Civic Issues

The last subject I wanted to turn my attention to in my civic issues blog is the racial discrepancies among suspension rates in our education system. A study based on data from 2015 to 2016 by the Center for Civil Rights Remedies found that per 100 students, black children lost an approximate 103 days of schooling as compared to 21 days for white students. This rate was also higher for black boys, with an estimated 132 days for boys and 77 for black girls. 

These findings are significant, and highlight the fact that these statistics are often much more disproportionate on the state level as compared to national statistics. In some states, such as Missouri, black students lost up to 162 more days of instruction than white students. This effect is not just limited to black students; in New Hampshire Hispanic students had 72 less days of schooling due to suspensions and in North Carolina students of Native American origin were removed from school for an average of 102 more days than their white counterparts. 

Explanations for this phenomenon are caused by a number of factors, including inherent biases, socio-economic factors, and family structure. 

There is a notable relation between family environments and suspension rates. Black children who shared a home with married biological parents had a suspension rate estimated at 12%, as compared to 28% for black children that did not live with both parents. Using this model, the racial discrepancies in suspension rates were reduced 55% as compared to only 38% when solely accounting for socio-economic causes. This explanation might correlate with the racial gap concerning suspension, as it was found that black students are 72% more likely to live separately from their birth parents as compared to 37% of white students. 

This is significant because suspension has serious implications on future behavioral issues as well as dropout rates. Recurring suspensions additionally set a precedent for future crime rates. Less schooling can mean a higher chance of future run-ins with the crime as well as less job opportunities. Some have described this as the “school-to-prison pipeline”, wherein punishments at school can lead individuals closer to their first experience with the criminal justice system. In some cases, an individual’s first arrest can even occur at school, therefore involving them in the justice system. 

Furthermore, students are two times as likely to be apprehended during a time period that they are suspended from school. With suspension rates up more than 10% since the early 2000’s, it is easy to see how this can create a serious issue regarding racial disparities within the criminal justice system. It is important to target this at the source by implementing strike policies and other programs that treat suspension as what it should be: a worst case scenario. Overall, it is important to consider the lasting implications of suspension before condemning a student from time away from important education time.

The next issue I would like to address within our nation’s education system is common core curriculum. This system is meant to provide a standard for what is included in education throughout the country. However, common curriculum limits both students and teachers alike.

With common core curriculum, students learn to memorize the information for the sole purpose of passing the annual standardized tests. This in itself leads to numerous issues. For one, because most questions are surface-level and often multiple choice, students are not taught critical thinking skills. In addition, everything that is deemed “important” for education has to be organized into a few core subjects. In this manner, anything that does not fit into these subjects is not seen as necessary or prioritized equally. This discourages creativity for both the student and the teacher, who is then forced to teach within these narrow parameters. To simplify, the primary focus of the teachers becomes whatever material is on the test- which surely does not encompass the countless important things there are to learn that don’t fit into the standard curriculum. 

The core curriculum teaches students that standardized tests are the most important aspect of school. As I have discussed before, however, the standardized testing system is flawed in itself. In addition to not assessing complex thought, it is biased culturally, and perpetuates the ideal that college is the only natural next step. Moreover, the entire system is tailored to students who are good test takers. Others who do not excel at this one mode of evaluation or can’t keep up with the curriculum may give up or feel discouraged because this is the only way their progress and learning capacity are measured. 

All of these factors have led to the growing public recognition of this system’s failure. As a result, support for the common core curriculum is dropping over the years. In 2012 and 2013, there were high public opinions for the common core. However, from 2013 to 2014, this support began to drop. Then, in 2016, the matter reached a turning point wherein more teachers opposed the system rather than supported it. At 51% disapproval versus 41% approval, it was becoming evident that distaste for the system was growing. Among the disapproval results, 32% of the surveyed teachers strongly opposed it, compared to the other 19% who somewhat opposed it. 

There is not just one way to learn, nor is there one set way to teach. So why should we support a system that enforces one rigid standard of education? 

The next issue I wanted to bring to light was diversity within the teaching world, and the importance it holds for minority students. According to an American Community Survey, 80 percent of young teachers (individuals of the ages of 25 to 34 with a bachelor’s degree) varying from the level of elementary to high school are white. This is extremely disproportionate in comparison to the demographics of our nation’s students, which only consists of only approximately 50% white children. On the contrary, while black children make up 13% of students, only 8% of young teachers are black, and while 24% of our country’s students are Hispanic only 9% of young teachers are Hispanic. This leads to a serious issue regarding representation in the classroom. Having a same-race teacher is extremely important to developing young adults, as it provides them with a role model and an example to look up to. 

This issue is a vicious cycle, as one of the proposed reasons for this lack of representation in the teaching force stems from disparities in graduation rates. 95% of Asian students and 94% of white students will graduate high school, as compared to 89% of Black students and 76% of Hispanic students. This rate then leads to even more drastic differences within the statistics of individuals with Bachelor’s degrees; take for example that 40% of white students and 95% of Asian students earn a bachelor’s degree while only 21% of black students and 16% of Hispanic students earn one. Less minority students with bachelor’s degrees means less students that will go on to become teachers, thus leading to less minority teachers to serve as role models for younger generations. 

