[Want even more content from FPM? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more—now for just $3.99/month. Click here to sign up.]

In the wake of President Donald Trump’s decision to dismantle the Department of Education, there are a few issues to bear in mind – ones which, if properly attended to, will ensure that America remains a global educational force with which to contend.

In reverting the education of our youth to the individual states that make up our nation, and against the backdrop that some states are fiscally more advanced than others, the question remains: how does the United States remain true to its commitment to provide a first-class education to its youth without compromising any of its quality, where that quality is tied to economic status on a state level? The ethical issue at stake here is that the quality of each American student ought not be constrained by an accident of birth. Students born into poor families and living in poorer states have just as much potential and cognitive capabilities as those born into affluent families living in high-income districts.

Although there are some exceptions, high-income school districts tend to spend more money on education per pupil and have better outcomes, while low-income districts tend to spend less and have worse outcomes. Without entering into a debate about the ethicality of publicly funded education, it should be fairly obvious that in order for the United States to surpass those 40 countries President Trump has identified as being ahead of us educationally, our nation needs to ensure that talented and capable students trapped in poorer states should have as much of an equal chance to matriculate through K-12 as their more affluent compatriots.

The President has derided our education system and has stated that the country performs the worst globally while spending the most per pupil. President Trump declared: “We’re last, we’re number 40 but we’re number one in cost per pupil.”

One issue that needs to be investigated is exploring how and why such funds are allocated in ways that do not increase performance. It should go without saying that if we wish to remain competitive with other nations that are outperforming our students in several domains including reading, writing and mathematics, then the government ought to ensure that dollars are spent in a way that can directly correlate to excellent outcomes.

One of the factors that lead to poor outcomes in poorer districts and states is indiscipline in schools—regardless of increased spending per student. It is no secret that the level of indiscipline among students in poorer districts, and the inability of teachers to invoke strict disciplinary measures against obstreperous students, is a chief contributory factor to poor performance. Truancy, disregard for and disrespect towards authority figures, disruptive actions and reduced student engagement (which includes skipping classes), adversely hinder teachers’ ability to teach effectively.

The United Sates educational system needs to have a zero-tolerance policy for all the aforementioned forms of bad behavior in schools. To that extent, abusive and hostile and ill-behaved students will need to be expelled from schools. Too often teachers in our public schools spend a disproportionate amount of time attempting to implement disciplinary measures as opposed to disseminating knowledge. To this end, we know that students from impoverished backgrounds can learn and achieve in an educational environment governed by implacable and non-negotiable law and order.

The United States, therefore, in whatever diminished capacity the federal government chooses to involve itself with the education of our students, needs to have a universal behavioral and disciplinary standard that applies to all schools and all states – period. Going forward, let it be known that the United States has the strictest disciplinary standard in the world when it comes to classroom comportment. Poor students, coupled with diligent teachers, can learn and flourish in an educational environment governed intransigently by the strictest disciplinary measures. It is not the job of our schools to rehabilitate and cater to behavioral issues each student might be experiencing.

Indeed, the world is replete with images and stories of children in poverty-stricken countries often walking to school without shoes, but possessed of a deep and heart-wrenching hunger to learn. Such students are able to leave their trauma and tribulations behind them and focus on manifesting their aspirational identities. The United States seems to be one of the few countries in the world that treats its educational system as a therapeutic enterprise, one that first needs to tend to the psychological challenges of its students before it believes they can learn. Too often mental health is used as an excuse for simply not getting on with the business of teaching and learning.

Another issue to be addressed in the wake of the dismantling of the Department of Education is the coercive monopoly on teaching held by the teachers unions. One way we can allow students to thrive regardless of background is to advocate for the complete abolition of the Teachers Union and the need for certification as a precondition for teaching. When I was attending school in Jamaica, where I grew up, the only qualification a teacher needed to teach was the completion of a bachelor’s degree in the particular subject he or she was teaching. We need to put the thousands of unemployed and unemployable individuals holding doctorates into our public school system. There is no rational need for certification.

With highly qualified teachers ensconced in a strict learning environment with zero tolerance for misconduct, United States public schools can become not just citadels for scholastic high achievers. They can also become moral domains in which the continued socialization of our students produces an ethos conducive to the cultivation of rational patriotism, civic mindedness, and refined and cultivated sensibilities.