Red Herring: Does the education system need a change?
Written by Tony Salgado, Zhaohan Zhang
Yes the education system does need to change:
The Department of Education was founded in 1979 on three bases:
Administer federal funding for education
Collect and Analyze data on schools and students
And enforce federal education laws relating to civil rights and equal access.
Notice how I did not mention if they had the power to set educational standards, that is something left up to the states right? Wrong.
The Department of Education requires all states that accept federal funding to follow a strict guideline and standards, which in turn means they have control over what is being taught inside the schools. This ensures that all states and schools are in a “one size fits all” education model.
This is problematic as it completely ignores the economic and cultural differences all over the country. The department's rules and mandates don’t take into account local needs or variations, leading to unnecessary compliance burdens for schools. For example economically, in Suburban California the average income is 190,000 dollars, whereas in Rural Alabama where it is only 49,000.
Stay with me now.
This would not be so bad if the average reading and math scores of today's students were on the rise, however, it is not. According to NPR, U.S. reading and math scores have dropped to the lowest level in decades. The icing on top of this terrible cake is that the NAEP shows that this trend of lower performance has been going on for quite some time. This can be partially attributed to standardized testing mandates. For example, policies such as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) have emphasized that standardized testing is a key indicator of school performance. This is problematic as it then requires schools and teachers to focus more on test-taking rather than holistic learning.
This is disparaging as the Department of Education has a budget of 268 billion dollars in the fiscal year 2024, making the U.S. the country that spends the largest amount of money on its people's education in the world. Yet despite this, our education system does not reflect the funding. But this is just the beginning of all of its problems.
The U.S. education system has been in place for over 200 years, maintaining a structure that was originally designed for the industrial age. While the system has provided stability, it has failed to evolve at the pace necessary to meet the demands of the 21st century. Standardization, outdated teaching methods, and disparities in educational quality have led to a system that no longer serves the needs of all students. Reform is necessary to address the shortcomings of the current system and ensure that students are equipped with the skills required for success in a rapidly changing world.
One of the main arguments supporting the status quo is that the longevity of the system proves its effectiveness. However, simply because a system has existed for over 200 years does not mean it remains efficient or relevant. The modern world is vastly different from the 19th century, yet the fundamental structure of education remains largely unchanged. The traditional model of education, which emphasizes rote memorization and standardized testing, was developed to produce factory workers rather than innovative thinkers. In today's digital age, where creativity, adaptability, and critical thinking are highly valued, an outdated education system is a disservice to students.
A major flaw in the current system is its reliance on standardized education, which fails to accommodate diverse learning styles. Proponents argue that standardized education ensures a consistent foundation for all students, but in reality, it creates a rigid structure that does not allow for individual growth. Students learn at different paces and have unique strengths and weaknesses, yet the current system forces all students to adhere to the same methods and assessments. This one-size-fits-all approach prevents many students from reaching their full potential.
Moreover, standardized testing, a cornerstone of the current system, does not accurately measure a student’s true abilities. These tests prioritize memorization over critical thinking and creativity, which are crucial for success in the workforce. While supporters claim standardized testing is necessary for accountability, it often places unnecessary pressure on students and teachers while failing to address the real educational needs of students. Instead of focusing on test scores, schools should prioritize diverse assessment methods that evaluate problem-solving abilities, creativity, and real-world application of knowledge.
The U.S. education system claims to provide equal access to education for all students, but in practice, this is not the case. Schools in wealthier areas have better funding, access to advanced courses, and highly qualified teachers, whereas schools in lower-income communities often struggle with outdated materials, larger class sizes, and fewer extracurricular opportunities. The argument that the system ensures equality is misleading because equal access does not equate to equal opportunity.
Furthermore, standardized tests often reflect socioeconomic status more than actual intelligence or potential. Wealthier students have greater access to test preparation resources, tutoring, and high-quality schooling, giving them an unfair advantage over their less-privileged peers. If the goal is true equity, reforms must address funding disparities and provide additional resources to underprivileged schools to level the playing field.
The world is becoming increasingly technology-driven, yet the education system has been slow to integrate technology in meaningful ways. Critics of educational reform argue that technology, including artificial intelligence, would replace traditional teaching methods and weaken student-teacher relationships. However, technology should be viewed as a tool to enhance education rather than a replacement for teachers.
Personalized learning, supported by technological advancements, allows students to learn at their own pace and according to their individual needs. Adaptive learning platforms, for example, can provide customized lessons that help students grasp concepts more effectively. Instead of forcing all students to conform to a rigid structure, personalized education can help each student maximize their potential while allowing teachers to focus on mentoring and guiding rather than simply delivering information.
