Nina+Ray+RP+Post+5

When I began my research, I was more so acting out of anger, dissatisfied with what I had learned over the past 11 years of schooling. I thought I would find information about the flaws in the schooling system, and how it just matters that we fix them. I didn't expect that what I considered "flaws", were actually far more dangerous than that.

Consider this: According to Where We Stand, a series hosted by PBS, 93% of the funds towards K-12 education comes from the local and state accounts. While at the the state level, these funds typically come from sales and income taxes, the local level gives a very different perspective. At the local level, education funds come from property taxes. In other words, where you live determines the quality of your school. In other words, the U.S has set up a system where you have to be able to afford a quality education, rather than be guaranteed to one. And if the money determines the education, then this sets up an even bigger disadvantage for disabled students. Jonathan Henner delivers a chilling statistic, stating that 20% of deaf high school graduates can only read at a level at or below the second grade. In poorer districts, the numbers may be higher.

A solution to this problem may be, if you can afford it, to send your child into a better school in a wealthier district.

This is not the case.

In 2011, Tanya McDowell was arrested after she enrolled her son into Brookside Elementary School, on the charges that she was "stealing her son's education". The message is clear: the law works directly to "keep people in their place", which further fuels the stigma that people living in poverty, especially people of color, won't get themselves a better education. In reality, they're not allowed to succeed.

Other comments about the quality of our education draw a common theme of the ability of schools to create industrialized workers rather than creative thinkers and leaders. Regardless of the money that goes into them, schools rarely encourage students to become young adults that will make strides in the real world, and it makes sense. Our AP classes, supposedly providing a higher level of learning, are often so stifled with "required material" that one comes out of class as if they had just escaped from a different universe. Can I use Euler's method to solve for the approximation of a value related to differential equations? Probably not, considering I put that method out of my mind the second I left my testing room in May. Our standardized tests are often useless, measuring whether a student can adhere to strict guidelines and a particular way of thinking above anything else. There is meager encouragement for creativity, as art and music and other forms of expression are seen as "taking a risk" if a student decided that they wanted to pursue this field.