The Vexing Problem of Education

Education is one of those issues that politicians seem to love to simplify. They like to focus on one thing and act like that everything will fall into place if that one policy is implemented. For some, the problems of education are all related to funding -- if you pay teachers enough and provide schools with enough resources, learning will happen. Others focus on accountability issues which essentially places the responsibility of education squarely on the shoulders of teachers and administrators -- they believe that the best teachers and the best administrators will definitely deliver good educational outcomes much like a good painter produces good paintings. Still others think public schools have failed and parents need more educational options and so they support vouchers to enable more students to attend private schools. I think all of these points of view are correct to one extent or another, but I suspect that no matter how much is spent on public schools, how much teachers and administrators are held accountable, and how many school vouchers are issued, education will still remain a problem. The process of education is deeply complex and filled with innumerable players that must cooperate. A bad teacher may teach badly, but an uninterested student is also likely to learn badly regardless of instructor. A student with a rough home life walks into the door with disadvantages, but so does a teacher whose meager salary does not pay her bills. I think of education as being like a ladder: one bad rung can greatly impede a student's progress to the top. Still, it's impossible to create ideal conditions for every student. What should be done?

Virtually every reform will bring about bad consequences as well as good. Upping the funding to schools, for instance, can make education a more desirable field to enter and can provide students with more learning opportunities (computer and chemistry and robotics labs, for instance), but it strains already troubled state and local budgets and may not be sustainable for the long term. If the federal government picks up more of the funding gap, that is just another stressor on the much beleaguered federal budget. It's not like education spending is all that elastic either -- no one wants to provide students with a worse education than previous generations of students received so shutting down labs, not buying new computers when they are needed, and paying teachers less are some of the toughest fiscal decisions that can be made. Furthermore, throwing money around freely tends to create bloat rather than efficiency. Focusing on accountability would seemingly do the opposite in that it would lead to more efficiency: teachers and administrators would strive for excellence to hold on to their jobs and the best, rather than the longest employed or most well connected, would be most rewarded. However, this mindset seems to suggest that there are no bad students, just bad educators, which in my view is obviously incorrect. Past the early grades, most students have access to multiple ways to learn ranging from textbooks to libraries to the Internet. If they don't know something, they surely deserve some of the blame themselves. I'm pretty sure anyone who has ever been inside a school has noticed that not every student pays equal attention to even the most gifted and creative teacher. That's not even mentioning the individual circumstances for each student that might make it difficult for him or her learn. It's not fair to hold teachers accountable for factors beyond their control, but to a certain extent all educational outcomes ARE beyond their control. They have an important role, but they can't do it all themselves. Inevitably, some in education will be rewarded not for being better but rather for having more learning-focused groups of students at their disposal for whatever reason. Meanwhile, some teachers will get sick of all the scrutiny and seek another profession that will appreciate their talents better. Vouchers encourage competition among schools, which is fantastic in the way it allows for comparisons in educational outcomes among similar groups of students. If students from single-parent households are exceeding in one school but not in another, then there might well be something worth looking into there. However, just as public schools never get tired of public funding, private schools will undoubtedly develop an insatiable appetite for vouchers. Once again, easy money will lead to bloat and the lines between the public and private school systems will blur...not necessarily a great recipe for "competition." Inevitably, governments and private schools will butt heads -- central planners will strive for more influence on the education they are funding while the schools will attempt to remain as independent as possible. The process of education may well take a back seat to politics which benefits no one.

Personally, I think there should be something of a paradigm shift in how we approach education...actually, make that two shifts. I don't regard No Child Left Behind as a great piece of legislature, but I still think the title would be quite good if it were just slightly changed to No Person Left Behind. Education shouldn't just be about children. Of course, it's a good thing for children to learn as much as possible during their formative years. Sometimes, though, learning won't happen, and we have to accept that. That doesn't mean that the people who passed through the education system unscathed should be regarded as some kind of refuse to be discarded and forgotten in favor of more promising raw material. More and more people seem to be entering higher education later in life now, in no small thanks to the recession -- that's a great thing because a dynamic educational system should always be open to learners of any age. Children will always be left behind no matter what educational reforms are enacted...I think it's important that as adults they'll be able to make up for lost time if they have the desire to do so. However, I rarely hear any politician ask if the educational system is welcoming enough for adults and suited to their needs. The pathways for adult education do exist, but it's a societal shortcoming that we still see education as kids' stuff. Another big paradigm shift that is occurring as we speak is the result of the information revolution. Technology is going to change education in innumerable ways in the future, and it's already making it easier for those "left behind" kids to catch up. The Internet has democratized learning like no other invention; not even the printing press is quite comparable. As we speak, people from around the world are viewing lectures online for free taught by university professors at prestigious institutions -- as time goes on, more and more educational resources will be available for free to all comers. Formal and structured education will undoubtedly still be very important, but it too will be able to take more and more advantage of technology. Flu outbreaks and snowstorms perhaps won't be such disruptions when students can routinely listen to their teachers via webcam and complete assignments online. The best teachers cannot physically be in every single classroom, but no sincere teacher would mind sharing the stage for a few minutes with some brilliant lecturer who wishes to share his or her wisdom with the students of the nation or world...technology makes the transfer of knowledge so much easier. Perhaps the most valuable information students of the future will pick up in school in addition to the three Rs will be computer literacy. That skill is what they will need to learn over the course of their lifetimes, far beyond the date they graduate. That said, it's another simplification to presume the Internet will solve all our problems -- technology is a superb equalizer in education, but frankly if we were all perfect self-motivated learners libraries would have been sufficient to turn us all into polymaths long ago. Small steps like integrating technology with education and encouraging older students, however, may have a bigger impact in the long run than broad and massive reforms.