The Equity and Excellence Tension
Assessing the Evolution of American Educational Values
The annals of history are replete with tales of empires, leaders, and transformative moments that have shaped the course of civilizations. From the rise and fall of the Roman Empire to the intricate narratives crafted by Shakespeare and the haunting verses of Edgar Allan Poe, these stories form the bedrock of our shared cultural heritage. Yet, as society evolves, so does the way we impart knowledge. The pursuit of educational excellence, once a revered goal, now finds itself juxtaposed against a new paradigm: educational equity.
Amidst this rich tapestry of history and culture, educational institutions have long stood as beacons of knowledge, shaping young minds and preparing them for the challenges of the future. However, as the winds of change blow, there's a discernible shift in the educational landscape. While the essence of excellence begins to dwindle, a new narrative is emerging, one that emphasizes not just the heights of individual achievement but also the breadth of collective inclusivity.
In the hallowed halls of institutions like Fishburne Military School in Virginia, the oldest all male military boarding high school in the country, the relentless pursuit of excellence is the guiding principle. Cadets are molded not just through rigorous academic curricula but through a merit-based system that rewards diligence, discipline, and dedication. Such environments foster a spirit of competition, pushing individuals to strive for perfection in every endeavor. Achievements, whether in the classroom or on the parade ground, are celebrated as testaments to individual merit and collective responsibility.
While institutions like Fishburne Military School champion the ethos of excellence, the broader educational landscape is undergoing a transformation. The emphasis on individual merit, once the gold standard, is now being viewed through a different lens, one that seeks to balance personal accomplishments with broader societal goals. This shift is not just philosophical but is deeply rooted in the changing dynamics of our society, where the call for inclusivity and fairness is becoming increasingly pronounced. The challenge lies in harmonizing these two seemingly divergent paths.
We stand at the crossroads of educational reform, and a pressing question emerges: How do we reconcile the pursuit of excellence with the growing emphasis on educational equity? In an era where the term "Educational Equity" is gaining traction in public schools, we are compelled to ask: How do we ensure that all students have the opportunity to rise, without compromising the rigor and richness of our educational heritage? How do we strike a balance between individual achievement and collective responsibility? As we navigate this evolving landscape, it's imperative to reflect on these questions, ensuring that the next generation is equipped not just with knowledge but with the values that will shape our collective future.
Understanding Equity
The concept of "equity" often becomes entangled in contemporary discussions, leading to misconceptions. While it might seem synonymous with "equality" due to their similar dictionary definitions, the two terms carry distinct nuances.
Equality, a value championed for centuries, calls for uniform opportunities for everyone, regardless of their background or circumstances. This principle ensures that every individual, under the law, is granted identical rights. This then prompts the question: How does "equity" diverge from equality, and what exactly does "educational equity" encompass?
In modern discourse, "equity" has come to signify the guarantee of identical outcomes. This interpretation marks a significant departure from the traditional understanding of equality. The ethos of equity has permeated many facets of society, but its most palpable impact is evident in the education sector. This shift can be characterized as an evolving societal anticipation of consistent results for everyone.
While the aspiration behind this vision is commendable, it presents inherent challenges. By emphasizing uniform outcomes, the unique potential and achievements of individuals risk being overshadowed. Such an approach inadvertently sets a universal benchmark for success, neglecting the vast spectrum of human potential and capability. This evolving perspective marks a departure from time-honored values like diligence, aspiration, and individual accomplishment. As society continues to evolve, it becomes imperative to contemplate the long-term ramifications of this ideological shift.
"Equity" in education, as currently understood, prioritizes equal outcomes over equal opportunities. This approach is inherently problematic, potentially leading to an academic setting that fails to challenge students to reach their utmost potential. Instead of cultivating an environment where each student is encouraged to achieve excellence, there's a danger of endorsing mediocrity in the name of "equity." The objective should be to provide every student with equal chances to achieve their unique pinnacle of success.
