By OTAVIANO HELENE*
Social inequality, especially inequality in income distribution, also causes great educational inequality in the USA
1.
US school education is not the best. In international student comparison programs, such as Pisa, the USA is in a relative position far below that which would be expected considering its economic reality. In some educational indicators, the US position is close to that observed in countries with GDP per capita equal to half that of the United States.
Given the material conditions of that country and the existence of excellent schools and universities, this situation might seem strange. However, social inequality, especially inequality in income distribution, seems to also cause great educational inequality. This means that cutting-edge education and enormous scientific and cultural development coexist, on the one hand, with terrible educational indicators, on the other.
Other characteristics of that country that place it in a very atypical position concern higher education. In the USA, higher education is mostly public. However, despite being much less privatized than higher education in Brazil (a quarter of students in that country are in private institutions, an inverse proportion to that in Brazil, where a quarter are in public institutions), its privatization rate is higher than that which is typically observed in more advanced countries.
Another very striking characteristic of the USA is the fact that public higher education there is not free and the annual fees charged are quite high, a situation very different from that typically observed in advanced countries.
How do the two parties vying for the presidency of that country understand this situation and what proposals do they have?
2.
In some respects, the differences between the US Democratic and Republican parties are very small. However, in social policies, the same does not occur. In this aspect, the Democratic Party has a profile more similar to that of European social democracy, while the Republican Party defends traditional values, sometimes based on religious principles. Let's look at some examples.
The Republican Party defends the non-tenure of teachers and a remuneration policy that may depend on criteria unrelated to school and educational development. For example, your current candidate for the White House understands that education is taken over by “radical left-wing maniacs” and this must stop. And, perhaps, to put an end to this it is necessary to end teacher tenure first.
Democrats, in turn, recognize the importance of teacher stability and community participation (educators, parents, community leaders and students) in defining educational projects and better remuneration for education workers. Democrats recognize that the possibility of municipalities supplementing school budgets, including salaries, means that education in cities with higher per capita incomes is very different from that offered to young people and children in poorer cities, which is an important source of inequalities educational issues that must be overcome.
Republicans understand that federal aid for education and health care for children from low-income families that currently exists must be eliminated. Still other proposals are to transform public expenditure on education into vouchers that can be used to pay for private schools, and to close the education secretariat, a body corresponding to the Brazilian Ministry of Education.
The Democratic Party, for its part, claims to understand that education is not a commodity and that all children and young people must have access to quality education controlled by the public sector. Inequalities must be addressed through federal government aid aimed at children and young people from the most disadvantaged segments. Democrats also understand that public resources should only be directed to public institutions.
Republicans tend to support home education, even subsidized with public resources. Democrats, on the other hand, recognize the importance of in-person teaching, which became very clear during the confinements caused by Covid-19.
As here, other agendas invade the educational issue in the USA. Democrats reject the proposal that teachers use weapons in schools, a point defended by Republicans; Would it be the American version of militarized schools? According to the latter, schools must also promote “Western values”, while democrats understand that all children and young people must be treated the same way, regardless of their national origins, sex, gender identity, religion or lack thereof and other personal characteristics.
Another important point that differentiates the two parties is the financing of higher education. A common practice – collection combined with financing to pay annual fees – has caused quite significant damage. Student debts, almost entirely federal, are close to two trillion dollars, a value close to Brazil's nominal GDP for an entire year, which corresponds to an average of around US$40 per debtor.
On the one hand, this affects socially and economically more fragile groups hardest; on the other hand, it reduces or even nullifies the individual economic gains expected as a result of attending a higher education course. Furthermore, the possibility of financing to cover annual fees contributes to their increase.
3.
How do Democrats and Republicans understand this issue?
Part of the Democratic Party simply defends the end of higher education fees in public institutions, a proposal embraced by Bernie Sanders in his program when he was a candidate for President of the Republic. The Democrats' current proposals, recognizing the seriousness of the problem created by charging higher education, are, however, more modest, but advocate the reduction of student debt and interest on public loans.
The Republican Party's proposal to tackle the same issue is more common: promoting cheaper schools and courses. This answer is in line with the fact that 59% of Republicans or supporters think that higher education has a negative effect on the country. Would ending him be a possibility?
Ultimately, both there and here, the understanding of the role of school education in a society differs greatly depending on the political and ideological position of the parties. And, both there and here, the educational agenda is contaminated by the ideological agenda.
Octavian Helene is a senior professor at the USP Physics Institute.
Originally published on Journal of USP.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
