Education is a public policy

Most parents want and work towards their children having a better life than they. And education is usually thought of as one way to achieve this for their children. Here in the USA we have a long history of making education of our children a public policy. The common objective has been to make good citizens.

Just who controls education these days? Is it the federal politicians, the local politicians, someone else, or the parents? Just who should control education these days? Perhaps it is divided in terms of money and influence, and certainly it varies geographically. The division in public policy objectives makes sense … most parents want all their kids to go to college while a national politician might set objectives that recognizes our society needs all levels of education … from high school graduate to community college technician to college graduate doing something else.

And degrees do represent more than a level of education and knowledge. Degrees may be looked at as a willingness to do work and persevere. Hence the military requires a high school degree or GED to be a private, and a college degree to be an officer. And degrees often correlate to income levels, and most people think increased income levels bring more happiness, though that is debatable to most.

In the last 50 years another friction has been added to the public policy of education. That has been social engineering by social scientists using our children (us not too long ago) to do what they do. Just where they got their vote and influence I am not sure, but the earlier question still remains … just who is in charge, and who should be in charge?

Another debate in the public policy about education has to do with private vs. public education, and the argument in earlier times (like 40 years ago) that private and Catholic school educations were superior. I personally believe this, but these days the issue is in doubt, depending where one may live. Today’s private K-12 schools are not all what they used to be. And gifted and talented in the public schools is not what it used to be. Both the aforementioned tend to lead impressionable young children to believe that they may be better than they are. This smacks of the old English school system which we must avoid at all political costs. The idea of the American schools is that one learns an education along with the rough and tumble of life. This is not to imply sending one’s kids to ghetto schools since no one wants this for their kids, but the English vs. American system of education is different, and our American system is better suited for us who will work and lead lives in the USA.

Another debate in the public policy about education is where do the workers come from? If everyone has a college degree, just who will do the work? Thank goodness not everyone has a college degree, and the USA does grow good and smart workers. What appears to be happening in the income disparity between college graduates and non-college graduates is shifting towards equality, and more favorably towards the skilled workers and technicians. The old days of comparing education level with intelligence are fast falling by the wayside. People have to pay for skills and services that require intelligence and competency, not a college degree. And never discount those with a college degree doing well in the service sector.

The USA military recognizes this idea in that it has established professional education for all levels of leadership from NCO through officer.

It also sure looks like those south of the border, as well as others like the Chinese and Indians are exploiting the gaps our present public policy about education has led to. The USA lives on educated hard working family oriented people, and some are immigrants.

Last any discussion of public policy and education must discuss the 3 out of 10 who enter the ninth grade who never graduate from high school. My discussion is simple, I think we should focus on the 7 out of 10 who do graduate. The principle is as old as life … take care of the winners and hard workers first … do not be distracted by the 3 out of 10 until we can promote the 7 out of 10. Said another way, focus on the winners, not the losers, in setting priorities and public policy. People are watching and voting, and will respond to public policies that take care of winners and hard workers, first. This especially applies to education policies.