The following essay contains some thoughts I have about the problems we face with education in our country and what I think needs to be done in order to make things better. I am a liberal, but my opinions in this essay, and about education, can easily be categorized as conservative. I know from first hand experience that our system of education in this country doesn’t work. I am currently an A student in college; however I was considered a failure in high school and eventually dropped out. The system failed me, here’s why.

Over 150 years ago, the secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education, Horace Mann, in his ‘Report of the Massachusetts Board of Education, 1848,’ delivered a groundbreaking declaration about the future of education in America. Mann proposed that education is the key to economic equalization, salubrity, civic responsibility, nonviolence and ethics. However, a good look at the state of education and society in America today reveals a drastically different outcome than what Mann would have expected. In Michael Moore’s controversial critique of the general intellect of American society, ‘Idiot Nation,’ Moore asserts that there are currently forty-four million functional illiterates in this country; that is ‘Americans who cannot read and write above a fourth-grade level’ (154). But illiteracy isn’t the only thing that would surprise Mann today. In the last 30 years alone, we have seen a shocking rise in violence in the form or riots, school shootings and hate crimes, a substantial rise in sexually transmitted disease, and an increasing apathy towards politics. Mann believed that schools are the underpinnings of civilization as is evident from his statement, ”the common school, improved and energized as it can easily be, may become the most effective and benignant of all forces of civilization’ (142). If this is true, then where have we gone wrong? There is certainly no lack of opinion on the matter in Washington, nor between liberals and conservatives throughout America. But while the left and right perpetually argue over how best to reform America’s education system, students continue to struggle and parents are left with no real answers.

Taking a closer look at Mann’s ideas for educational reform, it’s obvious that his ambitions surpassed the boundaries of education into social reconstruction. While the subject of Mann’s educational architecture impacting society could be an entire topic of its own, it’s important and relevant to argue that education, in and of itself, has not the power to shape society to the degree that Mann insinuated it could. By viewing the individual aspects of Mann’s educational architecture, we can see how his thinking was well intentioned and legitimate, but also flawed. Indeed, one only needs to raise their head and look around at the current state of education to see the failures of Mann’s social and educational architecture, which is exactly what Michael Moore has done. By pointing out the educational and economic inadequacies with America’s public schools, Moore makes a strong case for a failed education system. In fact, I didn’t need to look any further than my own experiences to see such failures. I tried to draw parallels between Mann’s proposed education system and my own experiences but came up with only more proof to support Moore’s argument.

The first thing to understand about Mann’s writing on physical education is that he wasn’t referring to gym class, basketball or track and field. He was referring to morality. As evidence of this, I point to Mann’s own words when he states:

Now, modern science has made nothing more certain than that both good and ill health are the direct result of causes mainly within our own control. In other words, the health of the race is dependant upon the conduct of the race. (143)

This kind of thinking is juxtaposed with ideas like abstinence being the only acceptable means for preventing sexually transmitted disease and unwanted pregnancy. Mann believed that ‘moral education is a primal necessity of social existence’ (148). Fine, no argument here. The only questions is, who is best suited for this job’teachers or parents? It would probably be very difficult to find anyone who doesn’t believe that the teaching of morals to our children is the obvious job of their parents. Mann believed that without morals, and essentially religion, that the ‘unrestrained passions of men’ (148) would lead to murder and a host of other depraved acts. He makes his point by stating that ‘this good result in practical morals is a consummation of blessedness that can never be attained without religion, and that no community will ever be religious without a religious education’ (149). Is it true that morals ‘can never be attained’ without religion? Seeing as how I am an atheist and have never had such ‘unrestrained passions,’ nor have any of the other atheists I’ve talked with, I have to respectfully disagree. So, are physical, moral and religious education really the key to a thriving society full of good moral, God-fearing citizens? Is it the key to a successful education system in America? One hundred fifty years later, I think it’s safe to say no.

