prepared to read and learn. My immediate goal will be to redesign how our State Department of Education (SDE) functions, whether it’s early literacy funding or other issues. The department must move from a Boise-centered agency, focused on compliance, to a department focused on supporting local students, educators, and parents and encouraging innovation in the classroom. Each school or district has different challenges, and they need a partner that will provide solutions on how to address their challenges.The SDE should provide operational advice, support, and relevant resources to ensure these additional dollars get into the classroom and make an immediate difference. The SDE should facilitate best practices, share successful literacy strategies, and celebrate success. We need the department of education to help districts meet their own goals and fulfill the expectations we all have for Idaho education and for our students.
Durst:
The department will work with the SBE to promulgate rules to give parents as much flexibility as possible in the utilization of these funds. We will also seek statutory changes to ensure that districts who receive the funds provide half day and full day options rather than a one size fits all approach. I opposed the enabling legislation because I predicted, and have been proven correct, that districts would force parents into all day programs that many do not want. That is wrong. I will work with parents to make sure they have flexibility to meet their individual family needs. Parents and their individual family needs must be the priority.
Ybarra:
As a former third grade teacher, I know first-hand how important early literacy is. My department will continue to support educators by hosting the annual reading summit, which will be held on May 2nd, and offering professional development opportunities, including our SMART (Striving to Meet Achievement in Reading Together) program of training and collaboration. We also provide support and guidance on how to use data from the Idaho Reading Indicator to tailor instruction to meet the needs of individual students and what interventions and best practices to use. And, we are working to implement additional supports for students with dyslexia. I will continue to work with educators on how we can reach our shared goal of “All students are reading on grade level by the third grade.”
Critchfield:
My day job for the past nine years has been focused on meaningful engagement for parents and students as the Public Relations Officer for the 13th largest district in the state. I know how to do this. Communication and respect is essential. We cannot move forward without first listening. Outreach is essential to any success in this area. I intend to travel the state on a regular basis. I have done this as a candidate and have visited nearly 60 schools in 9 months. You can’t address what you don’t understand, see, or experience. And I can’t help districts successfully engage their parents and communities from an office in Boise. Encouraging and channeling the increased level of parental involvement can lead to powerful partnerships with educators and schools, and the next superintendent must facilitate that. In addition, I want to access the student body leaders across the state, after working with them for two years as State Board president. If we want our students to learn and achieve success in the world, they need trusted adults engaged in solutions. The SDE can serve as a service center for parents to direct them to outside partners, their own districts, and to state resources to assist them as the primary stakeholder in their child’s lives and education.
Durst:
Under my leadership, the department of education will be parent focused, rather than system focused as it has been under the current superintendent. Parents are our top priority. I also have many specific plans to improve and enhance parental rights and engagement. The biggest change that is parent focused that I have proposed is the Empower Parents in Education Act. This legislation would create education savings accounts (ESAs) and allow parents to be the decision makers on where their children learn by having a portion of the state appropriation follow their student to their school of choice. I’ll explain this in more detail in a later question. In addition, last legislative session along with Senator Christy Zito, I attempted to introduce the Parental Freedom in Education Act. Unfortunately, two “Republicans”, supporters of one of my opponents, chose to put politics ahead of parents and joined with the Democrats to reject the legislation. They, and their preferred candidate, represent an unsettling perspective that parents should not be trusted. I wholeheartedly disagree. My legislation would have recognized that parents have a right to know what their children are being taught, to decide if their children were masked or vaccinated and would have ensured that parents could go to their children’s classrooms. In addition to statutory changes, I will reorganize the department, which will include taking 12-14 positions out of the office in downtown Boise and placing them in regional offices throughout the state. These positions will be created through attrition in the department and the new hires will be local to the communities in which they are located. By decentralizing the government and putting it closer to the people, the department will be better suited to meet the needs of parents and taxpayers. To be clear, the purpose of these regional offices is to provide support to parents and taxpayers and nothing else. Having these offices will give parents and taxpayers a direct line to communicate with the department to share their concerns, suggestions and other comments regarding their local school districts and the education system generally. We will serve parents because parents are our top priority.
