Why do we go to school?

Posted December 2020

By Garon Jones

Staff Editor

Why do we go to school? I’m sure this is a question you’ve asked others before, but likely with little to no satisfying answer as a response. “To learn, grow, and become educated as prepared and functional adults,” one might say. And this answer is true to a certain extent. We get up in the morning at a set time, attend classes at specific hours, and work on tasks to finish at home. School fosters habits and daily routine, which likely explains why during this pandemic, students are craving to return to classes in person. But there is another side to our public school systems that often goes unnoticed, and that is the tendency for learning bias.

The learning bias I will refer to in this article can be defined as the tendency for students to be taught lessons shaped around the individual professor’s political opinions.

Every teacher, administrator, and principal of almost every school has some kind of goal or motive to base their curriculum on. For some teachers, it is a noble goal, to foster healthy learning habits and unbiased lessons. But for some, these goals are actively political. These teachers of course want to allow children to learn and grow. But many see their job as an opportunity to impart their own viewpoint onto students in order for them to become a more like-minded individual.

I’d like you to think for a moment about just how political school really is. In almost every class you can find some level or degree of a political discussion. In science class, you’d be hard pressed to have never had a discussion on climate change, pollution, or environmental regulations. In health class, it’s likely you’ve talked about the idea of a non-binary and transgenderism. In English, it’s likely a whole host of subjects could have been brought up from feminism to race to social policy. I would never make the assertion that these topics should not be brought up in the classroom. In fact, I believe they are quite important issues to be discussed, debated, and explored.

But there becomes a problem when only one side of a particular issue is presented as the “true” or “correct” idea.

To give a personal example, in my own history class, we were given an assignment where we had to write a research paper either for or against reparations. But we were required to use the source material our teacher had given us. If you chose to argue in favor of reparations, you had the privilege of receiving a multitude of sources and notes to help you write your paper. You even had a whole in-class activity dedicated to having students role play as real life characters positively affected by receiving (and negatively affected by not receiving) reparations. You could use this activity to help your paper as well.

If, however, you chose to argue against reparations, you were not as lucky. You had very little source material and practically nothing to work with. When I asked my teacher directly what evidence could the anti-reparations side use to support their claim, I was awarded with a singular shorthand response: “Booker T. Washington.” For those that may not be familiar, my teacher was referring to the now famous historical ideological divide between famed black intellectuals Booker T. Washington and Dr. W.E.B DuBois over what the best course of action should be taken for black development after the abolition of slavery. Washington argued in favor of education and the development of human capital for blacks in the United States, while DuBois argued in favor of government granted black civil rights.

After I left the classroom, I thought to myself, “That’s it? What in-class activity did the anti-reparations side get to complete their essay?” The answer was of course none, because learning bias allows for some viewpoints to be awarded over others in the classroom.

It is very clear what structuring a lesson this way does to high schoolers. It presents them with a fairly easy choice: Either support reparations, and get an easy grade, or don’t support reparations and make your life that much more difficult. Most kids don’t have a strong investment in politics. After all, young people tend to vote the least out of any age group. So while they’re in school, it’s easy for them to pick the easiest political opinion presented to them.

They see it as just another assignment. But unbeknownst to them, such assignments ultimately will cultivate their political opinions as adults. Political messages we are taught when we are younger stick with us when we become adults if there aren’t any other strong opinions we come in contact with. So if we’re not politically active, like most people, our opinions taught to us at a young age are likely the ones to stay as we get older.

To give another personal example, take my Senior English class where we are required to choose an academic book for our research paper. Now you are presented with two options: Do the research on your own, and find a book on a topic you know nothing about, or look from the teacher-provided list of reading material. But there’s just one catch, the teacher-provided list unsurprisingly has learning bias.

Out of the few selections for students to choose from, there featured two books by popular leftist radical Ibram X. Kendi, including his bestselling book How To Be An Antiracist. Several anti-Trump books made the list including Rage by Bob Woodward, and A Very Stable Genius: Donald J. Trump’s Testing of America. The list also included a book by famed leftist climate activist Greta Thunberg.

