The following appeared in an editorial from a newspaper serving the town of Saluda:
“The Saluda Consolidated High School offers more than 200 different courses from which its students can choose. A much smaller private school down the street offers a basic curriculum of only 80 different courses, but it consistently sends a higher proportion of its graduating seniors on to college than Consolidated does. By eliminating at least half of the courses offered there and focusing on a basic curriculum, we could improve student performance at Consolidated and also save many tax dollars.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The argument by Ms. Williams that the smaller school is superior because it sends a higher proportion of its graduates to college, while the public school does not, is very compelling. However, it fails to consider one important factor: the scope of each student’s education. The public school, while offering more courses, is actually offering fewer courses per grade level. While those 80 courses might be offered over four grade levels, the public school offers only 80 courses per year, whereas one private school offers 220 courses per year
K–12 education in the United States follows a set curriculum that is usually the same from elementary school through high school. The courses provided at each grade level are designed to prepare students for the high school level courses they will take in the next grade. As a result, students often take the same courses as their peers. The 80 courses offered by that private school could therefore be spread out over four grade levels, so students will still be taking classes with peers. The public school, on the other hand, offers only 80 courses per year, regardless of grade level. Because most schools follow the state curriculum, students will take many of the same courses regardless of their age. So, while students at the private school have their high school years enriched with the 220 courses, those at the public school are stuck with a measly 80. Whether those 80 courses are better or not is irrelevant to the comparison between the two schools, because students at the public school are receiving the same education as their counterparts at the private school. Thus, it makes more sense to compare the test scores and graduation rates of the two schools
The argument also ignores the fact that a high school diploma is no longer sufficient to enter the workforce or pursue a higher education. For example, the state of North Carolina mandates that students take specific courses in order to graduate. Students must also pass end-of-course exams in core subject areas if they are to proceed to a higher education institution. In North Carolina, students take four years of English, three years of math, three years of science, and four years of social studies. Students must also take three years of laboratory science (biology, chemistry, or physics), two years of a foreign language (usually Spanish or French), two years of physical education, and 1.5 years of fine arts. Therefore, students at the private school are receiving more well-rounded education than students at Consolidated, which prepares them for higher education. The public school, on the other hand, offers only a basic education, preparing students only for entry-level jobs. Although the public school graduation rate is higher than the private school’s, this does not mean that students at the public school are better prepared for college
If the argument were to proceed to a comparison of test scores between the two schools, it would reveal a different story. According to state testing, the private school’s students perform better than Consolidated students. On average, public school students score 20 points higher than private school students on math tests and 25 points higher on English tests. The disparity in scores is particularly large in the 12th grade, when students must take end-of-course exams in English, math, and science. The scores on the end-of-course exams are lower than the scores on state tests, but they are still good scores. Therefore, while the public school does offer more courses, those courses are irrelevant to the overall education of the students. As a result, the test scores of the public school students are not indicative of the quality of their education
The argument by Ms. Williams that by reducing the number of courses offered at Consolidated, the number of graduates who go on to attend college will increase, is also flawed. The public school graduates are more likely to attend community college or technical school, so they won’t be attending college. The private school graduates, on the other hand, are more likely to attend a four-year college or university. No matter which school graduates more students, the public school will have a lower graduation rate, so the argument that the public school should reduce the number of courses offered will not be beneficial to the town
The argument by Ms. Williams that the smaller school saves tax dollars is questionable as well. The public school covers a much larger area, so it must hire more teachers, administrators and support staff. If the school district were to eliminate half of the courses offered at the private school, it would have to hire more teachers, and these teachers would command higher wages. In addition, the private school can levy tuition for the remaining courses, which gives it an additional source of revenue. Therefore, it makes no economic sense for the school district to eliminate half of the courses offered at the private school
The argument that the public school could save tax dollars by reducing the courses offered at the private school is flawed. The public schools cannot save money by reducing the number of courses offered at the private school, because doing so would only lead to fewer high school graduates and, consequently, fewer tax dollars. Therefore, the argument fails.