Prioritizing identical outcomes over equal chances can potentially dampen the spirit of individual accomplishment and innovation that has long been a hallmark of American ethos. It's essential to reassess educational strategies to ensure they resonate with the core American principles of individuality, diligence, and aspiration, rather than diminishing these tenets in a misguided chase for a uniform standard of equity.
It’s easily argued that in the relentless pursuit of 'equity', there has been an inadvertent sacrifice of the acknowledgment and celebration of individual excellence and traditional American values. In striving to create an illusion of a level playing field, unique strengths and distinctive competencies have been compromised. This interpretation of equity has diluted the potential for greatness, potentially transforming what could have been an ocean of diverse talents into a puddle of homogenous mediocrity.
This transformation has taken place under the misguided banner of “equity”. Yet, despite mounting critique and increasing questions about its efficacy and consequences, a considerable number of people remain oblivious to how profoundly this radical ideology has seeped into the very core of our education system. Furthermore, they seem unaware of how significantly this belief system has permeated the broader cultural fabric of our society, or indeed, of the considerable length of time for which it has been present.
This lack of recognition, be it deliberate or unintentional, masks the reality that the ideology of equity is not a recent phenomenon. It has historical roots that have seeped deep into our education system, shaping its direction and objectives for numerous decades. To accurately address and correct our current course, it is crucial that we understand and critically examine these roots and the societal changes they have precipitated.
The roots of this ideology stretch back several centuries. While there are numerous detailed and insightful works that offer comprehensive analyses and histories of this concept, this discussion will specifically center on understanding how this ideology found its way into the public education system.
Understanding the current situation requires a journey back in time, specifically to pivotal legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This monumental Act set in motion a broad drive for societal and cultural change, the effects of which are still evident today. While the Act was undeniably a crucial stride towards ensuring equal rights, its interpretation and application, especially in sectors like education, have evolved in ways that deviate from the original intent of promoting individual achievement and equal opportunity.
The shift from emphasizing equal opportunity to prioritizing equal outcomes is central to this discussion. This change didn't happen overnight but unfolded slowly over the years, much like a river gradually shaping the land it flows through. Just as this consistent erosion can result in the formation of vast canyons, the continuous emphasis on equity in education can profoundly alter the fabric of society.
The Civil Rights Movement is universally recognized as a defining moment in American history, celebrated for its role in addressing and rectifying deep-rooted racial prejudices and discriminatory practices. However, it's also evident that the impact of this movement reached beyond just racial and equality laws, instigating significant changes in the educational landscape of the country.
The Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 stands as a pivotal moment in American educational history. This groundbreaking judgment, which deemed racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, is universally hailed as a triumph for racial justice. However, this essay aims to shed light on another significant, albeit less frequently discussed, evolution in the educational landscape that took place a decade later. This evolution is characterized by the growing federal involvement in education, epitomized by the “Elementary and Secondary Education Act” of 1965 (ESEA) and the ensuing emphasis on “equity”.
The inception of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act set a new course, paving the way for increased federal oversight in education. This trajectory was further cemented by subsequent legislative measures, including the “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act” (IDEA) in 1975, the “Improving America’s Schools Act” in 1994, the “No Child Left Behind Act” in 2001, and the “Every Student Succeeds Act” in 2015. A unifying thread runs through these legislative acts – a growing wave of federal influence in the realm of education.
To fully understand the genesis and implications of this federal incursion into school curricula, a more profound exploration of the key figures that spearheaded these transformative shifts is warranted. Foremost among them was Francis Keppel, the Commissioner of Education from 1962 to 1965, who played a significant role in shaping the ESEA. Keppel, who was known to have inherited his father’s liberal disposition, was a zealous proponent for equality. His visionary approach considerably influenced the trajectory of American education, setting it on a path toward the focus on “educational equity” that we see today.