Society has a living, breathing life of its own that some may argue is still in its adolescence. As in real life, society will acquire knowledge; it will make good and bad decisions; it will evolve and become more self aware with time. What Mann didn’t realize 150 years ago, and perhaps what he helped us figure out, is that society cannot be led down a path by any one man, but that man is to follow the path left by society. So, while Horace Mann had noble intentions for a moral and salubrious civilization, it was never going to turn out in a way that would have completely satisfied him.

In light of the flaw in Mann’s educational architecture, and indeed his thinking, it should be no wonder why there are so many children flunking tests or why the illiteracy rate is dangerously high in America today. Michael Moore, along with many liberals, believe that that education system is under-funded. Is this assertion justified? In ‘Idiot Nation,’ Moore offers a compelling argument that the majority of problems with the education system can be solved by throwing money at them. Unfortunately for Moore, he damages his own argument by citing example after example of privileged students who turn out to be undereducated after attending Ivy League schools. For example, Moore states:

Recently a group of 556 seniors at fifty-five prestigious American universities (e.g. Harvard, Yale, Stanford) were given a multiple choice test consisting of questions that were described as ‘high school level.’ Thirty-four questions were asked. These top students could only answer 53 percent of them correctly. And only one student got them all right. (155)

Moore continues to make his point by criticizing top TV pundits for knowing ‘little or nothing’ (156) and argues how high-ranking political figures, including the president, are idiots. It baffles me that Moore took the time to research and prove how all these well-to-do people who attended the most expensive universities in the country are idiots that can’t answer simple high-school questions, all the while blaming the failures of education on a lack of funding. Excuse me while I scratch my head.

On November 23rd 2003, Fox News aired a special called ‘The Education Crisis in America’ on their popular ‘Breaking Point’ series. During this special it was said that the average per student expenditure is $8,000. Wanting to verify these numbers, I looked online and found that the average expenditure for the school year 2000-01 for pre-kindergarten through grade 12 was $7,376 per student, just slightly under Fox’s number (St. John Elise). The $600 discrepancy can probably be attributed to the two year difference between reports. To bring things into some context, $8,000 per student is more educational funding than any other industrialized nation in the world (The Education Crisis In America). After looking into this, it’s hard for me to believe that anyone who is being completely honest with themselves can claim that the problems with education in America are due to a lack of funding.

But there are other aspects of Moore’s argument that can’t be discounted in this way. For instance, Moore argues:

Almost 10 percent of U.S. public schools have enrollments that are more than 25 percent greater than the capacity of their permanent buildings. Classes have to be held in the hallways, outdoors, in the gym, in the cafeteria; one school I visited even held classes in a janitor’s closet. (162)

Moore continues that too many schools have outdated study materials, are not physically maintained and, because of a lack of government funding, are forced to accept funding from corporations whose primary motivation is not to educate children, but to sell more products (160-167). I’ve already said that I disagree with the idea that the problem with education in America is a lack of funding; after saying that, let me say this. The United States is the richest and most powerful nation in the world and the fact that we have these kinds of problems in even a single U.S. school is unacceptable. And politicians who let these things happen in their district should not only be fired, but should be held accountable for contributing to some form of child neglect.

So what is the answer to the education crisis in America? Mann’s argument was largely about what to teach, while Moore’s argument was mostly about funding what we teach. But a factor that struck me as being noticeably absent from both Mann’s and Moore’s essays was the subject of how children are taught.

I am a high school dropout with a G.E.D., or as my friends like to say, a ‘Good Enough Diploma.’ I dropped out in the start of the 10th grade and in the 10 years of my public schooling, I can only recall two of my teachers. The first was Mr. Howie, my 6th grade science teacher and the second was Mr. Tyler, my 10th grade music teacher. There is a reason I remember these two teachers; they were incredibly passionate about what they do, which is something that shined through when they taught. They both showed a genuine interest in me and were the only teachers that ever provided encouragement. I looked forward to being in their classes and when I was there I wanted to learn, not only for myself, but for them. None of the other teachers in my life during that time made any kind of impact on me whatsoever. I’m not an unintelligent person and I never had any learning disorders. In fact, sometime after getting my G.E.D., I took it upon myself to learn the art of computer programming. How did I do this? I bought books and I read. Within 5 years, I was making over $90,000 a year at Gartner, the largest technology advisory firm in the world. So why then, was I such a failure in public school?

