The American education system is in peril and has been for quite some time now. Our education system is, without a doubt one, of the most — if not the most — disappointing education system amongst the developed countries. Our mediocrity is supported not only by our international rankings as formulated by PISA, the Programme for International Student Assessment, but by our treatment of teachers, educational funding, and educational policies. Our test scores are embarrassingly low given our constant boasting of our superiority. The United States only ranked 27th in mathematics, 17th in reading, and 20th in science according to the 2012 PISA results. It is clear that whatever the educational framework is in the United States, it is not working.
For decades, the United States has struggled socially and politically in allowing a complete autonomy within the education system wherein the curriculum could be selected without restrictions and regulations. However, social taboos and political agendas continue to dominate and restrict this front. For example, in the mid-1990s there was a push to introduce a more comprehensive national history curriculum, but it was shot down because of the outcry from several conservative groups that declared the legislation unnecessary and inappropriate. Additionally, a more palpable example comes in the form of sex education. It is a taboo in the United States to have this is in the curriculum, and some states either neglect it entirely or focus on abstinence-only education, which is ill-conceived and dangerous. These are only two examples of the social problems the United States faces in implementing a comprehensive curriculum program, let alone having constructive dialogue regarding curriculum policy and reform.
A bigger problem in the United States is that of school choice and the privatization of education. More and more, the institution of public education is being attacked. The country is experiencing a bipartisan attack on public education that allows school choice in the form of charters and vouchers to dominate the system. Funding is being denied to public schools and redirected to schools that are not accountable to the public who provide them with those funds. These schools — who are accountable to their donors, profit margins and corporate sponsors — are therefore not accountable to their students. When a school is operated like a business, it undertakes business practices, which come in the form of cutting costs through cutting programs, offering lower pay systems, hiring less qualified teachers, etc. In the case of education, this is neither practical nor efficient. Furthermore, there is no evidence that indicates that charter schools and voucher programs produce better test scores. In fact, they perform relatively the same, and in some areas, public schools actually outperform charter schools.
It is also important to note the accountability standards within the system which make this privatization movement possible. In short, success in the United States is measured through test scores, which is then branded as accountability. By increasing the amount of standardized testing, the system changes from one that should be centered on development, enrichment and growth to one that teaches in order to test, which concentrates all students in one category and incentivizes the neglect of and even exclusion of certain areas of instruction like the arts. Accountability based on testing only narrows curriculum, encourages memory retention, discourages learning, and stifles creativity. Additionally, funding is allocated through the results of these tests, which only incentivizes schools to follow procedures to maximize those scores leaving students further and further behind in their development.
Finally, it must be noted that the claims that education in America necessitates school choice because of its deterioration are simply false. When PISA accounts for socioeconomic status and other indicators, the United States is actually steadily improving, and it is not because of acts like No Child Left Behind (2002) and Race to The Top because of the relatively short period of time they have been active.
This leads into the discussion about teachers and the way teachers are treated in the United States. Simply, teachers in the United States are not respected, are undervalued, and are inadequately trained. There are no incentives to be a teacher in the United States because of the attacks on public education and teacher’s unions by those such as Chris Christie. Statistically, people who are the most mediocre-scoring students in the United States are the ones that are most likely to turn to teaching because of the meager salaries inherent to a teaching career and the stresses that come with the profession without many incentives.
Moreover, the privatization movement is resulting in a race to the bottom in the training of teachers. Teach For America, for example, is vital for the privatization movement. Graduating college students are recruited to undergo five-week training programs. The educational preparation, training and expertise of people promoted by Teach For America is laughable in that these people do not have the necessary and required training that fosters educational growth. Also, the accountability system makes the profession bureaucratic, dictatorial and too dependent on testing, which only makes the profession less enjoyable. Essentially, teachers in the United States are not valued as they should be, and this attitude fosters a reluctance to enter the profession for those who would surely enrich and elevate it.
Lastly, students are the ones that end up being left behind in this system. Education and success have a direct correlation with poverty, allocation of funding, equity, teacher autonomy, ability and characteristic mixing, mental health promotion, and the absence of retention. Poverty and socio-economic standing have great impacts on a student, so it is imperative that the discussion includes dialogue on how to alleviate the burdens of poverty on those who suffer from it. Furthermore, more equal distribution of funding and less divisive methods of funding, such as through property taxes, would improve the system immensely.