Following in Keppel’s footsteps, a series of influential figures took up the mantle, advocating for increased federal involvement and progressive reforms in education. This lineage includes such prominent figures as Shirley Hufstedler, Teresa Amabile, and Arne Duncan.
Hufstedler, who served as the second Commissioner of Education from 1968 to 1972, became a powerful advocate for civil rights. Her advocacy efforts led to the establishment of the Office for Civil Rights within the Department of Education, significantly expanding the federal role in safeguarding equal educational opportunities.
Following Hufstedler, Teresa Amabile assumed the position of the third Assistant Secretary for Education for Research, Planning, and Evaluation from 1979 to 1981. As a strong proponent of educational research, Amabile played a key role in creating the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). This standardized test, administered to students throughout the country, served as a benchmark for nationwide educational standards, further entrenching federal oversight of local education.
Finally, Arne Duncan, who served as Secretary of Education from 2009 to 2015, proved to be another significant figure in the progressive education movement. A strong advocate for reform, Duncan played a crucial role in establishing the Race to the Top program. This initiative, underpinned by federal funding, incentivized educational reforms in line with the Common Core State Standards.
Common Core has faced scrutiny for perceived federal overreach and its debatable effectiveness. Yet, discussions rarely address the core objective of this initiative – Educational Equity. While supporters highlight its achievements, notably the narrowing academic disparity among students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, they frequently neglect the sacrifices made to bridge this gap. It can be argued that these sacrifices are borne by the most academically driven segment of our student population – those who consistently pursue excellence.
While the endeavor to uplift those from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds and offer equal educational opportunities is both admirable and necessary, it should not result in the marginalization of our most academically gifted students. The spotlight should be on acknowledging and appropriately rewarding the achievements of our top-performing students.
The notion of “participation trophies” falls dramatically short in equipping students for real-world challenges. By equating mediocrity with excellence through uniform rewards, we risk instilling a misconstrued perspective in our students. The real world prizes hard work, innovation, and excellence; thus, our education system should reflect this reality, not distort it.
In our attempt to homogenize the narrative of education, we risk undermining quintessential American values of hard work, merit, individual achievement, and strong moral character. We’ve obscured the fact that our educational system should function as an incubator for not only well-rounded individuals but also high-achieving ones. The persistent push for educational equity, while aimed nobly at creating equal opportunities, can paradoxically inhibit the potential of students who strive beyond the average.
Instead of challenging our high-achieving students to reach their full potential, we have often diluted the quality of education to ensure that no student is ‘left behind’. This practice can inadvertently cultivate a culture where academic mediocrity is the standard, and genuine excellence goes unrecognized or even penalized. This, surely, is not the vision we aspire to for our education system.
The recognition and fostering of individual potential, intellectual rigor, and the pursuit of excellence must regain their rightful place in our educational narrative. It is only by upholding these fundamental values that we can ensure our education system produces not just equal, but exceptional, citizens.
Moreover, we risk snuffing out the innate curiosity and drive to excel that naturally resides within many students. When we accord everyone the same reward, irrespective of their effort or skill, we implicitly convey a message that there is no real value in striving for excellence, no tangible incentive for surpassing expectations. This practice erodes the bedrock of the American ethos – ambition and meritocracy – and should not be the lesson we inculcate in our future generations.
In our well-intentioned attempt to level the playing field, we may have lost sight of the broader picture. Education’s objective should not merely be to ensure every student’s proficiency in passing a test. Instead, it should foster lifelong love for learning, curiosity, and the courage to explore beyond the conventional boundaries. We need to acknowledge and reward excellence rather than suppress it in the pursuit of ‘equity.’ In my view, it is by adhering to the quintessential American values of hard work, ambition, patriotism, and individual achievement that we can realize this vision.
