Education and Big Politics

Expressing qualms about the American educational system, one Harvard official remarks. "The level of excellence in Japan is so far beyond what we're doing that our kids would not even have the right to carry the books of the Japanese kids."

"We have got to get back to a concentrated core curriculum," says Democratic Presidential candidate, Sen. John H. Glenn, (D-Ohio) commenting on the problems of secondary school education. "What is important in education is math, and science, and English, and composition, and foreign language, and all those things that go into a very good basic education."

Another Presidential candidate, the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, has gone so far as to argue--in a debate last month at the Kennedy School--that cuts in the Reagan Administration's education budgets over the last three years are directly responsible for the ballooning foreign trade deficit. These varied comments reflect the reality that, in an election year, issues concerning education on all levels--be it elementary, secondary, or collegiate--have become a hot political issue. Candidates on all fronts are moving to gain votes from an electorate that is showing increased frustration with the U.S. educational system, and some are blaming the decline of industrial productivity and the recent recession on educational failings.

The issue of education, of course, is not new to politics. The United States made a concerted effort to push math and science in schools following the Soviet launching of Sputnik in the late 1950s. But in the space of four years, since the last Presidential election year, education has jumped from sitting on the backburner to being one of the most debated topics on the campaign trail.

Part of the reason for this is the flurry of commission reports that have emerged in the last year bemoaning the decline of the U.S. education system and calling for the reinstitution of tougher curriculum standards at all levels. These ranged from a report commissioned by Reagan himself to ones carried out by several private foundations.

Moreover, at least in the higher education sphere, the Reagan efforts to slice into student financial aid from the government has spawned an unusually vehement reaction from some constituents groups, especially students themselves.

The result is that presidential candidates of all stripes are waving the educational banner in the current campaign--vigorously debating such issues as "merit pay" for teachers, throwing out plans for funneling more money into educational programs, and generally trying to out-promise each other over what they plan to do to get the nation's schools back on track.

Considering just a few of the candidates who have been most outspoken on the matter gives an idea of the extensive role to which the education issue ha come to play in the campaign:

* Former Vice President Walter F. Mondale has proposed a more vigorous federal approach to the issue. He wants to establish a federally sponsored "Fund for Excellence.." which would pump money to community education groups;

* Colorado Sen. Gary W. Hart has devoted a good deal of time to highlighting his relatively young age (46) and his understanding of the concerns of the post-War generation. The centerpiece of his education platform is his so-called American Defense Education Act. a program be proposed last year to beet up teaching in much, science, and computer use.

* South Carolina Sen. Ernest F. Hollings, in his capacity as a ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, has moved to increase funding for the 1984 education budget by $1 billion, upping the eventual outlay to $16.1. Hollings has in particular, gone after Reagan's hike in defense spending as a prime reason for the decline in education, saying in a recent speech. "I think the school children of America are worth at least one weapons system."

* President Reagan has taken a different tack in his stand on educational issues, stressing the important role states have to play in combatting drug use and violence in schools and reinstating "traditional roles." In his televised announcement two weeks ago that he was seeking reelection, Reagan said that schools must "find room for God," a reference to his efforts to bring voluntary prayer back to the classroom.

While it is these candidates who have generally taken the lead on the education issues, the rest of the eight Democratic candidates have also worked many of the same themes into their campaign rhetoric. Still, expects are unsure as to the role any of these issues might play in the unfolding campaign.

Education issues really fall into two camps--the primary and secondary school questions and the collegiate questions--both of which are markedly different Debate on the kindergarten to high school years has focused on a range of topics--from teacher training and core curriculi to computer literacy, math and science competency, and tuition tax credits for parents of private school children.

On the other hand, the issue in higher education, say experts, is mostly money--money for students and money for research.

"There is no way you can claim there is equal opportunity when you cut aid," says Charles B. Saunders, a lobbyist for the American Council on Education, which has played an active role in fighting Reagan's budget cuts in federal student age. Says Saunders, explaining the widely stated rationale for student and programs. "By definition you're limiting the kind of access to higher education."

