The True Purpose of Compulsory Education in American Schools Connie Nollner University of Alaska Anchorage Presented to Victoria Sansome In partial fulfillment of the requirements For ENGL A111 Abstract John Gatto, a school teacher in the Manhattan area, taught for thirty years at various schools. Throughout his teaching career, Gatto observed that students often found classroom activities boring due to the teaching methods employed. The students were not being stimulated intellectually and frequently had prior knowledge of the subject matter being taught. Jean Anyon also agrees with Gatto’s views on the shortcomings of the public school system.
The article highlights the superiority of schools in affluent communities compared to those in poorer communities, emphasizing their ability to effectively equip children for desirable occupations. Anyon’s research involved examining schools across four social classes, spanning from working class to executive elite schools. The primary objective of education in American schools is to ready children for specific careers while also imparting lifelong values, discipline, fostering a spirit of exploration and independent thinking. Ultimately, education plays a pivotal role in shaping responsible citizens.
Jean Anyon (1980) and John Taylor Gatto (2003) both argue that the traditional belief that all students receive equal education in America is incorrect. Anyon’s investigation of education in various social classes and Gatto’s personal experience as a teacher support this claim. Both authors share the viewpoint that students’ education in America is heavily influenced by their social class.
Anyon (1980) argues that schools in wealthier communities are superior to those in poorer communities and that they effectively prepare children for desirable jobs. In Gatto’s (2003) article “Against Schools,” he examines the contemporary purposes of compulsory education and criticizes the six functions outlined by Inglis (1918) in his article “Principles of Secondary Education.” Gatto finds these functions absurd, as they hinder critical thinking, promote uniformity, and limit students to predetermined social roles. Consequently, Gatto asserts that this approach aims to benefit the privileged while marginalizing those deemed unfit for society. As a teacher in Manhattan for thirty years, Gatto observed that the teaching methods often left students bored with classroom activities.
Students were not challenged and often knew the concepts being taught. Teachers were also bored due to the rude and grade-focused behavior of the students. The question is, who is responsible? Gatto investigated the reasons for this issue by analyzing the modern goals of mandatory education. In his article, he dissects these goals and presents his own views on the six fundamental functions outlined in “Principals of Secondary Education” (Inglis, A., 1918) that form the basis of the school’s purpose.
According to Ingles (1918), there are six fundamental functions: the adjustive or adaptive function, the integrating function, the diagnostic and directive function, the differentiating function, the selective function, and the propaedeutic function. These functions originated from Prussian culture and were implemented as a deliberate tactic to hinder the advancement of the lower class. The primary objective of mandatory education is to ensure that students’ intellectual abilities remain average, impede their mental development, deprive them of leadership skills, and ultimately produce submissive and inadequate citizens.
Compulsory education aims to control and restrict the majority of the population, keeping them in the lower class and ensuring that children are easily controlled. Schools separate students based on factors such as intellectual abilities, social class, and the Darwinian theory of “the favorite race.” Furthermore, children are further divided based on subjects, grades, test rankings, or other criteria, allowing schools to exert control over their progression or stagnation. Ultimately, compulsory education hinders children from fully maturing or realizing their potential in life.
The result of this is that they are not progressing into fully grown adults in our society. According to Dr. Inglis, if children were kept separate from adults, devoid of responsibility and independence, and encouraged to develop only trivial emotions like greed, envy, jealousy, and fear, they would age but never truly mature. (Inglis, A., 1918) The initial purpose of the six is the adjustive or adaptive function, which aims to establish ingrained responses to authority. Gatto believes this is closely linked to why children often feel bored in school.
According to Gatto (2003), he argues that compulsory education inhibits critical thinking and undermines the importance of teaching useful and interesting subjects. He claims that it is impossible to assess reflexive obedience without first assessing whether children can be made to learn and do foolish and boring tasks. Additionally, Gatto views the second purpose of compulsory education as an integration function, which he deems absurd. He suggests that this function should be seen as a means to create conformity among children rather than fostering their individual development.
The third function, diagnostic and directive, aims to determine each child’s appropriate social role and provide them with specific training within that role. However, this approach is considered absurd because it limits the working class children’s chances of succeeding in life, as they are only trained for positions in the low-status working class. The fourth function, selective, is compared to Darwin’s Theory of the “favorite race” by Gatto. Its purpose is to improve the breeding stock, particularly of the white race, and allow only the most capable individuals to advance to higher positions in society. This function primarily targets “the unfit” by assigning them poor grades, holding them back a grade, or subjecting them to other punishments. Finally, the fifth function is the propaedeutic function, which focuses on grooming selected individuals to excel in management and leadership skills, while subjugating the rest of the students.
In the United States, mandatory public education serves the purpose of fulfilling six basic functions. According to Gatto, this system not only aims to lower the intelligence of the lower classes and create division among them, but it also serves the interests of management, economics, and politics. Woodrow Wilson articulated the desire for a liberal education for a certain class while the majority should be trained for specific manual tasks. This compulsory schooling instills fear in children as they are taught that everything is difficult and that others control their lives. Jean Anyon supports Gatto’s claims in her article, where she highlights the disparities between schools in wealthy and poorer communities and how the former better prepare students for desirable jobs. Anyon’s research involved investigating schools in four different social classes, ranging from working class to executive elite schools.
Despite previous arguments stating that schools are taught differently based on class, no evidence was provided to substantiate these claims until Anyon conducted her investigation. Anyon’s study confirmed that these arguments were indeed accurate. Scholars in political economy and the sociology of knowledge assert that education for upper class children aims to prepare them for careers as doctors or corporate managers, while the working class receives a more “practical” education.