There was a time when these truths were self-evident, when the understanding of our values was the bedrock upon which our nation flourished. This was highlighted in 1937 when the Educational Policies Commission published a report titled “The Unique Function of Education in American Democracy.” The authors of this paper eloquently encapsulated the intended function of our public education system:
“It is out of the historical development of American society that have come the ideas, aspirations, knowledge, and working rules which prevail today and set the task of education. There have been borrowings, of course. Beyond the founding of the Republic lies a vast background embracing the culture of antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and modern Europe. From this plenitude of resources American civilization has been enriched. But all that has been drawn from other times and places has been worked into the American heritage. Additional drafts may be made upon other nations in days to come. Research will bring new knowledge. Experiments may confirm new methods. Novel ideas may bid for favor. The spirit of inquiry and invention may be active. The aspirations of the living will be stirred by the eternal surge of the human heart. Even so, the past, distant and near, has given us our society, including all the material, intellectual, and moral manifestations with which education must work.” [Educational Policies Commission. “The Unique Function of Education in America.” Washington, D.C. 1937. p. 9]
The stark contrast between such an enlightened perspective on our education system, penned less than a century ago, and the current landscape we observe today is nothing short of a catastrophe.
Reflecting on this historical account, it becomes evident that the nation once embraced a distinct educational ethos. Had this ethos been consistently upheld and cultivated in all public schools, the current contentious debates might have been mitigated. Regrettably, this comprehensive report seems to have faded from the forefront of contemporary education. It's plausible that many educators today might be unfamiliar with its content. Yet, its message remains profoundly relevant. The report offers critical insights into the role of public education within the American democratic framework, the trajectory of education in the United States, and how democratic principles, individualism, and American values have shaped the structure of public education.
So, what exactly changed? Less than a century later, it’s challenging to find a public school in America that still operates on this framework. It seems that we’ve significantly deviated from the principles outlined in the 1937 report. We’ve sought to diminish the importance of individualism, ambition, and the zeal for excellence, swapping these values for a standardized approach to education. This shift, while apparently designed to ensure no student is left behind, risks blunting the competitive spirit that has long characterized American education.
It appears we have veered onto a path where the goal is not for students to maximize their potential, but for everyone to meet a common, moderate standard. Instead of applauding education of good moral virtue, or fostering the daring spirit of the individual, our current classrooms are often set up to nurture a sense of collective uniformity. This approach risks undermining the cultivation of strong morality, critical thinking and independent thought – critical skills that may not be measurable via standardized testing, but are integral for the innovators and leaders of the future.
The “Unique Function of Education in America” underlines the critical need for education to grapple with the tangible, intellectual, and ethical dimensions of our society. It endorses the cultivation of inquiry, creativity, and aspirations, all fueled by the ceaseless rhythm of the human spirit. Yet, these fundamental principles seem conspicuously absent from our contemporary educational programs.
The noticeable shift in our education system’s focus can be traced back to key legislative milestones, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. While these acts were launched with commendable intentions—ensuring equal access to education and striving to narrow the achievement gap—they inadvertently set the stage for a gradual but unrelenting shift towards a government-driven pursuit of educational equity.
Now, as education becomes a focal point in political debates across the nation, revisiting some foundational educational traditions becomes imperative. These traditions emphasize imparting clear American values to students, rather than leaving them in an ambiguous realm of self-discovery. The prevailing notion that students should solely learn through self-directed exploration might not be solely due to the omission of traditional American values from curricula. Critics often argue against the inclusion of specific values or religious tenets in schools. They advocate for teaching students "how to think" rather than "what to think," emphasizing a fact-based approach and allowing students to form their own interpretations. However, such a perspective might be missing a fundamental aspect of education.
The distinction, although subtle, represents a fundamental change dating back to Keppel’s ESEA. Nevertheless, this approach was fraught with a critical flaw from the start. It is a fallacy to believe one can teach ‘how to think’ without invariably influencing ‘what to think.’ As Ben Shapiro suggests in his book “The Right Side of History,” facts intrinsically carry their own values. Following this logic, when facts are taught, their embedded values are imparted as well, and if those facts are manipulated to fit a particular narrative, the result is the inculcation of values that contradict those grounded in reality.
