Where's the campaign talk on education?

Quite an interesting post from Star Parker about how education should be more of a campaign issue this cycle.  Much like Hope Street Group's recent proposal on reforming K-12 education, Parker calls for more consideration of merit-pay for teachers and accountability systems that distinguish productive from unproductive school principals.  Further, she quickly identifies that while the discussion has been heavily focused of late on "job losses and earning gaps, there should be less discussion about sealing ourselves off from international competition and looking for scapegoats and more focus on the real problem -- educating our own population."

Certainly, educational achievement is a key predictor of real family income.  But, Parker goes further by recognizing that "the greatest single influence on school achievement is family background" (Ron Haskin, "Education and Economic Mobility," ).  According to Parker: "There's a destructive circle that runs likes this. The best way to earn more than your low-income-earning parents is to complete higher education. And the most likely predictor that an individual will not get this education is that he or she comes from a low-income family."

In her estimate, education cannot simply be addressed through populist rhetoric, but instead should take a lesson from the religious right's playbook and focus instead on family values.  How we can jump from putting together broken families to vouchers, charters, and tuition tax credits is a logical leap, but certainly Parker has a point when she suggests that getting a good education often comes down to one's living conditions.