Saunders and other educators can be expected to press their cast against the Reagan program for higher education, especially in light of even more drastic proposed cutbacks in the area for the budget for fiscal year 1985. But while it is unclear just how important education in general will ultimately be in the campaign, issues involving elementary and secondary schools will most likely overshadow the higher education issues.

"I would like to see lot of focus on elementary and secondary education," says Notre Dame University President Father Theodore M. Hesburgh, a prominent American educator. "You can have all the Harvards in the world, and it won't matter without primary and secondary education."

One of the major points stressed in this area, at least by presidential candidates, is getting back to concentrated core curriculi in elementary and high schools--curriculi that emphasize traditional subjects. This especially includes topics in math and science, where U.S. slippage has made many educators fearful for future trends in industrial productivity.

"All of what have been called self-realization courses, all of the driver ed and music and band and a lot of other things...let's not let them interfere with what is a core curriculum, what is core to a good education," says candidate Glenn. "Getting back to a good core curriculum--that doesn't cost any money."

One other move that is gaining widespread bipartisan support is the idea of "merit pay," or encouraging good teachers by dangling before them possible salary increases. Reagan and several of the Democratic eight have supported the proposal in general, though no one has proposed anything specific.

The race to get on the right side of the educational fence has also been accelerated by pressure from teacher lobbying groups, especially the National Educational Association (NEA), which endorsed Mondale last fall. The NEA endorsement is more than a more stamp of approval for Mondale's platform: it carries with it the promise of campaign workers nationwide and a organization that rivals the AFL-CIO, another group that has backed the Minnesotan.

Despite the general focus on lower-level education, a healthy bureaucratic battle has been waged over questions of higher education. Yet a number of educators bemoan the fact that higher education is not, in the words of University of Minnesota President C. Peter Magrath, "a politically attractive issue."

Magrath says the electorate is short-sighted in focusing exclusively on elementary and secondary schools to the detriment of higher education issues, which in the end have a great long-term significance.

"The colleges don't get the structural attention they deserve," he says.

What little debate there has been in the public arena has largely focused on budget issues, but educators acknowledge it is tough to get the public worked up over cuts in financial aid given the swollen budget deficits nearing $200 billion.

Education lobbyists have cried foul over Reagan's proposal, and many charge him with disregarding higher education. The proposed budget would include a cut of $326 million in funding for need-based programs, which, according to education groups, would cut off nearly 800,000 of the 12 million college and graduate students who receive aid.

The budget also seeks to eliminate federal funding for several educational programs, including National Direct Student Loans (NDSL). Supplement Grants, State Student Incentive Grants. Graduate Student Fellowships, and a program to help build and renovate academic facilities.

Offsetting these cuts, however, is a major hike in funding for work study programs from $550 million to $850 million. The level of Pell Grant funding would remain equal. (See accompanying story).

The issues raised in the budget are familiar to lobbyists and other educators who over the last three years have fought the Reagan cutbacks tooth and nail. These seasoned pros generally make two points about the education budget as it relates to politics--one, many of Reagan's proposed cutbacks are certain to be restored by Congress and, two, it should not play more than a small role in the election campaign.

"The President's proposals are going to be thrown out so fast they will be soon forgotten," says Saunders.

More ominous, says Minnesota's Magrath, the next nine months are not likely to yield any substantive proposals for higher education--beyond the specific rebutting on the Reagan budge.

The Democrats "can certainly demonstrate there has been a drop in federal concern for research and development," he says. "But I'm not sure the political campaign of 1984 will bring any focused discussion on the issue." Magrath himself favors fellow Minnesotan Mondale because he shows a "specific commitment" to financial support for lower and middle-class students.

It is not clear, then, whether any of the over the education budget should have much of an active effect on students.

Harvard federal lobbyist Parker L. Coddington says of the various Democratic proposals to restore funding for aid programs. "They're all very general ideas. Price tags cannot be put on them and the cost-benefit can't even be guestimated."

Adds Minnesota's Magrath, "Political plat forms don't mean a darn thing."