Another argument for maintaining the current system is that it fosters social connections among students. However, a traditional classroom setting does not necessarily promote social and emotional development as effectively as more innovative learning models. Project-based learning, for instance, encourages collaboration, teamwork, and communication—skills that are essential in the modern workforce. Reforming the education system does not mean eliminating social interaction; rather, it provides opportunities for students to engage in meaningful, hands-on learning experiences that better prepare them for real-world situations.
Change is often resisted in education because of the fear of disruption. However, refusing to adapt leads to stagnation. The argument that stability is more important than reform ignores the reality that other industries and systems evolve to meet new challenges. The education system should be no exception. Countries that have modernized their education systems, such as Finland and South Korea, consistently outperform the United States in global assessments. These countries emphasize critical thinking, reduce reliance on standardized tests, and incorporate flexible learning models—approaches that the U.S. should consider adopting.
While the U.S. education system has served many generations, it is no longer sufficient for the demands of the modern world. Its reliance on standardized testing, outdated teaching methods, and inequitable access to resources has created a system that does not fully support all students. Rather than resisting change, the U.S. must embrace reform that promotes personalized learning, integrates technology, and ensures that all students—regardless of socioeconomic status—have access to high-quality education. The future depends on an education system that evolves to meet the needs of today’s learners, not one that clings to outdated practices.
No the education system is fine:
Recent debates have been encircled around the education system, whether or not it's a good fit and if it needs to be changed; however, as it currently stands, the status quo provides a stable structure in our current education system; the system has been in use of over 200 years dating to the 19th century and has still provided a strong sense of education despite all the changes and evolution to technology or teaching systems. While many arguments arise for why it needs to change, there are just as many, if not more, strengths our current system provides, showing why we do not need a change in our education system.
Let's begin with the values and the core of our education system. As stated before, our current system has been the status quo for quite some time. This is partially due to our systems approach of emphasis on structure and standardized education. This ensures that all students have a strong foundation and basic education despite background or geographic location. This consistency is crucial in a rapidly changing world and society. We also have a significant focus on the development of critical thinking, something that is highly established with our core subjects of math, science, Literature arts, and history while also providing us with a strong foundation for knowledge. My research shows that studying these subjects and our current system is vital to a well-rounded future education. According to a report by the National Center for Education Statistics(NCES), students who excel in mathematics and reading 2, the core subjects in the system, have gone on to have more success in their individual careers. Another study published by Educational Researcher highlights the correlation between a strong foundation of education and success in higher education and the workforce.
Along with this, a structured system provides the best sense of equality at an objective level. Our public school system's cornerstone principle is that all students should have equal access to quality education regardless of their status. With their education, other nations like Canada and Finland drive their strong mobility. These nations consistently rank highly in global education assessments because they rely heavily on centralized education. Pasi Sahlberg, a Finnish Instructor, even states that Finland's Success can be related to a strong emphasis on policies that ensure equal distribution of education and resources.
Often, people argue that standardized testing, a key component in our current system, does not measure the full potential of each student. However, the truth of the matter is that standardized testing allows students with unique backgrounds to be measured in the most objective way and offers a scale of accountability. The National Assessment of Educational Progress(NAEP) mo, commonly known as the National Report Card, is one of the most well-regarded standardized tests in the United States. It provides how well a student is doing objectively at a national level. This enables people to track their progress over time. By testing a large quantity of unique students, NAEP provides a way for any disparities in our system to be identified and corrected accordingly. Standardized testing is also a great way to ensure equity within the educational system. Students of differing social, economic, geographic, and even racial backgrounds are given as much care as anyone else. Without this ideal equality in our system, the quality of education and resources can become much more difficult to split between everyone, leaving maybe those of higher rankings in society to receive a good education but not so much for anyone else. Research by the Brooking Institution emphasizes the importance of standardized testing and how it can highlight the gaps in achievement between different groups of students, which is crucial for directing policy interventions to help improve the overall state of education and equity in it all. Those who argue against standardized testing will likely say that it is too narrow or rigid and limits students' creativity; however, they fail to understand and look at how it's only a more extensive education system component. Teachers still have the opportunity to foster creativity along with foundational education. A study by the American Educational Research Association(AERA) found that although traditional testing mainly focuses on basic skills, it doesn't inherently stop teachers from incorporating creative and more high-end thinking into the basic curriculum. The pressure to teach only what is on the test may be prominent in some places. Still, it doesn't change the fact that standardized testing is key for ensuring accountability and measuring educational success.