Ybarra:
I am the only candidate in this race who has established a Parental Advisory Council to engage parents in policy decisions. Also, at the suggestion of parent groups, I will be releasing a parental involvement took kit with practical strategies for parents to re-engage in their children’s education. Additionally, I am the only candidate who has established a statewide Student Advisory Council, 13 students in grades 4 through 12 from all parts of the state. It has been successful beyond my expectations, and I had high expectations! These students were involved this past legislative session in speaking out for, and then testifying on behalf of, dyslexia legislation for the state of Idaho. We will soon be accepting applications for next year’s student advisory council.
Critchfield:
My first priority as Superintendent is making sure we fulfill our Constitutional obligation for funding public education. We need to keep in mind this responsibility applies to rural Idaho communities, where school choice is limited. I am open to discussions about funding more choice, but it cannot defund public schools or come at the expense of Idaho’s rural school districts. Money currently does follow the student to public and charter schools. Sometimes that point is obscured. I do have a strong record of supporting school choice. Because of my strong advocacy for all educational deliveries, I am endorsed by both public school professionals and the Idaho Charter School Network. I was the President of the State Board of Education when the Strong Families, Strong Students grants gave money directly to families to support educational choices and the student funding model was introduced to fund enrollment, not seat time.
Durst:
First, tax dollars aren’t public. They don’t belong to the government. They belong to the taxpayer. That is a fundamental philosophical misunderstanding by many on the left and one that conservatives must routinely correct. As to whether or not I support taxpayer dollars going to a parent’s school of choice? Unequivocally yes. Again, this comes down to a philosophical perspective. If you believe the money belongs to the government, as my opponents apparently do, then you either reject the idea of money following students or you hedge and say that you may support it as long as public schools don’t have to compete. Let’s be clear, neither of those positions are conservative and neither are reflective of the Idaho GOP platform. Competition is critical to the success of a school choice program and removing the competition element is simply building more government. No thanks. ESAs will revolutionize our education system. They will empower parents in brand new ways to be the decision makers in their children’s education. This issue doesn’t need another study or more dialogue. It needs action. My proposal is a net benefit for almost everyone. In fact, under my proposal not only do we put money in the hands of parents, but we also increase or maintain the per pupil funding in 95% of all public schools in Idaho and for 90% of all public school students, without raising taxes one penny. Our rural and small schools will never see a reduction in their per pupil funding under my proposal. This issue is going to require statewide leadership and that is exactly what I will provide. The days of business as usual are over, it is time for action. It is time to empower parents. To read the proposal for yourself, visit durstforidaho.com/epea.
Ybarra:
Under my leadership, Idaho has increased school choice by over 40 percent. Our public schools offer more learning options for students than ever before. I will not support any proposal that siphons money away from public schools or public charter schools. I have secured historical funding increases for K-12 under my leadership, and according to a recent survey conducted by “RISE,” public support remains strong and undiminished for funding of our K-12 public schools. My two opponents, in the primary, support vouchers.
Critchfield:
Our school leaders are begging for a strong and reliable partner to provide assistance for communicating and engaging their community and parents on some of the most sensitive issues schools are facing. We can build on the new expectations for parents who want a part in local decision making. I would collaborate with local schools to strengthen their efforts for outreach by having an open door and providing structured assistance to engage parents. The SDE should be leveraging the expertise and resources of natural partners like educators and K-12 stakeholder groups to support comprehensive action plans and leadership strategies. Helping them with proactive engagement and transparency efforts is key to properly addressing these concerns.
Durst:
Through our regional offices, we will provide parents the opportunity to share concerns with classroom content directly with the department so further investigation can commence. These concerns are happening in Idaho. Just yesterday someone I know had an issue with her daughter’s high school in southwest Idaho where her daughter was mocked and bullied by her teacher due to her conservative and Christian beliefs. The mom felt helpless. She shouldn’t have. She should have had a state superintendent to be her advocate. I will be. Our regional offices will also be intimately involved with helping parents understand what is going on in the curriculum adoption committees required for each district under Idaho law. We will expose content that may be inappropriate before it reaches the hands of a student. We will fight for parents.
Ybarra:
Under my leadership, I have protected local control. Classroom curriculum is decided at the local level. However, when complaints are received by my department, we communicate them promptly to local district leadership and follow up to support the districts in conducting proper reviews and investigations, responding to parents and community members, and implementing changes.
