Of course, this is not how we today
understand our "educational crisis." We do not see it
as a battle to control the hearts and minds of our youth but,
rather, as an attempt to upgrade our schools so our young will
be able to compete in the world economy. But there are reasons
to think that our battle is a power struggle much like the one
that took place in Athens a long time ago when Socrates was accused
of corrupting the young.
First and foremost, it is not clear that our schools are in crisis.
According to one study made by the Sandia National Laboratories
in 1991, a report that the government released in 1993 to little
fanfare, high school completion rates are near 90 percent, 25
percent of Americans have a bachelor's degree (the highest percentage
in the world), and a larger percentage of our young received degrees
in math, science, and engineering than those of our major economic
competitors. Moreover, because of reforms made in the 1980s, more
American high school students took four years of English and at
least three years of math and science than ever before. And far
more students are successfully completing Advanced Placement courses.
Does this mean that we could not do better? Of course not. And
we should strive to do so. And I could even support some of what
Jeff Taylor calls "the Republican education vision."
I could support "tenure reform" but only if it were
applied in a way that would preserve academic freedom. Besides,
for all practical purposes, our politicians, especially those
in the Congress, have a kind of tenure, don't they? And, of course,
I would support reducing the bureaucratization of our schools.
But, again, this is hardly unique to our schools. Just glance
at our national government if you want to see an enveloping bureaucracy.
Or even look at the Congress, which has become more and more bureaucratized
in recent decades. Although Mr. Taylor does not mention teacher
testing, I would support that too, but only when we test our politicians.
I would be more than willing to make up these tests and grade
them. But this will never happen.
Before we jump on any bandwagon, either Republican or Democratic,
we need to ask some questions. For example, if the alleged "crisis"
in our schools is more fiction than fact, what is the source of
our discontent with those institutions? Why do we perceive a "crisis"
when there is none? Could it be that the latest "crisis"
is being used to justify measures that we older Americans feel
are needed to "socialize" the young, to render them
fit for society in a way that demands more and more conformity?
There are reasons to entertain this possibility. More and more,
we hear pleas for national standards and standardized tests to
assess the worth of our schools. When I asked a class once, what
would be the result of such tests, one perceptive student said,
"Standardized students." Indeed! And what else is the
purpose of the "reform" in Massachusetts involving the
MCAS test if not to control the curriculum of the schools, to
standardize that curriculum in the name of conformity?
Of course, conformity is comfortable but it is also boring and
even repressive. Nor is it clear to me that conformity is or should
be the goal of education. And here we come back to Socrates and
his battle with Athens. Truth be told, it is the non-conformists,
the agitators like Socrates, who have helped make the world what
it is today. I cannot propose what reforms I would make in our
schools, but whenever I watch the movie, Dead Poet's Society,
in which Robin Williams plays a teacher who reminds me of Socrates,
I know that much of what passes for "educational reform"
today would undermine the vitality of our schools and, therewith,
of our young. If we do that, it will be only a matter of time
before the vitality of our society disappears as well. We would,
for all practical purposes, be drinking hemlock.
Dr. L. Peter Schultz is an associate
professor of Politics and chair of the Department of Political
Science. He received his Ph.D. from Northern Illinois University
and
is the author of Governing America (1997); "Congress and
the Separation of Powers Today: Practice in Search of a Theory."
Separation of Powers and Good Government. Ed. Bradford P. Wilson,
Rowan & Littlefield (1994); and "War Power and the Constitution:
Chaining the Dog of War." The American Experiment: Essays
on the Theory and Practice of Liberty, Ed. Peter Lawler. Rowan
& Littlefield (1994).