news-30112024-120610

During his first administration, Donald Trump emphasized the importance of judging employees based on skills and experience rather than degrees. This approach aimed to provide opportunities for individuals without a bachelor’s degree who are eager to receive training and work hard. One of Trump’s significant actions was to sign a rule stating that federal jobs should not require a bachelor’s degree unless absolutely necessary. This move challenged the education vision of the previous administration, which focused on a generic public school curriculum followed by a push for “college for all.” Many working-class Americans felt alienated by this approach as well-paid manufacturing jobs were disappearing, leaving them searching for a new middle-class future.

Although the previous education advisors believed that success depended on a university education, particularly in STEM fields, Trump’s administration recognized that not everyone aspired to pursue a four-year degree. The reality is that a significant number of bachelor’s degree holders are underemployed even a decade after graduation, while some individuals with associate’s degrees earn more than the average college graduate. Furthermore, a large percentage of college students do not complete their degrees within six years, indicating an issue with the current educational system’s focus on college.

High schools have become overly college-focused, neglecting to provide guidance on alternative career paths for students not planning to pursue higher education. This lack of direction leaves many young people unprepared for both citizenship and the workforce. While opening federal jobs to individuals without degrees was a step in the right direction, schools need to do more to equip students with the skills needed for a successful future in the workforce.

Regarding Trump’s proposed actions on education during his potential second administration, shutting down the U.S. Education Department would require congressional approval, presenting a significant challenge. Additionally, reallocating the department’s responsibilities to another agency would not eliminate the essential work required to administer education laws, process financial aid applications, and oversee grants and loans.

Despite Trump’s intentions to reduce federal involvement in schools, recent efforts to pull funding from schools teaching LGBTQ+ topics or critical race theory have faced resistance. These decisions are typically made at the state and local levels, with voters having the power to hold school board members accountable through elections. Trump’s emphasis on school choice has also encountered public pushback, with recent statewide votes in conservative states rejecting the concept.

However, Trump’s focus on non-college pathways and apprenticeships has garnered bipartisan support and presents an opportunity for constructive education policy. By utilizing corporate tax credits and public-private partnerships, the administration could create apprenticeship programs that lead to white-collar job opportunities for young individuals. Emulating successful models like Switzerland’s system of white-collar apprenticeships could transform the U.S. education landscape and provide practical skills to students.

In conclusion, Trump has the potential to become a transformational education president by building on his initiatives and prioritizing relevant and engaging curricula. By steering away from disruptive policies and focusing on practical solutions, such as apprenticeships and vocational training, Trump could leave a lasting impact on the education system. The appointment of a new Education Secretary and the implementation of innovative programs could pave the way for a more inclusive and effective educational experience for all students.