DISSENTING OPINION: Paying the Way Forward

There is consensus among the liberal elites that the American education system is a fundamentally flawed one, and that it requires sweeping reform. Nevertheless, I dissent from the Crimson Staff in their endorsement of monetary incentives for New York City schools that serve communities with a high proportion of low-income Latino or black students. Doubtless, many of the students from such disadvantaged backgrounds need help to stay in school and focus on their studies, which are eventually what will give them a chance at better circumstances. But paying the way forward will not pave the way forward.

Throwing money at high school students with good test scores is a simplistic answer that alters the ideals of education, sending a terrible message to students everywhere. The state provides free education because, as a society, we choose to cultivate love for learning. Though many may argue that there are instrumental benefits behind it, learning should not be pegged with money, even if many of these students will grow up to be Wall Street investment bankers.

Parents are free to incentivize their sons and daughters however they choose, but to give money without stipulation of how it can be used is far from a scholarship for excellence; it’s an invitation for careless spending that sends the message that money is the direct reward of learning. But it’s not, and it shouldn’t be. Better opportunities for the future are the prize, not just cash.

If we regret the circumstances that have led this country to the brink when it comes to public education, we should not condone measures that give up on every value behind education: If we want our youth to grow up with the right values, we should not support giving monetary prizes to students who achieve outstanding test scores.



Pierpaolo Barbieri ’09, a Crimson associate editorial chair, is a history concentrator in Eliot house.

Occasionally, The Crimson Staff is divided about the opinion we express in a staff editorial. In these cases, dissenting staff members have the opportunity to express their opposition to staff opinion.