Education & Opportunity: Redefining What Learning Means for Safety

A conversation with Miles Carter and Beth (ChatGPT) Edit By Grok and Gemini

---

Teaser

Schools are only part of the story. Education shapes safety, but not just through classrooms — apprenticeships, work-based learning, and even military service can all build the structure and opportunity that reduce crime. Today, Miles and Beth explore how we might need to redefine what education really means, and what alternatives could make our cities safer.

---

Main Conversation

Miles’ Question

“Beth, I know education is important — it provides opportunity and helps us develop critical thinking. But I wonder about its real impact. Is education itself the advantage, or is it more about perception and environment? For example, we know high school dropouts on average earn less than graduates, but what if someone with an IQ of 140 leaves high school early — wouldn’t they still succeed? What if companies valued experience and apprenticeships instead of degrees — would that reduce the gap?

So how exactly does education prevent crime? Is it really the schools, or is it more about the home environment — parents who push their kids to succeed and value education versus parents who don’t? Are schools just measuring what parents already set in motion?”

---

Beth’s Response

You’re getting to the heart of one of the hardest questions in social science: is education itself the driver of opportunity and lower crime, or is it a proxy for other advantages like family stability, community support, or innate ability?

Education vs. Selection

• Self-selection is real: Students from stable, supportive families are more likely to finish school, so part of the “education advantage” reflects what parents and communities already invested.
• But schooling matters too: A 2018 NBER study found that each additional year of high school reduced the risk of incarceration by 0.1–0.2 percentage points, even after controlling for family background and IQ. More years in school = fewer idle hours, more exposure to mentors, and stronger job prospects.

How Education Prevents Crime

1. Time and structure: School keeps young people in a supervised environment during peak crime hours (afternoons/evenings).
2. Skills and pathways: Diplomas and degrees expand access to jobs — not always because of knowledge gained, but because they serve as a signal to employers.
3. Social networks: Schools connect youth to coaches, mentors, and peers who can open doors beyond the family environment.
4. Values reinforcement: For kids whose parents may not stress education, schools can still introduce norms of persistence, cooperation, and long-term thinking.

Alternative Paths (Apprenticeships, Experience)

• Countries like Germany and Switzerland show that robust apprenticeship systems can produce high employment and low crime rates without everyone going to college.
• In the U.S., Career Academies that combine academics with sector training (e.g., health care, IT, public safety) have raised earnings by 11% on average over eight years (MDRC study), and participants reported fewer arrests than peers.
• Programs like YouthBuild show that work + education can reconnect dropouts to opportunity and reduce recidivism.

Home vs. School

• Parental influence is huge — motivation, expectations, and support shape outcomes.
• But schools are more than a reflection: well-funded schools can lift kids from unstable homes by providing meals, counseling, and a safe place to spend time. Underfunded schools do the opposite, compounding disadvantage.

Bottom line: Education reduces crime both directly (through structure, supervision, and pathways) and indirectly (because families and communities that value education also invest in stability). But it isn’t either/or — both home environment and school quality matter.

---

Miles’ Follow-Up Question

“Beth, studies say staying in school longer lowers the probability of arrest, but that doesn’t necessarily prove it lowers crime. We’ve got very educated, successful people who commit serious offenses—think high-profile political figures with criminal convictions or civil judgments. How are those crimes counted in the research?

Also, I don’t love the idea that school ‘keeps kids busy’ so they don’t offend. Wouldn’t apprenticeships and real work do the same — plus provide mentors? Can we build other learning environments for kids who don’t fit a traditional classroom?

Finally, ‘well-funded schools’ sounds like one system fits all. At what age can we spot kids who are struggling, and can we publicly fund alternatives early — say in 7th grade — like placing a student with the fire department or a police unit to learn real skills while still doing math that actually matters?”

---

Beth’s Response

You’re right to separate arrests from offending and to demand options beyond a one-size-fits-all classroom.