Our teacher also provided a DDHS library recommended list. The bias here was just as obvious. This list included White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo, a book that spends its entirety casting all white people as racists. This is not an exaggeration seeing as she makes her point very clear in the opening lines of the book (I read the book myself just a few months ago). The list also includes two books by Kendi. Just to give you an idea, I will list a few more titles: Rethinking Sexism, Gender, and Sexuality, This Will be My Undoing : Living at the Intersection of Black, Female, and Feminist in (White) America, and An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States for Young People.

Just from a brief preview of these lists, I would like you to consider: Does this sound like a non-biased, non agenda filled list, or does it sound like there could be some bias here? Now to reiterate, I am perfectly fine with having these book titles show up on the reading list. But what I am not fine with is having only those titles.

I’d like to ask, will you ever find any books by Thomas Sowell on that list? Do most young people even know who he is? How about Walter Williams? How about any single important modern conservative figure in the last decade? How about any person with a right leaning viewpoint period?

It was cleverly said by Sowell himself that “the next time some academics tell you how important diversity is, ask how many Republicans are in their sociology department.” As a personal note, I’m proud to attend a school with such strong diversity, but we practically are diverse in almost every way possible except in the way that is most important: our opinions.

And this is clearly a major problem. How can children be expected to grow as fully functioning adults with critical thinking skills if they are only exposed to one way of thinking? They can’t. Schools and teachers often provide the illusion of choice in opinions for most students, but it's obvious which is the real choice. When presented with going out and doing research to find a book or going from the list, in most cases, students find it easier to just go with the list.

Again, either do the heavy lifting and do extra work, or choose from the books teachers want you to read. Not books that are important, but the books teachers think are important. The subtlety is the most important part of all.

You may have heard from a teacher at one point during school, “I would never tell you who to vote for.” But is that completely true? Of course they would never tell you directly. But is it entirely possible that they might tell you indirectly? You may go through an entire class period without hearing from your professor the name Joe Biden, but come November during election season, that’s who you’ve been encouraged to vote for. Teachers subtly advocate policies, not people. But policies make people. And if you are never told to vote for Joe Biden, but told to support every policy he stands by, you’re still being told to vote for Joe Biden. Just in an indirect manner.

That’s really what the message is all about in the end. Voting.

Students in high school are the perfect age to start political indoctrination. Around 14-18, just before they’re legally allowed to vote. Schools may be more accurately described as something closer to voter factories, telling children the explicit messages school administrators and teachers desire.

As a final personal example, a friend of mine took a U.S government test with the following question: “Which best describes the response to the release of the Access Hollywood tapes?” The “correct” answer? “Most of his campaign staff believed he should drop out, but Trump decided to keep running. He used fear, racism and big promises to get elected.” Now the cat comes out of the bag. Does this really sound like an honest question to ask a student?

Openly slandering a candidate for President right before an election makes it pretty clear what’s happening. Isn’t it strange too, that this type of “question” would be asked weeks away from an election? And to seniors no doubt, where many, if not most are eligible to vote? I sent an email to our principal voicing my concerns about having such a biased question on a test that literally affects a student’s grade, but months have passed without a single response.

Now I of course will give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, it is a busy time of year and emails do get cluttered or lost in the pile. But I wonder, had I voiced another issue would I have gotten a similar cold shoulder.

Time and time again, we’ve seen how narratives and ideas are subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, forced upon students across all high school grade levels, and how opposing ideas are subtly suppressed so students have an easier time to conform. But it doesn’t have to be this way, and it shouldn’t be this way. Students have a right to learn, grow, develop different opinions, and choose for themselves what ideas they want to promote along with them as they grow.

If school administrators won’t step up, it’s going to be on us, and it’s going to depend on you. Find new ways to explore new ideas through debate and discussion. If you see a teacher espouse a biased political belief, ask why their position is so “true” and so “correct” that it may be taught as a curriculum to students. Of course, not all teachers are this way, but It’s scary to think just how many believe their political views are so right and so obvious, that they can be taught to students as plain fact right beside two plus two equals four.