“What a great and much-needed investment this would be for America!” As tensions between President Trump and Harvard University continue, Trump has proposed redirecting billions of dollars originally earmarked for Harvard to fund U.S. vocational schools instead. This move ties directly to his campaign promise to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. Historically, vocational education once thrived in the U.S. But a 1960s-era law promoting “college for all” not only made federal student loans a key pillar of the higher education system—it also reshaped educational equity and class mobility across the country. In recent years, burdened by student debt and high living costs, more young Americans are questioning the value of a college degree and showing renewed interest in vocational paths. However, education experts caution that the lack of forward-thinking in vocational schools, chronic underfunding of basic education, and a cultural decline in work ethic pose serious challenges to the goal of a manufacturing revival.
“Extremely effective from a political standpoint.”
On May 26, U.S. President Donald Trump posted on the social media platform Truth Social, saying he’s considering pulling $3 billion in funding from Harvard University and reallocating it to vocational schools across the country. He emphasized his point by writing “TRADE SCHOOLS” in all capital letters. Not long before, Trump told the media, “I want the money to go to trade schools—places where people learn how to fix motors and engines, how to build rockets. Because, you know, someone’s got to build those rockets.”
U.S. government officials have also stressed the need to increase investment in schools beyond four-year universities. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in an interview, “Our country needs more apprentices, electricians, and plumbers,” rather than graduates with degrees in multicultural studies from Harvard.
Recently, Fox News interviewed residents in Washington, Detroit, and Houston about the issue. While most expressed concern or opposition to Trump pressuring Ivy League institutions, they also acknowledged the importance of investing in vocational schools. Universal Technical Institute, one of the largest private vocational school chains in the U.S., echoed this view. Its CEO, Jerome Grant, stated, “We’re not in conflict with four-year colleges. We just believe that for many American kids, a four-year degree shouldn’t be seen as the only path after high school.”
Jonathan Fansmith, director of government relations at the American Council on Education, argued that pulling funding from Harvard or other research institutions isn’t the right way to support vocational education. He pointed out that Harvard’s federal grants are competitively awarded and designated by Congress to fund cutting-edge science and biomedical research. In his view, the federal government should seek congressional approval for new funding if it wants to support vocational schools—“not repurpose money that Congress already allocated for specific purposes.”
NBC criticized Trump’s proposal to reallocate Harvard’s federal funding to vocational schools, calling it an effort to “stoke division between Ivy League elites and the working class.” Some education experts have described it as a “shrewd political tactic,” suggesting that it seeks public support by implying Harvard’s success comes at the expense of America’s working class. Nat Malkus, Deputy Director of Education Policy at the American Enterprise Institute, said, “Politically, it’s extremely effective.” With a single short post, Trump made it clear that “he stands not with Harvard’s globalist elites, but with ordinary Americans.”
Trump and the Republican Party’s support for vocational schools is deeply political. According to The New York Times, education divides have sharpened political polarization in the U.S., with education levels closely tied to partisan preferences. Since 2016 especially, voters without college degrees have leaned heavily Republican, while those with bachelor’s or higher degrees increasingly favor the Democrats.
From the Land-Grant Act to “College for All”
Historically, vocational education in the United States once flourished. In 1862, the U.S. passed the Morrill Act—commonly known as the Land-Grant Act. Under the law, the federal government granted land to individual states, which then used the proceeds to establish and fund institutions of higher education. These schools primarily focused on mechanical trades and agricultural sciences. By the end of the 19th century, 69 land-grant colleges had been established, many of which later evolved into state universities and played a major role in America’s economic rise. While the Morrill Act is widely considered the foundation of the U.S. public higher education system, it also significantly advanced vocational education by supporting skill-based programs aligned with the labor demands of that era’s industrial and agricultural sectors.
As early as the late 19th century, various groups in American society began calling for more vocational training in schools, rooted in a widespread belief in the moral, educational, and practical value of labor. In 1917, Congress passed the Smith–Hughes Act, marking the first time the federal government directly funded local education. The act promoted vocational programs in high schools across states, covering agriculture, industrial trades, and home economics—preparing students for local jobs after graduation. In 1963, the Vocational Education Act was introduced, significantly increasing federal investment in vocational education.
However, the rise of the “college for all” mindset in the 1960s led to the decline of vocational training. According to CBS News, in November 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Higher Education Act and declared, “Higher education is no longer a luxury—it has become a necessity.” The goal of the act was to break down social and economic barriers, ensuring every American could access higher education. It established a comprehensive federal financial aid system, including scholarships and student loans.
On the one hand, the U.S. did move closer to the vision of universal college access. Between 1965 and 2011, college enrollment nearly quadrupled to 21 million. According to German data firm Statista, the percentage of Americans with a bachelor’s degree surpassed 30% in 2011. On the other hand, the Higher Education Act funneled resources toward universities, making money and prestige the currency of higher ed—while vocational institutions were increasingly sidelined. For example, after the act passed, many high schools phased out vocational programs in favor of college-prep curricula. Federal funding also increasingly favored Ivy League schools and a handful of research-intensive institutions.
Later education historians criticized the act for unintentionally reinforcing inequality. Although its intent was to empower working-class Americans, it inadvertently helped institutionalize disparities in race and class across U.S. campuses.
By the late 1960s and early 1970s, America’s deindustrialization accelerated. Many manufacturing companies relocated overseas, and high-skilled industrial jobs began disappearing. Meanwhile, vocational education programs were shrinking and becoming outdated, producing graduates ill-prepared for the demands of emerging industries.
According to Nat Malkus of the American Enterprise Institute, U.S. vocational education steadily lost its appeal from the 1980s through the early 2000s. At one point, employment rates for vocational school graduates fell behind those of both high school and college graduates. Meanwhile, more than 60% of high school graduates were enrolling in college, and as academic prestige grew, college culture became the norm. Vocational education was increasingly seen as a “second-tier path,” disproportionately guiding low-income youth into it and reinforcing class divisions and unequal access to educational resources.
The “college for all” policy was originally supported by both parties. However, Democrats have typically championed increased federal funding and higher education expansion—emphasizing research, upward mobility, and educational equity. Republicans, especially during the 1980s, pushed for “rolling back the elite” and shrinking government, which shaped how federal dollars were allocated and how tightly higher ed was regulated.
A Shift in the “American Dream”
Business Insider recently reported on a growing shift in American society: the long-standing belief that “every student should aim for a four-year college degree” is starting to fade. Over the past few years, more Americans have begun questioning the value of a college degree, and vocational schools are becoming a more popular alternative. The article called this shift a redefinition of the traditional “American Dream.” A June 5 report from the Society for Human Resource Management showed that when asked about the “ideal path” for today’s high school graduates, 33% of U.S. adults chose vocational schools—more than the 28% who recommended four-year colleges.
This change reflects widespread concerns about the consequences of unchecked college expansion: massive student debt, poor alignment between degrees and job markets, and rising living costs. Fortune magazine reported that roughly 40% of student loan borrowers never finish college. A recent survey by job site Indeed found that over one-third of U.S. college graduates consider their degree “a waste of money.” This disillusionment is especially strong among Gen Z—51% of whom say they regret going to college.
According to NewsNation, vocational school programs typically take just 1–3 years to complete and cost about one-quarter of a four-year college education. An Indeed career trends analyst noted that the average cost of a bachelor’s degree has doubled in the past 20 years, now reaching $38,000. Meanwhile, total U.S. student loan debt has soared to nearly $2 trillion—so skepticism about the value of a degree is no surprise.
Despite this shifting mindset, a recent report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York emphasized that college still pays off. In the U.S., the median annual salary for workers with a college degree is about $80,000, compared to $47,000 for those with only a high school diploma. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, workers with bachelor’s degrees earn 67% more than those with just high school credentials.
Bringing manufacturing back to America is one of Trump’s key campaign promises, and boosting investment in vocational training is seen as a necessary step to make that happen. In April, Trump signed an executive order to expand job training in skilled trades—complementing his tariff policies and aiming to revive U.S. manufacturing. This move is also seen as part of his strategy to appeal to blue-collar voters and address the shortage of skilled labor. However, Fortune recently reported that Trump’s efforts to suppress the green vehicle industry may undermine the emerging career paths of Gen Z workers just entering the job market.
“Can American Schools Drive a Manufacturing Revival?” In April this year, Robert Pondiscio, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, wrote that America’s vision of “reshoring” manufacturing depends on a key issue—one that is rarely mentioned in the political and economic debates over tariff policy: whether the U.S. education system is capable of producing the workforce needed for a manufacturing comeback.
Pondiscio argued that vocational education programs in the U.S. often fail to align with local job market demands, especially in the field of advanced manufacturing, where traditionally trained welders are almost irrelevant. Moreover, only about 5% of students in American vocational schools study manufacturing—far fewer than those in health sciences, agriculture, business administration, hospitality, and tourism. In addition, today’s manufacturing sector is facing challenges from automation and smart technologies, which require new skillsets such as artificial intelligence and computer programming. However, the U.S.’s lagging performance in basic math education is, as Pondiscio puts it, “a flashing red warning light.” Particularly alarming is that only 26% of U.S. eighth-grade students are proficient in math, suggesting that the needs of modern manufacturing may exceed the capabilities of these students.
Another challenge is the lack of soft skills such as initiative and work ethic among students. Data shows that between 2020 and 2023, enrollment in U.S. vocational schools increased by 4.9%. However, a 2023 survey by the Associated General Contractors of America found that 86% of construction companies reported difficulty in hiring—indicating that the talent shortage in blue-collar professions remains serious. In his article, Pondiscio shared an anecdote: a Texas manufacturer handed out 75 business cards at a career fair, inviting students to interview, but only three showed up. Pondiscio argued that beyond making vocational education more forward-looking and fixing the gaps in basic education, what’s more important is to foster a social culture that values hard work and opportunity—not just academic credentials.
Leave a comment