With the change in our education system comes the use of individualized, unique learning for every student. Although not a bad idea, there are a multitude of issues. For one, it would become increasingly difficult for a teacher to learn the needs of every student, so a couple of solutions can arise. For one, get more teachers for classes so each teacher can help fewer students and provide them with quality instruction. Or two: using the help of technology to teach students, specifically AI, has been something people have regarded in terms of the future of teaching. Well, the issue is that we don't have teachers. Simply because of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, the nation lost 567,000 instructors, a number we haven't recovered from. Bills and ideas are being passed to help accommodate this, such as the Wyoming 2025-HB0100 bill K-121 Uncertified Personnel, which allows schools to create policies to bring in people to be teachers even if they aren't certified.
Regarding the use of AI or other technologies, it's breaking up an idea that is highly important for students: the connection between student and teacher. Even now, with technology playing a more vital role in general education, it still can't replace the experience and value of face-to-face learning. The position of a teacher isn't simply just someone who delivers information to you; they are mentors, guides, and, on rare occasions, lifelines for some students academically and even emotionally. Reading this, you likely have a favorite teacher(s) or someone you remember very vividly, something that can't be replicated with technology and is even harder to do with a change in the education system. The National Education Association states that it is vital for strong teacher and student bonds to exist, noting that students with a strong and supportive relationship with their teachers perform generally better academically, show better social and emotional resilience, and stay in school for longer.
Along with strong student-teacher relationships come strong student-to-student connections. Our current education system also provides an easy way to connect with many different kinds of students. Developing social skills is key for the future, no matter your career. While technological development has provided intense assistance within education systems, in some cases, they cannot improve the social part for people, which is essential if you want to develop ideas of teamwork, communication, and leadership skills. Your more traditional classroom or the status quo of today provides a much more unique perspective for learning, creating tools by getting help from the teachers and your peers to develop interpersonal relationships and skills that are vital components in most jobs and are highly valued by most employers across most industries. In 2016, a report was released by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD) emphasizing that countries that invest in those strong bonds between student and teacher tend to see better outcomes in both academic performance and achievement and overall well-being and student satisfaction.
Finally, the stability of our current system severely outweighs the potential of any other system we might use. Reforming our education system could drastically disrupt the learning process for students, teachers, and administrators. A study at Brooking Institution found that frequent shifts in educational policies, such as changes to curriculum or teaching methods, tend to negatively impact students. Another example is our very own Cody High School, where we recently switched over to a block and skinny schedule where some classes are 90 Minutes while the others are 50, a sharp comparison between the length of these classes. But what if you have an AP class as a skinny, which has multiple options like AP Calculus or AP Biology? Having 50 minutes to try and learn an advanced placement lesson makes it much harder and more stressful for the students. Change is not only essential but also inevitable. That's how this world works no matter what, but the simple theory that our education system would drastically improve and provide a much better system than it currently is, well, just that, a theory. Instead of thinking of something that might happen, we take a look at our current system with an argument that a stable, consistent system is imperative and allows for the proper accumulation of knowledge and building an understanding of most things over an extended period of time for not only the students but also the teachers as well.
Most advocates for continuing our current system won't fully argue against change. Instead, focus on more minor changes or slower changes. Changing some specific systems, like updating teaching materials or tweaking standardized testing, would be much more efficient, less time-consuming, and cheaper than a complete system overhaul. Adding courses focused on understanding the digital era, like computer science or computer applications, is a significant step forward. The World Economic Forum continuously talks about the importance of skills that help with problem-solving, collaboration, and new technological proficiency. Still, these skills shouldn't be a replacement but something to work in harmony with the current status quo. This all to say, we need to enhance the current system with more revolutionary modern ideas and systems; this could include adapting some ideas from proposed changes like more individualized learning, offering more and better quality vocational education, and, of course, the development of technology.
Arguments arise that the current system is 200 years old and that the approach to modern-day education isn't as strong. Or we rely too heavily on memorization instead of teaching critical thinking. This is true. Our current model often fails at being as diverse to the unique needs of our students, mainly in the digital age. Standardized testing can also be attributed to more basic needs. It isn't as creative as it can be. While there are some aspects, like the writing portion of the act, it isn't enough in general. Plus, the rigidity of the curriculum makes it harder for some students to learn as there is a large variety of learning styles. Many will agree that catastrophic events could befall the school and students if the current system stays in play with no change. The innovation of adding AI or switching to a more individualized system of learning would greatly benefit the students and potentially increase the speed of their knowledge. To ensure a future, one must not forget that flexibility and change are inherently just actual keys.
So yes, there are many great arguments on why the school system is currently not great, and many ideas arise on how it could or needs to be changed to improve. However, this is overlooking how great our current system is and the positives it can and has provided for years. It's a system that has proven capable of educating our students, giving a sense of stability and foundational knowledge. Tweaks can be made to the current system. There have been previous ones, but going on to completely change the education system would cost too much money, waste resources and time, and aren't even guaranteed to work. So that's why, as it stands, the status quo in our current system should stay the same.