Friday, January 11, 2008
Whenever I have an upset stomach and go to the bathroom during the middle of class or whenever I head over to the counseling or career center for an appointment, I almost always see students lounging on the stairways of the 500's or the lunch patios, horse‑playing with one another and disturbing the learning environment. If our CST's are always present to hassle students about something as trivial as a black beanie without a James Logan insignia, where are they during class periods when students need to be sent to their respective classrooms?
Stretching this topic further, why do some students come to school with nothing but their cell phones, to be used to text friends during class? Why do some students even come to school at all?
To many, school is not a think tank used to absorb and enrich our minds; instead, it is a hindrance that prevents them from completing their to‑do list's, a list comprised of frivolity and immediate satisfaction.
These observations have led to my opinion of reforming the precedents of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Under current circumstances, students MUST attend school until the age of eighteen.
However, I believe that school attendance should be optional.
Let the people who want to learn learn. Let the people who don't stay home and pursue other endeavors. Not only would this drastically improve California's debt and future budgets, it would provide a better environment for those who want to learn and make something of themselves. There would be less crowding in the hallways, smaller class sizes, and a better sense of school spirit and unity.
Still, I am not naive enough to believe that such a reform will ever occur in the near future, considering the bipartisanship of the No Child Left Behind Act and its success in raising national test scores, but the fact is that our schools are filled with students who have no desire to be there and are simply draining assets that could be used to help those who seek education.