I’m being a bit disingenuous when I call it my failure. I can’t rightly take all the responsibility; after all, for a child, learning is a three way street. I believe the failure is a reflection on my teachers, my parents and myself. The majority of my teachers never did anything to bring about enthusiasm in me, spark any interest or mentor me. They did little more than simply follow the lesson plan. And my parents never did anything to help me with my education beyond yelling at me on report card day. Is it any real wonder why I lost interest and began to think of school as a drag at an early age?

I think that we should attribute the problem of education, not to a lack of funding, but to a lack of accountability from our teachers, a lack of involvement from our parents and a lack of enthusiasm from our students. One only needs to look at the growing success of charter schools; that is, privately owned and operated schools that are publicly funded. The idea is that schools like these are able to operate with freedom from the guidelines of public schools. It’s been reported that charter schools are producing astounding results compared to the public schools in the same district only two miles away (The Education Crisis In America). How can anyone argue with that? We are talking about the same kids, not kids from another country, state or even town, but kids from the same neighborhoods. So what is so different about charter schools? An important aspect is that charter schools have accountability systems setup for the teachers, parents and students. Parents who enroll their kids in charter schools usually have to sign a contract that states they will check their kid’s homework every night and sign off on it. Charter schools are usually smaller, offering more personalized attention to each child, and another major difference between charter schools and public schools is that there are no teachers’ unions, which means there is no tenure, no laziness and no bureaucracy.

Is privatization of the educational system the answer? Who knows? But I do believe that many teachers out there should take a good hard look at their chosen profession and reevaluate if it’s really for them. I think those who are in charge of public education should research why charter schools are doing so well and perhaps incorporate some of those tactics into the public education system. I think parents need to take a much more active role in their children’s education instead of simply pawning the job off to someone else and then going crazy when their child gets a D in English or gets held back a grade.

Given Horace Mann’s environmental and social context in 1848, one can, at least to some extent, understand how his attitude toward society and view of the world could lead to such an architectural fallacy. After all, there was a stronger emphasis on religion, and society was much less complicated. So perhaps a simple answer, such as the re-architecture of education based on the valued concepts of the time, was a feasible solution. However, it’s obvious now that this solution didn’t stand the test of time, as evidenced by Michael Moore’s controversial look at the American school system today. But Moore’s argument about education can be characterized as cynical with no real answer beyond shouting for more money. While Moore makes a strong case that a minority of public schools across America are in desperate need of funding for materials, supplies and facility maintenance, he fails to make the case that the problems with education can be fixed with more funding. The battle of fixing education has to start with the soldiers on the front line’the teachers. These education professionals need to bring excitement and passion back to the common school and re-energize the lives of America’s children. Teachers who truly love what they do and who have an honest enthusiasm for teaching will project that enthusiasm on to their students. When students get that, combined with the support of their parents, they will be in a positive environment no matter what kind of funding the school is receiving. This kind of environment will produce what is perhaps the most powerful concept in education; that of a student who wants to learn.

Works Cited
Mann, Horace. ‘Report of the Massachusetts Board of Education, 1848.’ Rereading America: Cultural Contexts For Critical Thinking And Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. 6th ed. Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004. 142-151.

Moore, Michael. ‘Idiot Nation.’ Rereading America: Cultural Contexts For Critical Thinking And Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. 6th ed. Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004. 153-171.

St. John Elise. ‘Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: School Year 2000′01′ Education Statistics Quarterly. Vol 5. 2003. <http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_5/5_2/q3_7.asp>.

‘The Education Crisis in America.’ Breaking Point. Narr. E.D. Hill. Fox News. 23 Nov. 2003.