Education is linked to “national prosperity”, and whether the question of “taking the exam” is an old one

When it was President Trump’s turn, he sharply criticized the current state of education in the United States during the campaign, declaring that “this administration has screwed up education, and they have failed utterly.” He has championed “free school choice”, supported charter schools and opposed Common Core standards.

Although he did not put forward systematic educational thoughts, he made relevant remarks, and was regarded as a representative of “elite education” thinking.

In the Biden administration, although the system of education thought and the framework of education reform have not yet emerged, many problems related to education have been involved in the first three steps of the new administration, which can be seen.

In a word, where education should go is an ever-changing and important topic, which concerns both national strategy and people’s livelihood. People from national leaders to ordinary people have something to say and want to make fun of. As education is closely related to talent training, it is bound to be connected with “national prosperity”, so it will have strong epochal characteristics. The United States is a good example. When the United States and the Soviet Union “fought”, when they “eliminated poverty”, when they entered the new century, when the gap between the rich and the poor widened, when they put “America First”, there was no doubt that the emphasis of education reform would be different.

And should education be “test-oriented” after all? Or should you not “take the test”? It is also a complex topic that is difficult to “cut one size fits all”. Without “examination”, it is impossible to evaluate students’ learning efficiency and school teaching quality effectively. Emphasize too much “should take an examination”, bring about teacher and student drain unexpectedly, affected the whole level of education to rise.

However, everyone can agree that, first, everyone has the right to an education, and it is not right to be denied the right to an education because the tuition is too expensive or the family is poor. Second, preschool education is very important. In addition to setting up more childcare institutions so that children can have places to “take care of”, attention should also be paid to preschool learning and ability development. Third, on the basis of equal educational resources, it is necessary to join the competition mechanism, such as charter schools, so as to give more people the opportunity to choose schools and give more promotion to schools.

Of course, there are many other issues affecting education in the United States. For example, while Clinton and Obama strongly supported affirmative action, Trump may be more against it. In the field of education, how to admit ethnic minority students, including Asians who have also argued that under this framework, in fact, admissions are restricted and discriminated against, may involve deeper problems of American history, culture and society, which are not so easy to solve.



In this world, everyone may agree on the important role of education and advocate “equal education”. But how to make education serve personal growth and national competition, and how to set goals, set procedures and implement policies is by no means a simple question, and it is impossible to achieve what you want in any “one size fits all” approach. For “equalization”, this is even more true. Private resources cannot be completely equal, including intellectual ability. We should focus on the equalization of public services, and constantly make up for shortcomings, so that children can see the goal and be able to run on the track.