Reforming Public Education in the United States: 5 Myths Busted

Americans have been attempting to “transform” the public education system for more than a quarter of a century. As a matter of fact, has it ever been broken in the first place? The system has actually performed admirably despite the fact that some components were missing and the mission occasionally veered off course. It is possible to trace this fantastic fake back to five basic premises that were never effectively challenged or refuted in any way. The comparison of this country with countries like China, India, Russia, or other European countries was, and still is, fair and in our best interests. What about the stark contrasts in national values, way of life, and overall achievements between the United States and those countries? We didn’t do anything like that.

Five mythical premises have dominated the education reform movement since the 1980s, in response to the Reagan Administration’s A Nation at Risk commission on “our failing public education system.”

To begin, we must compare our educational figures to those of our foreign economic rivals.

  1. We must adjust our educational requirements in order to satisfy the demands of a global workforce in the future.

International comparisons of student achievement will be based mainly on standardised test scores.

This projected failure of our national education performance output is attributed to a shortage of competent teachers.

All across America, we’re going to experiment significantly with private schooling.

How can we compare countries with various governmental systems, beliefs, statistical integrity standards and social/class divisions, etc.? First, as stated in prior articles There are several countries whose national educational standards are imposed on its students, disregarding the individuality and complexity of their locations. In order to do this, they adhere to communism, in which “the state” determines what, which, and where their industries are constructed. They choose, track, and train their employees from the time they are in elementary school all the way until adulthood. In the absence of free will, their political structure is dominated by a relentless utilitarian function. Practicing such ideas is fraught with danger, as history has shown, and it is not something we hold dear here in the United States.
When compared to India’s rapidly expanding middle class and booming software, manufacturing, and medical industries, we’re seen as a laggard. On the surface, their outcomes appear impressive. Although they have a problem with gender discrimination, economic inequalities, and racial barriers, we tend to overlook it. Our country is not immune to these problems, but we have put measures in place to deal with them (though steadily losing their potency). Currently, women in the United States are more likely to be educated and appreciated. America still claims to be a country that values uniqueness and equal rights at the same time. Through our objective of offering public education, we have already learned another historical lesson.

It’s hard to believe that a globalised workforce is hurting our educational priorities. Why? That’s because each US election cycle has its own political agenda and policy decisions. Industry moves to areas with the lowest corporation taxes and the cheapest labour costs. Is it necessary to constantly reprioritize education in order to keep up with the ever-changing economic policies? So, just because China and/or India are generating more engineers, should we increase our efforts in mathematics? Is it number or quality that is the problem? And do such countries’ higher production levels reflect the superior quality of their products or the fact that their populations and labour pools are larger and hence more easily exploited? For a time, the United States was proud of its people and the standard of living they enjoyed (or we at least professed this). It is impossible for an education based on materialism to succeed. However, our history of domestic innovation and people’ well-being have been overlooked by the concept of a globalised workforce.

It may only make sense to use standardised test scores to justify financing from an outside source (a lawmaker) who is not present in the classroom, has no knowledge of the economic engine of a particular location, and is unfamiliar with the resources, problems, and cultural makeup of a region. In contrast to tailor-made suits, this one is one-size-fits-all. There are many ways to display learning and knowledge, just as there are many ways to learn. America is a country that values independence, growth, and uniqueness of community. Is it true that we sensationalised the standardisation of tests to address educational quality or to justify punishment and prepare for hostile takeover of schools? Teachers’ qualifications have a role in this problem. Teachers are only as excellent as the resources they have access to, the support they have, the development they have access to, and the quality of life they have as a result of their dedication.

2022-06-17 19:00:00

Leave a Comment