Working class schools have parents who work in blue collar jobs and have an annual income at or below $12,000. Their educational experience is focused on practical skills and limits their choices and decision-making abilities. Middle class schools are located in areas with an income range of $13,000 to $25,000. In these schools, the emphasis is on finding the correct answers, and students who can consistently achieve this receive good grades. Unlike the working class schools, the middle class schools allow for some limited decision-making and choice. Affluent professional schools cater to parents with an annual income between $40,000 and $80,000.
Their education consists of creative work and independence, with an emphasis on expressing ideas and applying critical thinking. Executive elite schools primarily cater to families with incomes exceeding $100,000 a year. Their education focuses on developing analytical intellectual abilities to foster success. The teaching methods vary significantly across social classes. Specifically, working class education involves extensive mechanized tasks, with students instructed to copy assignment steps displayed on the board.
The students are not required to engage in critical thinking but rather are expected to memorize steps from the board. The teachers lack respect and treat the students as if they are children, while the higher classes regard them as young adults. The teachers often control the classroom by yelling phrases such as “Shut your mouth” or “Why are you out of your seat??!!” (Gatto, 2003). The students are not challenged in their studies, resulting in boredom. This directly relates to Gatto’s explanation of the adjustive or adaptive function, which establishes fixed habits of reacting to authority.
The teachers deliberately ensure that the children feel uninterested during their classroom activities by asking them to continuously copy notes and follow strict instructions. This is done so that, as adults, when they enter into working class jobs, they are already accustomed to obeying steps and orders. The middle class is only slightly more elevated than the working class, but it does entail some degree of choice and decision-making. The classroom exercises revolve around finding the correct answer, which necessitates the students to devise solutions to the given problems.
In working class schools, textbooks are utilized solely as instruments for completing assignments, lacking critical thinking. Consequently, children are not stimulated, resulting in boredom. Both working class and middle class schools are structured to maintain control and segregation from the upper class. In contrast, affluent professional schools, located in a higher social class category, provide challenging classroom activities that promote creativity, problem solving, and independent thinking.
The teachers in both affluent professional and executive elite schools expect the children to express their own ideas and concepts, as well as apply what they’ve learned in class to understand reality. The executive elite schools specifically prioritize the development of the children’s intellectual abilities. It is worth noting that both types of schools primarily consist of white students. This reinforces Gatto’s explanation of the selective function and propaedeutic function, which aims to enhance the quality of the student body, enabling them to become a chosen elite group with exceptional management and leadership skills.
Both Anyon and Gatto discovered that the education system in America is heavily influenced by social class, and they shared similar views on how this affects children’s success. Anyon’s research revealed that working-class and middle-class schools fail to provide adequate challenges for students and often leave them feeling bored in class. This aligns with Gatto’s argument about the adjustive and adaptive function of modern compulsory schools, which hinders critical thinking and neglects the teaching of practical and engaging subjects.
Anyon’s discovery confirms Gatto’s theory about the school system’s intention to maintain control over the lower class. As a result, these children are systematically placed in lower-tier occupations like laborers and janitors. In contrast, schools catering to the privileged classes, namely the affluent and elite, are specifically designed to prepare students for highly desirable careers such as corporate executives, doctors, and lawyers. These upper-class institutions align with Gatto’s concept of compulsory schools having selective and propaedeutic functions.
In an effort to enhance the quality of the breeding stock, these functions aim to train individuals to excel in life. However, Gatto considers these functions absurd as they hinder critical thinking and promote homogeneity among children. The functions also focus solely on preparing students to fulfill predetermined social roles based on their birth class. Anyon supports these assertions by examining schools across various social classes and finding that those in wealthier communities significantly outperform those in impoverished areas.
In general, the American schools system maintains that it prepares children for successful careers; however, the real objective of compulsory education is to indoctrinate children into a specific social class and discourage them from challenging authority. According to Gatto and Anyon, both concur that the education method and level are primarily determined by a student’s social class. This results in the public school system benefiting the upper-class by offering them the highest quality education, while the lower class is constrained with a curriculum that focuses on practical skills.
According to Gatto, the system is designed to hinder the mental development of children, deprive them of leadership abilities, and produce submissive and inadequately skilled citizens. Consequently, this educational approach discourages independent thinking by limiting choices and ensures that social progression is restricted. Essentially, it perpetuates the perpetual immaturity of children. Anyon’s article confirms that schools in affluent areas are unquestionably superior to those in poorer communities, as they effectively equip children for desirable careers.
The education provided to upper-class children focuses on preparing them for careers in medicine or corporate management. However, this level of education is not accessible to the working class, who are instead trained for jobs as laborers or janitors. Although American compulsory education claims to promote the development of good citizens, its true intention is to keep children from advancing in society and instead remain stuck in their predetermined social class.
Works Cited:
Anyon, Jean. “From Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work.” Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work (Journal of Education, 1980)
Gatto, John Taylor. “Against School: How Public Education Cripples Our Kids, and Why.” Harper’s Magazine Sept. 2003: 33+. Literature Resource Center. Web. 9 Apr. 2012.
Inglis, Alexander. “Principles of Secondary Education.” The School Review, Vol. 26, No. 3 (Mar., 1918), pp. 225-226. Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Woodrow, Wilson. “The Meaning of a Liberal Education.” High School Teachers Association of New York, Volume 3, 1908-1909, pp. 19-31 and Papers of Woodrow Wilson, 18:593-606 – http://www.jstor.org.proxy.consortiumlibrary.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress
