Posted by By Josh Quinn, Co-Editor in Chief
If you were paying close attention, you just might have seen the first sign of Autumn this year. Of course, I’m referring to the more than two million students who enrolled in New York State. 2.38 million students in public schools to be exact, and at an average cost of $15,000 for their education every year, their -and my own- continued schooling teeters constantly on the precipice of annihilation.
“In every article the New York Times posted regarding education, there was criticism levied against schooling in some way.”
But it isn’t the schools, or even students, that place public education in such proverbially dangerous water. It is the political ecosystem which surrounds it. You ask what school is for, let me tell you what school isn’t for– school is not for waging political wars and leaving children’s education as the casualty.
I have always attended public school, specifically New Paltz Central School District, and when I was in third grade, my mom served on the Board of Education. At the time, it didn’t really make sense to me, it just seemed like my mom was suddenly very busy all the time. But as the years pass, I find myself thinking back to this time often, as my understanding of education evolves. One thing that I find particularly fascinating is looking back on conversations my parents had about the Board of Education whilst I hid at the top of the stairs and eavesdropped. My mom would complain about interpersonal grudges, and board members who were single-issue focused. And this has stuck with me, specifically because of the inefficiency this resulted in. The members would argue with one another often, and some even hated each other. Friendships were made and destroyed, and it posed an impossible riddle in my mind:
For who’s sake did the board hate one another?
In every article the New York Times posted regarding education, there was criticism levied against schooling in some way. Perhaps we don’t fund it enough, or we fund it too much. There were parents who were shocked by teachers, and teachers shocked by parents. Each article was a single voice screaming in a clamoring crowd, each sentence they wrote, a scream of a single entity within a mass. And within confusion, the students are victims.
Specifically, articles in the New York Times collection “What is School For” like Everyone and Wasting Time, were evocative of ancient Greek inspirations, relying on Mythos, Pathos, and Ethos, as both relied on data to support their hypothesis, and personal anecdotes to fuel their beliefs. These articles rebuke one another– they stand at each other’s toes, and yet were built from the same foundation. Like microplastics in our blood, their fallacies snuck into our minds.
For example, Bryan Caplan condemned the education system, accusing it of failing to teach valuable lessons. According to Mr. Caplan’s “work,” he believes that adults have “shockingly little academic knowledge.” There are a few things that perplex me about the argument he makes. Firstly, his “work,” is a book he published as an economic theory, not as a sociological observation, and there are no publicly available studies he cited . Secondly, Mr. Caplan is a professor of economics, and a Berkely and Princeton graduate, so although his writing suggests an anti-educational belief, his actions clearly suggest another. Thirdly, his solution is a profit based system which, because he thinks education is ultimately useless, would cheapen costs significantly. Therefore, I posit that Mr. Caplan, a self proclaimed “libertarian economist,” is simply using the platform of education to further his economic belief of a free market.
“The article refuses to consider other perspectives and instead reiterates one solution without even attempting a counterargument.”
And yet, the opposite, Anya Kamentz, introduces the idea that the United States “inclusive vision” of schools is “under threat.” Why is it under threat? Because of private and charter schools which “see no problem with republican schools for republican students… and christian schools for christian students.” The article even provides a hyperlink in reference to how these schools see no problem with this. Except, the hyperlink only provides data which supports that public schools are highly diverse, not that private schools are attempting to segregate. It is an accusation that is not founded by quotes, simply a logical fallacy. And it ignores the fact that private schools may actually be a cheaper alternative to public schools; and if they are in fact cheaper, that possible economic mobility may increase our diversity. The article refuses to consider other perspectives and instead reiterates one solution without even attempting a counterargument.
The point I am trying to make, and I’ll say it very clearly: We should not be working against each other. Both articles, and my mothers experience, all highlight the same core ideas, the education system is not working par our expectations, and although most parties agree on that much, I do not believe the solutions have students’ best intentions in mind. Neither article spoke personally with students, and the board only has two student representatives, instead, they use statistics with the intention to manipulate. Education has begun to reek of oversimplified politics which lack real nuance.
The power of school has never been the classroom or the funding. It has never been the teachers, or the curriculum. It has always been the students, and their interactions with one another. Schools are full of hope and creativity specifically because they are full of young and imaginative minds. School is for learning, we must stop making it a battlefield.
The Maroon 