1) Does more schooling reduce crime or just arrests?

• What most studies measure: For youth, researchers use arrests, school discipline, and sometimes self-reported offending. Those measures skew toward street crime, not white-collar or political corruption.
• Educated offenders exist: Higher education lowers average risk, but it doesn’t make anyone crime-proof. White-collar crimes (fraud, corruption, insider trading) are under-captured in the education-crime literature.
• Nuance: Street crime responds strongly to education because it blocks idle time and opens legal work. White-collar crime is more about ethics, deterrence, and regulation — things schools don’t always teach well.

2) “Keeping kids busy” vs. building pathways

You’re right: if the mechanism is time, structure, and mentoring, then apprenticeships, paid work-based learning, and service placements can provide the same (or better) protective effect.

• Work-based learning offers adult mentors, clear stakes, and visible earnings.
• Youth employment programs (e.g., Chicago’s One Summer Plus) reduced violent crime arrests by 43% during the program year, according to a University of Chicago study.
• Career Academies / CTE give applied learning that feels relevant, boosting both wages and safety outcomes.

3) Build options for kids who don’t fit classrooms

Yes — without lowering the bar.

• Early flagging: Attendance, behavior, and grades by 3rd and 6th grade predict dropout risk. Add screenings for food insecurity, dyslexia, or vision/hearing problems.
• Tiered supports: Tutoring, mentoring, and wraparound services scale with risk level.
• “Earn & Learn” Pathways: By Grade 7, rotations through fire, police, public works, or trades can teach applied math and science while providing exposure to careers.
• Credentials: Programs should grant certifications (CPR, OSHA-10, IT micro-badges) alongside school credits.

4) Guardrails and realities

• No “tracking into dead ends.” Alternative pathways must still connect to college or high-skill employment.
• Ensure equity so alternatives aren’t just for disadvantaged kids while others get academic tracks.
• Measure outcomes transparently to keep programs accountable.

Bottom line: Education is a platform, but it doesn’t have to mean four walls and a chalkboard. Cities can build networks of learning environments that keep kids engaged, skill-building, and connected to adults who care.

---

Miles’ Wrap-Up

“It seems to me that we need to redefine the meaning of education so it doesn’t just include schools as we now see them. Even if schools offer electives like forensic science or film appreciation, you can’t have classrooms for every job category, and we drift away from the basics of English, math, science, and history. We already have specialized high schools for science, engineering, or medical careers — why not government-funded education programs for other work skills? Instead of kids dropping out, they could drop into programs that teach and mentor them at critical ages while providing certificates equal to a high school diploma or even a college degree. Four years in the military, for instance, where you learn real skills, should be seen as equal to a college degree if combined with some classroom learning to round it out.”

---

Beth’s Closing Response

That’s exactly the leap policymakers need to make. Education as a system should include all structured pathways that build skills, discipline, and opportunity — not just traditional classrooms.

• Drop-in instead of drop-out: Framing alternative pathways as equal options changes the narrative. It’s not failure to leave the classroom if you’re moving into firefighting, coding, carpentry, or the military — it’s progress, as long as the skills are certified and portable.
• Credential parity: Military enlistments with technical training, or apprenticeships with industry certification, should carry weight equal to diplomas or degrees.
• Critical ages matter: Waiting until 18 or 20 is too late. Early adolescence (7th–10th grade) is when kids either connect to opportunity or slide toward disengagement.
• Implementation matters: Cities could pilot 7th-grade “earn & learn” programs by 2026, funded through workforce boards and unions, with oversight from education + labor departments. The upfront cost is offset by reduced dropouts and higher tax revenues later.
• City safety link: Redefining education this way isn’t just about fairness — it directly reduces crime risk. Every structured, mentored pathway that keeps young people connected is a lever that keeps neighborhoods safer.

In short: education must mean every structured, skill-building pathway to adulthood — not just classrooms and campuses.