Scribd
Upload
13 views2 pages

SipherSampleEssay

Uploaded by

danilomilenkovic
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
13 views2 pages

SipherSampleEssay

Uploaded by

danilomilenkovic
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Sipher, Roger. “So That Nobody Has to Go to School If They Don't Want To.

” The New York


Times, 19 Dec. 1977, p. 31.
So That Nobody Has To Go To School If They Don't Want To
by Roger Sipher

A decline in standardized test scores is but the most recent indicator that American education is
in trouble. One reason for the crisis is that present mandatory-attendance laws force many to
attend school who have no wish to be there. Such children have little desire to learn and are so
antagonistic to school that neither they nor more highly motivated students receive the quality
education that is the birthright of every American.The solution to this problem is simple:
Abolish compulsory-attendance laws and allow only those who are committed to getting an
education to attend.This will not end public education. Contrary to conventional belief,
legislators enacted compulsory-attendance laws to legalize what already existed. William
Landes and Lewis Solomon, economists, found little evidence that mandatory-attendance laws
increased the number of children in school. They found, too, that school systems have never
effectively enforced such laws, usually because of the expense involved. There is no
contradiction between the assertion that compulsory attendance has had little effect on the
number of children attending school and the argument that repeal would be a positive step
toward improving education. Most parents want a high school education for their children.
Unfortunately, compulsory attendance hampers the ability of public school officials to enforce
legitimate educational and disciplinary policies and thereby make the education a good one.
Private schools have no such problem. They can fail or dismiss students, knowing such students
can attend public school. Without compulsory attendance, public schools would be freer to oust
students whose academic or personal behavior undermines the educational mission of the
institution.Has not the noble experiment of a formal education for everyone failed? While we
pay homage to the homily, "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink," we
have pretended it is not true in education. Ask high school teachers if recalcitrant students
learn anything of value. Ask teachers if these students do any homework. Quite the contrary,
these students know they will be passed from grade to grade until they are old enough to quit
or until, as is more likely, they receive a high school diploma. At the point when students could
legally quit, most choose to remain since they know they are likely to be allowed to graduate
whether they do acceptable work or not. Abolition of archaic attendance laws would produce
enormous dividends. First, it would alert everyone that school is a serious place where one goes
to learn. Schools are neither day-care centers nor indoor street corners. Young people who
resist learning should stay away; indeed, an end to compulsory schooling would require them
to stay away. Second, students opposed to learning would not be able to pollute the
educational atmosphere for those who want to learn. Teachers could stop policing recalcitrant
students and start educating. Third, grades would show what they are supposed to: how well a
student is learning. Parents could again read report cards and know if their children were
making progress.Fourth, public esteem for schools would increase. People would stop regarding
them as way stations for adolescents and start thinking of them as institutions for educating
America's youth.Fifth, elementary schools would change because students would find out early
they had better learn something or risk flunking out later. Elementary teachers would no longer
have to pass their failures on to junior high and high school. Sixth, the cost of enforcing
compulsory education would be eliminated. Despite enforcement efforts, nearly 15 percent of
the school-age children in our largest cities are almost permanently absent from school.
Communities could use these savings to support institutions to deal with young people not in
school. If, in the long run, these institutions prove more costly, at least we would not confuse
their mission with that of schools. Schools should be for education. At present, they are only
tangentially so. They have attempted to serve an all-encompassing social function, trying to be
all things to all people. In the process they have failed miserably at what they were originally
formed to accomplish.

You might also like