Skip to main content

Is Education No Longer the Primary Mission of Our Public Schools?


Did you know that the state of Oklahoma is currently experiencing not one, but two pandemics? Until yesterday, neither did I. According to the Oklahoma City School District, the state is currently experiencing the “dual pandemics of COVID-19 and Systemic Racism,” and has decided to spend valuable time and resources to ensure that their teachers learn how to “practice alternative ways of relating to…[their]students.” In the meantime, teachers are supposed to conduct their classes online   into November. Unfortunately, if the District doesn’t adequately prepare their teachers to use the available online learning platforms, it won’t matter how woke they are, they won’t be interacting with their students at all. 

At this point, we really have no idea what the school year will look like, and school districts have given little basis for optimism that students will actually learn anything. Oklahoma City public schools closed in March and “went online.” However, due to lack of sufficient technology, internet access, or proper training, the actual schooling that occurred was slim to none. Since that time, they have had the entire summer to gear up for the upcoming school year. What has the district done? Rather than come up with a strategy to reopen schools or preparing teachers for online school (developing platforms for online learning, ensuring a seamless transition, ensuring teachers can effectively use resources, etc.), the district has prioritized so-called professional development meetings that are more akin to Black Lives Matter (BLM) cultural indoctrination classes than something teachers can actually use to educate amidst the challenges of COVID-19 

This brings us to a serious question: is education even a primary goal of public schools anymore? The evidence presented by the Oklahoma City School District seems to point to the contrary, and this isn’t just a local phenomenon. A recent  feature article in the New York Times by Sarah Darville, the managing editor at Chalkbeat (a non-profit news outlet focused on education), discusses the extreme difficulty of reopening schools in the fall.  She spends the vast majority of the article discussing three things that make the decision to reopen difficult: child care, meal programs, and mental health counseling. Where is education?

Darville’s article is meant to show just how essential schools have become, but the author unknowingly highlights the issue with public “education” in the United States today: educating children is no longer (and hasn’t been for quite some time) a primary goal. In fact, it is a secondary goal at best. Other services such as child care, meals, and mental health counseling have taken its place. All of these services might need to be provided to some degree in some context. But it’s no surprise that with so many missions on their plate, the ostensible primary mission of schools has been crowded out and schools simply don’t do education very well. 

This quote from the article emphasizes the point: “If taking on the child care, food and the mental health challenges facing American children this fall were not enough, there is also, of course, the matter of making sure those children learn.” This comes three quarters of the way through an extensive article. The fact that the discussion about educating the children is tacked on to the back end of the article, almost as an afterthought, clearly indicates just what has been prioritized in public education, and it’s not education. Whether you think the first three programs are good, bad, or you are indifferent to them, the fact remains that they should not overshadow education as the primary goal of schools. 

Given the direction of the Oklahoma City School District, and the fact that it merely reflects what is happening in public education nationally, it is clear that schools no longer exist primarily to educate students. Unfortunately, there is not much parents can do about it. If they truly want their children to attend a school where education is the number one priority, they will have to consider an alternative to the public school system. 

Tyler Williamson is a Research Associate at the 1889 institute and can be reached at twilliamson@1889institute.org.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.


Popular posts from this blog

Can Government Force You to Close Your Business?

1889 Institute takes no position on whether any or all of these measures are warranted or necessary, or whether their economic fallout would inflict more human suffering than they prevent. We are simply evaluating whether they are legal.   With the unprecedented (in the last 100 years at least) reaction surrounding the outbreak of Covid-19, questions that few living legal scholars have considered are suddenly relevant.   Can a quarantine be ordered?   Can a mass quarantine, lockdown, or “cordon sanitaire” be ordered? Can businesses be ordered to change their behavior?   Can businesses be ordered to close? Can state governments order these measures? Can local governments order these measures? My legal brief addresses these issues from a statutory point of view; it is clear that state law gives the governor and mayors broad authority in a state of emergency. They must, of course, do so in a neutral way that they reasonably believe will help preve...
Read more

1889 Institute's Statement Regarding School Closures

The 1889 Institute, an Oklahoma think tank, has released the following statement regarding Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to keep schools closed for the remainder of the school year. We at the 1889 Institute consider Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to close Oklahoma’s schools for the rest of the school year a gross overreaction to the coronavirus situation. Even in the best of times and circumstances, suddenly shifting every student in the state from traditional classrooms to online distance learning will have negative educational consequences. This in addition to the economic burden on two-earner families forced to completely reorder their lives with schools closed. We believe many of our leaders have overreacted to worst-case scenarios presented by well-intended health experts with no training or sense of proportion in weighing the collateral damage of shutting down our economy versus targeting resources to protect the truly vulnerable. We say reopen the schools and stop the madness. ...
Read more

Destroying Others’ Property Is Violence, No Matter How It’s Done

With characterizations of protests and riots that have occurred over the last several months as “mostly peaceful” and headlines that include “peaceful demonstration intensified,” and “Fiery But Mostly Peaceful Protests,” it’s clear many in the press do not consider property destruction to be violent. Most likely, they mean most of the protesters haven’t physically harmed anyone. Still, during the very same protests, a large proportion of the “peaceful” participants , in obvious acts of aggression and hostility, have vandalized and stolen property. In fact, property destruction and theft are acts of violence, and are therefore legitimately defended against, not because these acts feel threatening, but because they are, in and of themselves, violent.   Nevertheless, it’s common to hear many condemn individuals who use or threaten force in defense of their property. After all, if no one is physically harmed, or even actually threatened, how can damaging inanimate objects possibl...
Read more

Protecting Your Rights: Interpreting Law by Its Plain Meaning

When deciding whether people have broken laws, should judges consider the intent of the legislators who wrote the law? Or simply consider the plain language of the law as written? Legal scholars have debated this question for decades. However, there is only one answer that protects We The People. The Declaration of Independence states, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” This means, among other things, that only laws actually voted on by the people (or their validly elected representatives) can be legitimately enforced. Any purpose not written into the law was not voted on, and so should not be imposed. What does this have to do with interpreting laws? In the republican form of government, the citizens speak through their elected representatives. These representatives pass laws collectively, almost always through two legislative bodies (House and Senate) and an executive (President or...
Read more