I found Lewis Laphams article School Bells in the August, 2000 edition of Harpers magazine to be not only convincing, but also easy to relate to and truthful. The contents of the article have far-reaching and thought-provoking implications.Much of his argument rests on the nearly indisputable belief that if we, as a nation, devoutly wished to reform or even revolutionize the educational system in place, we undoubtedly could. Factual proof of this is found throughout the history of the United States. We have made significant scientific and societal advances in the last one hundred years as evidenced by the computer, the automobile, the civil rights movement, the list goes on. With such incredible financial and intellectual resources as can be found in this country, why not add another major contribution to our success? Education.Though he never directly refers to it, the process in which public schools are funded is alluded to several times by Lapham (e.g. We have one set of schools for the children of the elite, another for children less fortunately born). The flaw in funding for public schools lies in direct community influence. Nearly 1/2 of the funding provided is derived from the property taxes collected from the locality. Since wealthy neighborhoods pay far more property tax than poor ones, schools that lie in wealthy districts and neighborhood are allocated far more capital than schools located in poor areas. This creates a myriad of dilemmas for the poor (most of which they arent even aware of because they have never been taught), and innumerable advantages for the rich. Under the current system the children of wealthy families are catered to and groomed to become the new elite while obstacles are constantly being placed in the paths of destitute children. This is a major contributing factor to the cycle of class distinction.Lapham claims at one point that schools regulate the supply of unskilled labor, and think of the grad...