[Shapiro, Ben. The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great. New York: HarperCollins, 2016.]
This dilemma was forewarned years before the current debate on education twenty years prior to the advent of the ESEA. In February of 1943, C.S. Lewis addressed this very issue in a lecture at the University of Durham. This series of lectures was later transformed into a succinct book known as “The Abolition of Man.” A brief perusal of the first of these lectures reveals Lewis’s views on a progressive or ‘equitable’ education.
“In the older systems both the kind of man the teachers wished to produce and their motives for producing him were prescribed by the Tao—a norm to which the teachers themselves were subject and from which they claimed no liberty to depart. They did not cut men to some pattern they had chosen. They handed on what they had received: they initiated the young neophyte into the mystery of humanity which over-arched him and them alike. It was but old birds teaching young birds to fly. This will be changed. Values are now mere natural phenomena. Judgements of value are to be produced in the pupil as part of the conditioning.” [Lewis, C.S. The Abolition of Man.]
Lewis’s “Tao” refers to the foundational values that have underpinned Western society since its inception, the same values underscored in “The Unique Function of Education in America. ” These principles built the world as we know it, and we turn our backs on them at our own peril. Education serves as the bedrock through which these values are transmitted to society. Therefore, a shift in our education system inevitably triggers a shift in our society.
In his lectures, Lewis offers a profound examination of the developments evident in the progressive education system. He dissects the motivations and methodologies of the educators, or ‘conditioners’, as he categorizes them. Moreover, his insights almost prophetically anticipate the current state of affairs in our education system. Lewis’s analysis, though made decades ago, still holds startling relevance today and provides a stark warning about the dangers of abandoning traditional values in education.
“We may legitimately hope that among the impulses which arise in minds thus emptied of all ‘rational’ or ‘spiritual’ motives, some will be benevolent. I am very doubtful myself whether the benevolent impulses, stripped of that preference and encouragement which the Tao teaches us to give them and left to their merely natural strength and frequency as psychological events, will have much influence. I am very doubtful whether history shows us one example of a man who, having stepped outside traditional morality and attained power, has used that power benevolently. I am inclined to think that the Conditioners will hate the conditioned.” [Lewis, C.S. The Abolition of Man.]
Lewis then proceeds to explain that he will not dwell on this concept since it was “mere conjecture.” However, nearly 80 years on, we can look at our education system and validate his analysis with certainty. The system has cast aside all traditional morality and substituted it with a new value structure that embodies the doctrine of “Equity.” Despite this remarkable prediction, what Lewis did not anticipate is the impact this dramatic shift from traditional teaching and morality would have on society as a whole. Naturally, he was writing in the 1940s, when progressives were yet to devise the methodology that would later infuse their new value structure into our education system. Without understanding these methods, comprehending the broader implications would be a challenge.
Nonetheless, if we turn to contemporary analysis, we can find an extension of sorts to The Abolition of Man in Michael Knowles’s recent book, “Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds.” While Knowles doesn’t directly cite Lewis’s arguments, he offers a detailed explanation of the vehicle through which the doctrine of Equity—that is, the new value structure that has replaced traditional morality—has permeated our education. Moreover, he discusses the real-world manifestations of the assertions that Lewis makes about how the “conditioners” will manifest their value structure. According to Knowles, this vehicle for change is the manipulation of language itself, accomplished through the progressives’ invention of political correctness.
“Political correctness goes further than demanding fealty to a set of opinions. It promises to fundamentally transform the world. Political correctness contorts language in an attempt to remake reality along leftist lines…. According to political correctness, words do not describe reality; they constitute it.” [Knowles, Michael. Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds. Regnery Publishing, 2021. p. 8.]
