Clinton and Obama on Education

So the Clinton plan for education reform essentially is to provide pre-kindergarteners with an infusion of education when they are young and suggests that ought to set them on a path to successful education. In theory I think this is a great idea, it pass a logic test that providing children with early education will provide them with long term learning gains. However, there are several studies which show that programs like Head Start have diminished effects overtime, and they offer a wide range of explanations as to why this is.

So it seems from the get go, that if Clinton were elected, and able to get her education plan enacted, it would be bound to fail – if only because these types of solutions are shown to have little effect.

When I saw her speak about this on Today a couple of days ago, Matt Lauer asked her:

“But isn't there another study or a group of studies that says, hey, if you spend this money on high-quality pre-K but you don't then invest more money on high-quality education down the road -- fourth grade, fifth grade, eighth grade -- that some of the results of that pre-K are lost?”

To this she responded:

“No, because if you don't invest early, you don't get the results that you need in those later grades… The evidence has been consistent that the early investment pays off.”

Lauer was right and it appears that Clinton was misinformed. If she is elected, I really hope she can come up with a better education plan, one that is shown to work; not one that is destined to fail.

On the other hand, Obama has some interesting and potentially viable suggestions as to how to increase academic achievement. First, he suggests increasing the pay of high performing teachers by 10%-20%. I’m not sure what the research says on this one, but I have long been an advocate of raising teachers’ salaries. It seems likely this would produce a general increase in the quality of teachers. Since at least some people base their career path on potential earnings, if teaching were a more economically rewarding career, an increased number of high quality people would likely be drawn to the profession if the pay were higher. This seems like basic rational choice economics to me. Second, Obama suggests more summer learning opportunities. While I’m sure millions of children would groan at the idea of more school, Obama and his camp are right that studies have show this is a place where disparities in educational achievement are exacerbated. Finally, Obama suggests increasing financial aid to college students. Since a college degree is more and more often required for even entry level positions in non-skilled jobs, it seems important to get more U.S. children through college. Providing them with more funding opportunities without causing them to go tens of thousands of dollars in debt certainly seems like it would increase the number of folks who could afford to attend college, particularly in the face of ever raising cost of attendance.

I like that this is an issue both of these candidates are discussing. Education is critically important to individuals as well as to the direction of our country. I hope that this comes more into the forefront of the presidential debate and leads to some real changes.