By Meagan Barrett ’15

For 13 straight years of American schooling, whether you truly understand and retain the content or not, you are pushed through classes that you may or may not excel at in order to keep up with the ever-competitive “standard.” As the United States education system has progressed, it has developed this obsession with encouraging—or pushing, really—students to take classes that they struggle in or are simply disinterested in.

Enforcing a rigid, set standard may have once made sense. When the British government was first developing the public education system that they would implement throughout its colonies, it needed to teach inhabitants of their colonies three basic things: how to read, write and do basic arithmetic. And thus, on-level algebra was born. But in the current American social structure, what is such standardization really worth? The school system stresses that kids take more challenging classes in the subjects they don’t succeed in, solely because it makes the student more appealing to colleges. Their strengths and weaknesses have no weight in their educational career, and their academic interests, desires and goals are boiled down to nothing more than a bundled up pre-determined act. We no longer live in a society where it is necessary to have lots of people who can all do the same thing. And as high schools continue to encourage students to start thinking of their future careers earlier, it’s hardly necessary to continue exposing a student who truly struggles with math to high level-calculus. At the same time, if a student struggles with basic grammar rules, there’s no need for them to be persuaded to take AP English classes just for college’s approval. There’s no argument that students should definitely learn both math and English, but to what level and at what intensity they should learn at is debatable.

In high school, students have reached a level at which they are self-aware enough to know what interests them, what they succeed in and what they simply can’t do. Of course learning basic math and English is necessary to function in society. But forcing those who aren’t proficient in English or math to continue taking the subjects in which they struggle until twelfth grade simply makes that part of their education a chore, and it essentially turns them off from the subject. And having requirements for a certain number of credits in a designated subject in order to graduate perpetuates the disdain they have for that subject. Now, not only is it difficult, but it is also an obstacle standing between them and graduation.

It would be more effective if a new system were in place, one that didn’t have a requirement for credits by class subject. Instead, a new requirement to have a certain number of overall credits should be implemented. In this system, more rigorous courses would have more weight, and a certain number of rigorous courses would be required in order to graduate within four years. However, the student could pursue rigorous courses in any subject they choose. And because having English and social sciences as well as math and natural sciences make for a balanced education that is healthy for the brain’s development, it would be required for a student to take less rigorous electives; however, passing or failing these classes would not dictate a student’s eligibility to graduate. It could be possible to showcase proficiency in extracurricular classes to colleges as a bonus, but it would be optional. Because these classes essentially would not affect students’ grades, they could truly try any class they choose.

It would be much more effective to allow students to take the classes in which they excel, and let them choose to challenge themselves without the weight of graduation bearing down on them as they’re trying to branch out. It isn’t necessary to force kids to struggle in subject they simply aren’t interested in just to meet some elusive, unrealistic standard. A fish should be judged on its ability to swim, not on how well it climbs trees.