In utilizing our education system as a tool for advancing the ideology of educational equity, proponents of this perspective have managed to mold the minds of many. The classrooms that once served as platforms for balanced learning and diverse thought have slowly metamorphosed into echo chambers for a single narrative. Through the clever alteration of language and a purportedly ‘equitable’ approach to teaching history and values, these advocates have subtly erased our shared cultural heritage. They are promulgating a new dogma, a novel set of values, essentially, a reimagined America to our impressionable young minds.
The repercussions of this paradigm shift in our educational approach are palpable. Our education system appears to have sidelined the rich teachings of civilizations that shaped our world, favoring instead the dictates of the Common Core standards. And herein lies the issue. These standards have become the playground for advocates of educational equity, subtly influencing and reshaping the very fabric of our education system. Let’s delve deeper into one among the many groups that are tailoring the curriculum within this new value structure—equity.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), initially launched as Teaching Tolerance in 1991, has emerged as one of the primary organizations advocating for educational equity. The main method through which Teaching Tolerance aims to accomplish its goals is by acting as a publisher of books, magazines, films, and other educational materials. Its principal publication, the Teaching Tolerance magazine, is issued twice a year and reaches 450,000 educators. Their mission is, as per the National Geographic Society, to foster “inclusiveness, reduce bias, and promote educational equity” for students of all ages across the United States.
[National Geographic Society. “Teaching Tolerance.” National Geographic Education website, https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/teaching-tolerance/%5D
A cursory look at the SPLC’s educational homepage, doesn’t immediately raise eyebrows. It champions the teaching of civil rights and social justice and espouses the promotion of ‘hard history.’ The site also proudly announces its contributions to the Common Core State Standards. But a more in-depth investigation unveils a slightly different narrative. By navigating to their newsletter, one gains access to their most recent publications – the same materials dispatched to hundreds of thousands of teachers twice a year. The content therein, while seemingly innocuous on the surface, does warrant a closer examination.
One of their latest publications is titled “A Refuge for LGBT+ Young People”. In this article, they mention the existence of 4,000 organizations referred to as GSA’s (Gender and Sexuality Alliances) throughout the country. The article seems to insinuate that these are student-led organizations aimed at aiding students, but it also contains a link that leads to a different website:
[https://www.glsen.org/resources/educator-resources]
Upon visiting this site, a prominent pop-up greets the visitor, stating that one can “safely exit” the page by pressing the escape key three times. It’s an unusual feature for a website purporting to be a supportive environment for young adults. However, exploring the site further reveals that it is not just a resource for student groups but also a platform for educators. This highlights that the influence of these organizations reaches beyond just student-led activities and extends into the realm of educators and curricula.
The GLSEN Educator Network invites educators to join their cause with the following call to action:
“Join the thousands of educators who are helping GLSEN change schools across the country. As a member of the GLSEN Educator Network, you’ll receive emails that highlight GLSEN’s resources and provide up-to-date information on GLSEN research. You will also receive current information on LGBTQ events and celebrations to help you plan for and implement a more inclusive curriculum, including direct information and new resources for GLSEN days of action like No Name-Calling Week. Register your GSA today!” [https://www.glsen.org/resources/educator-resources]
This statement clearly shows that it’s not just students leading these organizations. Instead, educators are playing a significant role in steering these groups, all under the banner of pursuing equity. This example is just one among many similar organizations that exist for this purpose, and as expected, they have found their way into classrooms via the Common Core State Standards. Therefore, it’s evident that these standards are providing a pathway for such ideologies to permeate our education system.
Without the guiding principles that our education system once upheld, and the shared belief that traditional American values and education ought to be of primary importance, anyone with the necessary credentials can set the standards.
One of today’s most debated topics in the political sphere is the discourse surrounding transgender rights and the escalating visibility of the LGBTQ+ community within the school system. This development has garnered the scrutiny of conservatives throughout the nation who contend that these alternative lifestyles should not constitute a component of children’s education. However, the focal point here is to comprehend that the breadth of content disseminated within public education isn’t limited to this subject alone. We are presented with a valuable opportunity to shed light on the broader modifications that have been deeply ingrained into our education system.