Critchfield:
I live and work in a rural school district, so I am very aware of the challenges they face. This is one of my priorities. Our rural districts are desperate for an advocate at the state level. They need acknowledgement of their unique challenges and a leader to bring viable solutions to them and the legislature. Yes, they need resources for high-quality learning environments that provide opportunities for kids, but they also need leadership for innovative problem solving so they can be creative in retaining high-quality educators, addressing aging facilities, and removing local tax burdens. Rural should not mean lesser than urban when we talk about schools. They need solutions for the lack of internet, infrastructure, and housing. The problems facing a growing and changing Idaho, are exacerbated in our rural communities. I believe I am the only candidate that understands these issues at this level. Many of our rural and remote districts have limited access to local tax dollars because of their economy or the large amount of federally controlled lands. Among other things, we must have more active management of lands in these communities and more direct control of state lands. The connection between the needs of our rural communities could not be more critical to the role the state superintendent plays on the Land Board.
Durst:
The current funding formula creates a disincentive for educators to stay in rural schools. Anyone in rural Idaho has at least one (generally several) story of a great teacher leaving their community to go to some bigger city to take a higher paying position. That has to stop. In addition, the prescriptive nature of the money allocated to districts further exacerbates these issues. I believe we must cut the strings and let districts manage the funds they get from the state in accordance with their own local needs, rather than what some bureaucrat or legislator in Boise thinks is best. This increased flexibility will give districts the option to improve their operations, which, if done correctly, will yield higher retention rates of key staff.
Ybarra:
Idaho is over 70 percent rural, and research shows that in order to support rural schools, there must be a focus on their unique needs. However, our funding formula has many line items that often “hamstring” districts. We must move toward a system of funding which is flexible to allow districts to streamline and use the funds according to their needs. For example, more technology for the rural areas is needed, as well as access to advanced classes and special education support to provide resources for struggling students in our rural districts. A menu of options and resources for students and parents, support for attracting and retaining great teachers and leaders, and quality reading programs are all evidence-based ways that will help rural districts face their unique challenges.
Critchfield:
I believe that school facilities and maintenance funding is the priority issue for our districts and communities and has been grossly overlooked for the last eight years. Because the responsibility for facilities falls to local taxpayers, our current system for addressing this need is not sustainable. Too much burden falls on local property taxpayers and with a billion dollar facility deficit the solutions cannot wait. Deferred maintenance is deficit spending. Added to this, fast growing communities and districts are funding new buildings almost every year. Solutions must take into account Idaho’s record surplus, our growing economy, and returns on endowed lands. These revenues need to be directed to funding facilities. School leaders are tired of asking and local taxpayers are tired of paying.
Durst:
School choice is a key strategy to address this issue because it will function as a pressure release valve by creating capacity outside of the public system. The net impact of this will be to reduce the demand for more classroom space and staff, which in turn will reduce the need for more bonds and levies and therefore ease the burden on local property taxpayers. And while it is within the purview of the legislature, I am open to the idea of districts applying impact fees on new development for schools, provided those fees are supported by a majority of voters in an election held in a general election in an even numbered year.
Ybarra:
Making sure that districts continue to receive the historic funding increases for K-12 education that have occurred under my leadership that focus on our strategic investments, such as attracting and retaining great teachers and leaders; because the higher the population of students, the more educators will be needed. Reducing line items in the budget will also help districts to make informed decisions around resources that their unique communities may need for population growth. I will also continue to build a positive culture around education, understanding that negative attitudes can result in students choosing not to go on to college or even drop-out of K-12 before their earning potential to contribute to society is realized. Students need a positive culture and parental involvement to encourage continued learning. Idaho’s population growth is the main reason why K-12 education must continue to be a top priority for all Idahoans.
Critchfield:
It’s time to have this discussion without politicizing the topic to the detriment of kids. As a state leader, it must start with an honest discussion of what it means to support and improve mental health for students, from an appropriate and realistic school perspective. Removing the stigma and fear of a statewide conversation has to start at the top. Schools want and need help in how they navigate growing concerns of suicide, anxiety and depression. This discussion must include parents and students. Because of my extensive experience in this area, I will show schools how they can maintain their supportive role while they direct and refer parents, who have the primary role, to outside resources and partners. If we want to support and retain educators, we need to provide them with realistic strategies for dealing with behaviors in class. Our teachers and administrators are frustrated and want help and our school counselors are overwhelmed. When we talk about school safety, we must include emotional well being. Prevention of behaviors that result in violence are a critical and key part of overall school safety.
