Rare are political candidates who do not claim to support education. But what do they mean by "education?" Do they mean maintaining and expanding the current system of indoctrinating pupils on what to think? Do they mean teaching pupils how to think? Or do they mean something else? They seldom say.
Nearly all, if not all, political candidates favor improving education. How do they plan to improve education? Most answer, "Spend more money."
Apparently, more than a third of the state budget spent on education is not enough. How do they plan to spend more money? They plan to spend it on raising the salaries of teachers. They seem to believe that higher teacher pay equals higher quality of education.
If that were true, pupils graduating from Chicago's public schools would be among the best-educated people in the country instead of among the worst educated, because teachers in Chicago's public schools are among the highest paid in the country.
The relationship between teacher pay and the quality of education is poor.
Other than spending more money and indoctrinating more children at an ever younger age, most candidates seem to have no clue about how to improve education.
Moreover, most probably have no clue about what kind of educational system that they want. They certainly are not likely to give the voters any details. At most, they will give the voters slogans, such as "I am for better education" and "We need to raise teachers' salaries."
Unfortunately, slogans seem to be all that most voters are interested in.