The fundamental issue extends beyond the introduction of LGBTQ+ content; it concerns the systemic shift towards an ‘equity’-based model which standardizes outcomes, neglects individual potential, and substantially deviates from the classic American values of hard work, ambition, personal accomplishment, and robust moral character that serve as our societal backbone. This represents the heart of the matter we must urgently address.
The notion of ‘educational equity’ has subtly yet decisively eroded the structure of our education system. Instead of fostering knowledge about the historical giants like Caesar, Shakespeare, and numerous esteemed figures of Western civilization, we have yielded to the standardization of education. Consequently, we have inadvertently surrendered control to those who do not share the core values that built our nation.
Yet, amidst this seemingly bleak landscape, there remains a glimmer of hope—a chance to reclaim our educational system and ensure the preservation of our values, history, and culture. Conservatives across the nation are more mobilized than ever, advocating for significant educational reforms. However, they are currently limiting themselves by focusing on symptoms, while neglecting the underlying disease that has permeated our education system. To truly address the problem, we must return to our roots, to the traditional values and rigorous academic standards that once defined our schools.
Some states have already begun to enact quiet but impactful changes. A recent Wall Street Journal opinion article details one such example:
“In Georgia students will be required to build ‘background knowledge’ by reciting all or part of significant poems and speeches. The Arkansas plan calls for students to recite a passage from a well-known poem, play or speech. That’s it: an old-fashioned demand that students memorize the Gettysburg Address or Hamlet’s ‘To be or not to be’ or Gwendolyn Brooks’s ‘We Real Cool’ and recite it to an audience….Every man is an orator,’ Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote. ‘The eloquence of one stimulates all the rest…to a degree that makes them good receivers and conductors.’ Reciting classic lines brings past eloquence into the present, turning us into receivers and conductors. When we weigh the words of influential men and women and realize they are still useful, we all benefit.” [From “Kids and the Power of the Spoken Word,” - Wall Street Journal]
These changes are more than just minor modifications to a curriculum; they are a powerful testament to the enduring strength and resilience of traditional educational values. They serve as tangible evidence that it is indeed possible to counter the current tide, even in a climate that often seems overwhelmingly focused on pursuing the nebulous concept of ‘educational equity’. By reintroducing time-honored educational practices, such as the memorization and recitation of seminal works, we reestablish our connection to our historical heritage, while also ensuring that future generations are not only well-educated but also firmly rooted in the values and ethos that have made America the nation it is today.
As we stand on the precipice of this educational crossroad, it’s imperative to acknowledge that the path to reinvigorating our education system with the principles of individual achievement, rigorous academic standards, and the fundamental moral character intrinsic to our society, is not one for the faint-hearted. It demands dedication, foresight, and unwavering commitment to the promise of American education.
We must be willing to delve into the fray, to question the status quo, and most importantly, to unite in our collective effort. Only then can we resist the homogenizing force of ‘educational equity’ that seeks to dictate uniform outcomes while undermining individual potential. Every parent, educator, and policy-maker who believes in the transformative power of education must join this mission, bringing their unique insights and steadfast determination to the cause.
Our journey may seem daunting, given the complexities of the contemporary educational landscape. However, the stakes could not be higher. The success of our mission holds the promise of an education system that once again nurtures ambition, celebrates achievement, and upholds the shared values that form the backbone of our national identity. Through our collective efforts, we have the power to ensure that our children’s education encourages them to strive for excellence, value hard work, and respect the moral and ethical standards that have always defined our society. By doing so, we not only preserve our heritage but also ensure the continuation of our shared narrative. We reaffirm the essence of American education: a system that cherishes individual potential, promotes personal responsibility, and remains true to the values that have guided our nation’s history. The promise of our future lies in our unwavering commitment to these ideals, and the journey begins in the classroom.