Durst:
First, we need to stop lying to parents and students. The government’s COVID pandemic response, perpetrated by both my opponents in their positions on the state board and department made matters much worse. We kept students isolated and masked. Everyone should have seen the negative impact that would have on our students’ mental health. Parents deserved to know what was going on and deserved to be able to advocate for their students so as to prevent this from happening in the first place. The question is, however, is this the proper role of government? While I believe mental health support can be very helpful, we need to make sure we aren’t stepping outside of our role. To that end, I think one practical thing we could do to increase access to parent approved mental health care in the school setting would be to alter the way we utilize our school counselors, especially in the intermediate and secondary levels. Many (most?) school counselors have the academic and clinical training to serve as mental health professionals, but they are regularly utilized as glorified (and high paid) clerical staff. This underutilization is both inefficient and expensive. I believe we need to encourage districts to better utilize this staff and have the clerical functions (schedule setting, calendaring, etc.) completed by someone with less expertise in mental health.
Ybarra:
Safety has been one of my top priorities since I took office. Our students’ mental health has been a significant part of this conversation. Self-control, self-awareness, problem solving, responsible decision making and the ability to cope with life’s challenges is what we all want for our students. If there is anything I can do to help keep students from disengaging in school, getting hooked on drugs, or committing suicide, as State Superintendent, I will do it. My work has included suicide awareness and prevention training, a statewide work plan for all aspects of safety, and numerous grants to support mental and behavioral health. I have also advocated aggressively through many speaking events and frequent classroom visits and conversations, to build awareness around safety and offer resources to our educators.
Critchfield:
I have already done this successfully as President of the Board. I was twice elected by my peers on the Board, which included the current superintendent, to lead them. I know what is needed to get the work done with honesty and fidelity and respect for roles and responsibilities. The State Board of Education is an essential partner for the success of the State Superintendent and State Department of Education. We don’t have time for fractured relationships and we need positive cooperation. I understand the Constitutional duties and role under state law. The Idaho Supreme Court made that clear in their 2020 unanimous decision. I am eager to have a reset of this relationship.
Durst:
I will engage with each member individually and lay out my vision as the elected leader of education in Idaho. I am hopeful that they’ll recognize the need to support my vision. However, if they don’t, then I am prepared to push legislation to make the state board of education elected by region. Regions will be comprised of five legislative districts in sequential order. For example, North Idaho region will be legislative districts 1 through 5. The Panhandle region will be districts six through ten and so on. Given the enormity and consequential nature of the decisions being made by the Board, it should be directly accountable to the voters. Did you know it was the Board who has kept Common Core in Idaho? Did you know the Board could stop social justice indoctrination (CRT, DEI, T-SEL) through board policy, but has done the opposite by pushing a DEI policy, a proposal of one of my opponents in June 2021. The voters must be able to hold the board accountable and as their elected school leader, I will work along with them to accomplish that objective.
Ybarra:
As our current Superintendent of Public Instruction, I am the only voting member of the State Board of Education who is elected by the people of Idaho. I constantly seek opportunities to educate fellow board members about the needs and issues in our K-12 schools and work with them to address these and how best to achieve our shared, strategic goals to advance K-12 education.
Critchfield:
I think it’s an indication there is a mismatch in what our students need/want and what is available. We have record numbers of students accessing dual credit college classes and declining numbers that go to college. Clearly our students want to get a jump start on their preparation and increasingly it’s less about a formal college experience. Our students are going on, it just looks like a variety of other ways. Added to this issue is that our state graduation rate has gone backwards. If we don’t provide the relevance for our students and prepare them for the variety of choices outside of high school, we will continue to lose students before and after they graduate. There has never been a time to pivot our educational system to fit the needs of the 21st century student and connect them to the opportunities of our growing communities and state more than now. This issue is precisely why I have put work ready skills at the core of my vision for Idaho education and why I am calling for a required financial literacy course. Our diplomas should matter to kids, employers and colleges. Developing skilled and confident learners is how we show our kids we’re committed to their success, regardless of the goals they pursue.
