The government is responsible for ensuring the academic success of all students in the country. The government’s responsibility is to ensure all students access education and that education in the country remains qualitative, affordable, and safe. The most effective way of directly influencing education in the country is by creating laws and ensuring all educational institutions adhere to them. The laws created by the government are essential because they provide swift learning to all students, and they should be monitored so that they remain favorable to all.
These legislations have a considerable effect on how schools function because all schools must fully comply with all laws and requirements by the government. For example, the No Child Left Behind Act is very profound academic legislation (Rebora, 2020). It aims to raise the qualitative nature of academics by holding states and schools responsible for students’ academic progress (“Education database: Educational expenditure by source and destination (Edition 2016),” 2017). The Act proposed several recommendations, including annual testing of students, which required teachers to test students on several subjects, including reading and mathematics. These tests must comply with the National Academic Standards set by the governments and States.
On academic progress, the Act proposed that States guarantee all students are on the proficient level set by the government. Individual schools must also fulfill adequate yearly progress for their student population and several demographic groups (Denning et al., 2019). Failure to meet these requirements for two consecutive rows the school will be technical assistance and students allowed to transfer to other public schools. Students are also offered private tutors if they cannot meet the set standards (Meador, 2019). Through this Act, the government can continuously monitor students, teachers, and schools and make sure teachers are well qualified and the students produce quality results.
The government also ensures that accessing education at higher learning institutions is cheaper by providing funds to these institutions. The federal government funds state institutions to help them continue offering programs and pay their staff. These funds not only benefit the institutions but students as well (Ward et al., 2020). Many students are not able to raise the needed fees; thus, they depend on these funds. The funds are also used to improve the institution’s infrastructure, pay the staff, and bills (Yu et al., 2018). Increased funding leads to better students’ academic results because they can access quality education at affordable prices.
Several laws are in place to safeguard equal funding to students from all districts. Some districts receive funds twice as much as students from other poor districts (Biddle, 2020). However, these funds are also adjusted according to the costs of living in the school’s state. Based on the wealth of individuals, the US government also funds elementary and secondary education; this makes it easy to access quality education at all levels.
These policies on education must be monitored closely to ensure they do not affect other citizens. For example, the No Child Left Behind Act was a center of media discussion as it drew criticism from many parts of the US. Concerns were raised because many schools, especially the high-performing schools, failed to meet the requirements (Lunday, 2020). As a result, the law was amended, allowing states to make their annual benchmarks. In addition, government funding to schools from various states has also attracted media attention because of the state-based funding disparity. Such media critics have made the government increase funding and amend laws to guarantee easy access to quality and affordable education to all citizens.
Suppose the media has learned of the constant embezzlement of funds in a given school. Such a situation is dire because it affects the school’s infrastructure and its public name. As a result, everyone will lose confidence, and parents will refrain from enrolling their children (Lunday, 2020). Therefore, to avoid the adverse negative effects of such a scandal, one should handle the effects of negative publicity, neutralize them and restore trust.
The first step toward handling negative publicity is acknowledging the mistake. Owning the mistake is better than a defensive rebuttal. It also convinces the public that the institution is responsible and accountable for its actions (Expert Panel, Forbes Agency Council, 2018). After owning the mistakes, it is essential to convince the public of the lessons learned and their actions to prevent the problem from reoccurring.
Second, create a positive image about the institution; this will convince the public that the institution can still be trusted. It also shifts the audience’s focus from the scandal and its effects on the positive sides of the school (Cath et al., 2017). Creating a blog, positive media advertisement, and videos showing the positive side of the school are some of the ways to achieve positive media publicity.
In conclusion, although quality education is expensive to access, the government has the role of making it affordable and accessible to all students. The best of achieve this goal is to create laws and policies that check the quality of education in the country. Laws such as the No Child is Left Behind Act monitor the quality of education and the quality of results from students. The government also funds these institutions to ensure they are adequately staffed and well equipped. Governments also provide funds to students to enable them to afford school fees. The media should also monitor how these funds are managed to protect the welfare of students. It is critical to invest in education because it secures the country’s future.
Biddle, B. J. (2020). Unequal school funding in the United States – Educational leadership. ASCD: Professional Learning & Community for Educators. Web.
Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2017). Undefined. Science and Engineering Ethics. Web.
Denning, J. T., Marx, B. M., & Turner, L. J. (2019). ProPelled: The effects of grants on graduation, earnings, and welfare. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 11(3), 193-224. Web.
Education database: Educational expenditure by source and destination (Edition 2016). (2017). OECD Education Statistics. Web.
Expert Panel, Forbes Agency Council. (2018). How to deal with negative press in a positive way. Forbes. Web.
Lunday, J. (2020). Compliance monitoring: A strategic approach to monitoring for compliance. Corporate Compliance Insights. Web.
Meador, D. (2019). Why school legislation matters to teachers and students. ThoughtCo. Web.
Rebora, A. (2020). No Child Left Behind. Education Week. Web.
Ward, J. D., Pisacreta, E. D., Weintraut, B., & Kurzweil, M. (2020). An overview of state higher education funding approaches. Ithaka S+R. Web.
Yu, M., Liu, F., Lee, J., & Soutar, G. (2018). The influence of negative publicity on brand equity: Attribution, image, attitude and purchase intention. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 27(4), 440-451. Web.