Latin American, The United States, and Socioeconomic Inequality

One of the policy areas that I am particularly passionate about is education policy. My passion has been shaped by my own experiences with my local public schools and the vast disparity between the quality of education in local and private schools and my professional experience working with policies meant to fairly shape the Ohio public schools. The Francis Fukuyama article – The Latin American Experience – explores the approach that Latin American countries have taken to leveling socioeconomic inequalities through a variety of pathways, including education reform. As I read, I noted several parallels between United States education policy and those polices pursued by multiple Latin American states.

First, as Fukuyama points out, throwing money at education does not necessarily mean that educational outcomes will be improved. Fukuyama cites a study by Michael Clemens, in which New Jersey was forced to equalize spending per capita in all public school districts through reallocation of funds. However, there was very little improvement in the education levels of New Jersey’s poor. Fukuyama points out that better, more dedicated teachers are a large part of producing better educational outcomes. I had the opportunity to work in two inner city schools with troubled children as a part of a school monitored service program. Both schools received the same relative amount of funding, however one school saw more success in its students than another. As I began to look for differences between the schools, the only real difference that I could find was the teachers. Both schools learned the same basic material, however one teacher had a far more hands on approach than the other. One teacher spent time with each student during silent work periods and read to students, while the other teacher sat at her desk and had other students read to the class. The hands on teacher’s class did far better in district wide evaluations than the hands off teacher. To me, this reinforced that money, while often helpful, is not always the best way to improve a child’s education. The key to improving education is finding people who are truly passionate about enriching student’s lives with knowledge.

I noted an interesting parallel between the educational transitions going on in Bogota, Columbia and those, which recently occurred in my hometown, Youngstown, Ohio. Bogota recently transitioned to a system in which local authorities, rather than state authorities have control over the school systems. Fukuyama explains that this is supposed to reduce dependency on central government, which is in turn supposed to alleviate the stress of renegotiating funds, which takes focus away from actually improving performance. While Fukuyama does not comment on the overall efficiency of this plan, the opposite is occurring in Youngstown, Ohio. About a year ago, the State of Ohio implemented a plan in which a schools CEO would take over the failing Youngstown City School District and would all but eradicate the need for a school board. The CEO put in place has so far increased the morale of the district by working closely with the community, however educational outcomes are yet to be measured. This is the opposite of what has happened in Bogota, but has also shown signs of progress. Much like the Bogota plans, the overall efficiency of this reform is still to be determined, however it reinforces the point that people rather than money are essential to school reform.

I also found it interesting that Mexican conditional cash transfer programs were based on school attendance. School attendance is one of the largest problems facing many nations, because many students do not see a benefit in school and would rather drop out than stay in “useless classes.” I would like to see how a program like this would work in the United States in impoverished families. If families were allotted food stamps based on how often their children attend classes, schools would probably see much higher attendance rates. Even in families where transportation is an issue, there would be more of a push to get children to school and there would be fewer excuses to not send children to school. These programs do have some logistical obstacles and may seem harsh, but they would put enough pressure on parents to make sure that their children get to school.

One crucial factor in education that Fukuyama does not address, but should is the degree to which parenting style and home life factors into a child’s education. Educational success requires some degree of parental involvement and encouragement. If parents are lackadaisical towards education, children are likely to follow. I believe that by not addressing parental involvement, Fukuyama has left out an enormous predictor of student success, even though arguments can be made for and against parental involvement.

It was very interesting to see how Fukuyama used education to demonstrate socioeconomic inequality in Latin America. Some of the policy solutions that Fukuyama discussed are very similar to those utilized in the United States while others are very different. I am wondering if my peers believe that any of the solutions Fukuyama discussed could be translated to the United States, if they have had any similar experiences, and which polices they see as the most effective.