Durst:
The problem is that we aren’t preparing students to be successful in whatever they choose to do after high school. There are many system reasons for this, but one in particular is the one size fits all approach we have to high school graduation. As one of the key architects of the Advanced Opportunities program, I have been focused on this issue for a decade. However, Advanced Opportunities is just one part of what should be a multipronged strategy. School choice is another part of the strategy. Helping students access learning environments that maximize their abilities, whether that be public, private or something is critical. As I have already mentioned, I am the only candidate for this office who unequivocally supports real school choice. To expand on something I started off mentioning, our high school graduation requirements aren’t serving our students well. The State Board of Education is responsible for approving high school graduation requirements. My opponents, both members of the state board, chose to abdicate their responsibility in this regard, even though one of them now has a proposal that she should have pushed when she the president of the very organization tasked with making the changes. To that end, I won’t just wait for an election to act. I will propose a change to the graduation requirements and create two new paths to graduation. The current path will remain also. One path will be a college bound track where academic rigor is increased by requiring coursework (foreign language, advanced science and math, etc) that we know better prepares students to be successful in the collegiate environment and will reduce the need to remediate students (which will save money for students and taxpayers). The second path will be a career technical (vocational) education track. This track will alter graduation requirements and better align them with the skills and knowledge students need to be successful in the trades after high school. For example, rather than four years of traditional English, the final year of English might be a technical writing class. We will work with industry and others to make sure that students are leaving high school prepared to succeed. Ultimately this comes down to recognizing that every student is different and leveraging their individual strengths to help provide them opportunities to be successful.
Ybarra:
Our students need options, so they may have a “foot in both lanes” at all times. Not all students want or need to go on to college, but they all need to have a college OR career path and the resources to pursue their path. This includes more career exploration in middle school and more work-based experiences for students. We are responsible for giving all students the foundation for solid choices and the opportunities to succeed. Our Career Technical options and postsecondary choices continue to be broadened and updated. I also believe the “Go-On” statistic needs revision to include individuals who have achieves some form of credential or training that has provided career opportunities.
Critchfield:
The next state superintendent must re-establish trust in Idaho public education for students, parents, educators, taxpayers, business leaders, and lawmakers across the state. Caring about kids means caring about outcomes and the return on our investments. Using honesty, integrity, and transparency, I want to build an educational experience we can all be proud of and believe in. It’s time to change the culture around education and restore the value it brings. That starts at the top and is achieved through work ethic, respect for those in and out of the classroom, and listening to the many Idahoans involved and impacted by Idaho education. At the state level, K-12 education leadership has been missing or late. I will be the leader that understands the complexities of our state, and the changes that are coming and are needed.
Durst:
1 – Pass real school choice, which will improve student achievement. 2 – End Common Core (for real) 3 – Stop the social justice indoctrination and sexualization of our students.
Ybarra:
I have four top priorities for my third term as Superintendent: 1. Reading – As a longtime third grade teacher, I know learning to read by third grade is essential so students can read to learn for the rest of their lives. My top priorities this legislative session were to gain funding for optional full-day kindergarten and to provide early screening, teacher training and intervention so students with dyslexia can learn on an even playing field with their peers. 2. Parents – I’m committed to helping parents engage and partner with schools to support their children. Research shows that active parent involvement is the single best predictor of student success and that has never been more true than during the pandemic. I was saddened and disturbed – and I wrote a strongly worded letter to the U.S. Attorney General — when the spirited debates at some school board meetings last fall resulted in parents being labeled “domestic terrorists.” I shared ideas with district superintendents and administrators for how to address hot-button issues from COVID protocols to CRT worries. 3. Educators – It is imperative that Idaho continues to recruit and retain the best educators, and I have fought to increase the pay and respect our teachers and staff receive. This year, legislators embraced my proposals for $1,000 teacher bonuses, and for significant pay increases and bonuses for school staff. Perhaps my proudest achievement as superintendent is changing the culture of the State Department of Education from blame and shame to support and pride. Teachers and other school staff are essential workers who boost our children’s confidence, abilities, and achievements. 4. Top Ten – Building off the historic investment in public schools and the legislative priorities achieved in the 2022 legislative session, as well as the momentum we have built over the last seven years, I want to lead us to achieve a Top Ten ranking in the nation. Our Idaho students deserve no less. Our Idaho parents want to know their children are receiving a high-quality education, and our teachers merit this recognition. Idaho is in a great position to build trust in, and enthusiasm for, public schools and to prove that our public schools lead to student success and achievement.