Why is it so important to have a same-race teacher? If there is a lack of racial representation within the classroom, minority students may believe they have less opportunity and therefore feel less inspired to further pursue their education. Besides just serving as a role model, a same-race teacher could lead to stronger bonds between students and teachers, and in some cases could even serve as a translator or friend to a minority student adjusting to a different culture. According to findings from the Institute of Labor Economics, an underprivileged black student who encounters a same-race teacher within primary school is 40% less likely to drop out. This elucidates the fact that racial representation in teaching could mean all the difference for a developing young adult. 

 

Another issue within American public schools that I’ve witnessed firsthand is our nation’s weak and uninformative sex education program. 

In the year 2017 alone, more than 194,000 babies were born to girls between the ages of 15 to 19 in the United States. In my high school class alone, which consisted of only about 250 girls, three of my classmates carried teenage pregnancies to term. The U.S is notorious for its teen birth rate, which is drastically higher than other Western countries. I believe that the root of this problem lies not within the individual, but rather our country’s education system. 

Only 24 states- less than half- actually mandate sex education, and 34 mandate HIV education. To make matters worse, only an estimated 50 percent of our country’s high schools and 20 percent of middle schools cover all 16 topics labelled as necessary by the CDC. According to Catherine Brown, former vice president of Teach for America, only 10 states and D.C actually mention important concepts such as “consent” “healthy relationships” and “assault”. Instead, American sex education is primarily based on the policy of abstinence, or the complete restraint from sex altogether. This system is largely kept in place because parents worry that their children are more likely to be sexually active if they receive comprehensive sex education. However, studies have shown that teenagers are going to participate in sexual acts regardless, meaning that they are just less informed when they make these decisions. According to Planned Parenthood, 43 percent of teenage girls and 53 percent of teenage boys only learned about birth control after they had sex for the first time. 

There also lies some disparities in the matter of this issue. According to the CDC, lower incomes lead to significantly higher teen pregnancy rates, teens in foster care are twice as likely to become pregnant, and the birth rates of Hispanic and black teens are almost two times higher than that of white teens. The issue of teen pregnancy also contributes to a lower graduation rate. The CDC found that only 50 percent of pregnant teens go on to complete high school. So, what does the solution to this problem look like?

In my opinion, the first step would be mandatory comprehensive sex education across the country. What constitutes “comprehensive” sex ed? I believe the program should cover topics such as sexual health, safe practices and birth control, healthy relationships and sexual identity. Take San Francisco sex education for example: the program begins in middle school and covers everything from puberty to identity to refusal skills. Another great example is the Netherlands, with a teen pregnancy rate that is eight times lower than that of the United States. Their program starts at the age of 4 years old, starting with concepts like personal boundaries and saying no, and working its way up to heavier topics like sexual relationships and contraception as students get older. In the long run, this program stresses the importance of the bond between two partners, and leads to much higher levels of contentment in sexual relationships. While 70% of Americans report that they regret not waiting longer to become sexually active, the majority of Dutch individuals recall their first time was a “fun and positive” experience. 

As of right now, our country is failing its youth. We are not giving teens the tools they need to make informed and responsible decisions. We can learn lots from other nations and tackle the issue of teen pregnancy head on by simply improving our education system.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” 

-Albert Einstein 

For my civic issue blog, I decided to focus on some problems I’ve noticed within the public education system. Almost immediately, the standardized testing system came to mind.

Personally, I don’t believe our nation’s testing system is completely inutile. In fact, I think standardized tests are a great way to measure a student’s respective strengths and weaknesses. However, I do not think these exams should be the parameter by which we should judge the full capabilities of the student nor the teacher. I cannot count the number of times I have been in a class where the teacher begins to delve further into a subject or shares extra information about a topic they are excited about, just to shut themselves down because it is not part of the standard curriculum. My experiences in college, by contrast, are quite different. Because the professors design their own test, they have the liberty to teach whatever they wish or see fit. This affects not only the material of the class, but completely transforms the energy in the classroom. In my experience college teachers, having the freedom to teach what they enjoy, seem to get a better sense of gratification from their job. 

In my high school education, I also knew some very intelligent individuals that weren’t good test takers- and as a result they would thrive in their classes but do poorly on their cumulative tests. Critics of standardized tests argue that they are very dependent on the student’s environment and other factors, including stress, hunger and energy. Additionally, these tests only measure what students have learned on a year-to-year basis, meaning once the student passes the test they immediately move onto the next year’s material. Because these tests do not build off of each other, there is little motivation nor means to retain previous years’ information. Personally, I can recall many skills I mastered in high school, just to forget them a year later.

There have, however, been some successful implementations of standardized tests. Take France for example; at the end of their high school career all French students take a final exam. However, their test is cumulative, measuring their knowledge of everything they have been taught in their academic career. In addition, students have the option to choose a path that will prepare them better for life after school, including literature, economics and social science, or sciences and math. In this way, students can focus on their strengths and prepare themselves for the next step in education. Furthermore, this French standardized test counts for something beyond the completion of high school; it can equate to college credits, scholarships, and even certify more job opportunities.