Race to Nowhere

Few days ago, in the gymnasium of a local high school in my neighborhood, I attended the screening of “Race to Nowhere”, a documentary about a new controversial aspect of the education system in the United States: the growing pressure that today's students face to achieve excellence in their school and after-school life. “Race to nowhere” focuses on teenagers in high schools, but the race idea applies to young children as well: the entire American public school system is described as a mechanism for producing and selecting top-performing students who can win the competition against their peers and be accepted to the best colleges, get hired for the best jobs, maximize their earning potential and live happily ever after.

First-time Director Vicki H. Abeles points the finger at public programs like “No Child left Behind” by the Bush’s administration, and “Race to the Top”, the primary educational initiative of President Obama. These programs have been designed to spur education reform through rigorous criteria for teachers training and common academic standards for students. In particular, these programs require states to develop assessments in specific skills for all students in certain grades if those states are to receive federal funding for schools.

Based on the belief that setting standards and establishing measurable goals can improve students’ individual outcomes, the standards-based education reform has resulted in the shift of focus from “learning” to “learning how to score well in standardized tests”. Similarly, the goal of high schools has become to prepare for college applications rather than prepare for college itself. The competition is fierce and students need to achieve so much in their class and after-class activities, that some end up cheating or using drugs.

As a mother of three children, Abeles is particularly concerns with some of the short-term consequences of such “top-of-the-line students” production process: stress, eating disorder, depression, and even a growing rate of suicide among teenagers. Some of the long-term drawbacks are considered as well: students trained to do well in standardized testing tend to passively memorize what will be in the test rather than learn what they need to know to become good professionals. The argument is real: with knowledge of humanities considered useless even to be assessed, most standardized tests focus on measurable metrics such reading and math skills. However, it takes more than technical skills to become good managers, innovators, critical thinkers and entrepreneurs. Moreover, students which are not motivated by their own curiosity, inner-satisfaction and passion, will more likely cheat, cut corners or act unethically in real life.  

In addition to the emphasis the movie puts on how this pressure is harming teenagers’ physical and mental well being, the movie points out that an important driver of the competition is teenagers’ desire to fit in, be recognized and please others, particularly the parents. As if the imperative to succeed was passively accepted by the student but did not always coincide with his/her actual desire. At the same time, teachers do not offer an alternative because they are also struggling, being themselves evaluated and rewarded based on test scores. 

“Race to Nowhere” describes a vivid and realistic picture but does not give convincing answers to the questions raised and at some point sounds too much like whining.

Anyone who has been being exposed to the school admission process in the United States knows that can be overwhelming: you have to write essays, ask for recommendation letters, take IQ tests, interviews etc. the process can involve children as young as four years old. From their perspective, schools are only making sure they select the best candidates by using simple and measurable criteria that will give them the highest probability of selecting the best candidates. They end up applying some kind of Darwinism principles to education: 3.5 GPA good, 4.0 GPA better.

However, unconditionally relying on standardized tests, academic achievements and other measurable criteria for promoting and selecting “the best” students leaves out whatever is unmeasurable and thus eliminates any risk - risk of making mistakes, risk of teaching what it will be useless, risk of raising someone that will not conform. In trying to minimize the risk in the process we are giving away the upside potential. As Nietzsche said “wherever progress is to ensue, deviating natures are of greatest importance”. Education per se is a call for freedom, because is a proposal that parents or teachers do to their children.

Is the freedom embedded in this proposal that distinguishes positive from negative pressure.

What makes the pressure negative is the unconditional application of the standard, the use of theories to assess the progress and the value of individual learning. This constant comparison to the standard is negative because the reality of one student will always differ from the abstraction. The pressure is created because we force the student to conform to an abstraction - this is an impossible task. 

The same pressure could turn into positive by focusing on the archaic desire to learn all children are born with and by giving the children all the means to follow their natural inclination, as hidden as it could be. In contrast to a traditional education model, we need more holistic, individualized approaches that place the emphasis on each student’s uniqueness, self-motivation, exploration and risk taking rather than expectations, imitation and fear of mistaken. By recalling each student to his/her original curiosity one can motivate the child without creating any pressure.

It is very hard to keep this positive attitude, and so much easier to rely on the standardization or imitation, particularly with your own children, because this positive relies on a free choice. And the choice involves a risk. And taking risk involves confidence.

It seems to me as if American students and their parents are struggling with pressure because they are loosing their confidence. United States, as a country, seems to be loosing confidence competing with eager developing countries like India or China. Perhaps we got a little too spoiled and have lost track of what motivates us to work and succeed. Motivation is not about what you “have to do”, motivation is about what you “want to do”.

Rather than reducing the curriculum, eliminating grades or homework, we have a better chance to ease the pressure by developing the awareness and releasing each student’s desire. Everyone should be free to decide what to desire. To succeed in school must be embraced as a desire for happiness, not in opposition to a desire for happiness. To put it simply: you do not have to desire to get into an Ivy League School. But if you do, here are the conditions that the real world poses.

As Francoise Dolto’ said “to raise children does not mean to please them, but introduce them in the real world as responsible individuals while giving them the means to endorse the pursuit of personal desire”.