Prompt: Write a formal, academic essay in which you imagine that you are in a position of leadership in your country or your local community (note that while many leaders who effect change are politicians, they can also be scholars, activists, scientists, artists, etc.). Choose an issue about which you, as this leader, feel passionately and describe it in detail, giving your informed reader a sense of the arguments and counterarguments associated with the issue. Tell us where you stand and why, using description and analysis of real-world evidence as well as your unique perspective as an influential member of your community. Hypothetically, how would you address this issue and what would your community or country look like as a result of your actions? Please be as specific as possible and limit your response to 500-750 words.
Please feel free to give broad suggestions along with grammar, syntax, and vocabulary suggestions. This essay is very important to me as it is to my top choice school so please help!
One of the greatest indicators of development in a society is the shift from labor based jobs to an economy run on knowledge. The United States definitively at this point, being at the forefront of research, medicine, and technology, however despite this, the US still has one of the worst performing education systems of developed nations. The system is widely recognized as unequal and elitist, offering greater opportunity to those who live in wealthier families and areas. Every $20,000 of average yearly family income increases average SAT scores by 40 points, and the same trend is evident with the AP, ACT, GPA's, and nearly every other quantifiable measure of academic success. As a result of bureaucracy and organizational faults, the United States public school system leaves low-income students to fail.
One of the most commonly cited reasons for the failure of public education for low-income families is the lack of interest by the students in their education. No matter how highly certified teachers may be, uninterested students will rarely perform well. 70% of high school drop-outs cite lack of motivation as their reason for quitting. Innovative programs such as awarding students cash prizes for good grades have been piloted in certain districts and schools, but these programs are widely criticized for going against the principle of education since they don't provoke curiosity or engage interest in the curriculum. Rather they reward the already high performing students for doing better, and leave the poorer performing students feeling increasingly separated and dejected.
A system that I have been widely exposed to, the French lycée (high school) system, has a compelling strategy that helps shrink the income gap and allows students from all backgrounds to find a niche that interests them. Starting in the equivalent of ninth grade, students have the choice to go to either technical, professional, or normal school. Lower performing students are often encouraged to start learning a trade, while those who have already found a passion can start specializing in fields such as theatre or culinary arts. Some of these tracks will allow students to graduate high school with the highest level of certification in their field, and immediately find a job. From my visits to both technical and professional French schools, I met students who were genuinely interested in what they were studying. Since they choose what they study, almost all French students are curious and motivated in their studies. While there are some public high schools in the US that allow of specializations and concentrations, these schools are rare and often highly selective. An expanded and open system of trade and professional schools could offer lower-income students an opportunity to become competent in a higher paying and more significant job.
Sweden is universally recognized to be a model for how an educational system can succeed. Similar to France, they allow for specialization and range of curriculum, however, they do this through a network of high-performing charter schools. These schools are commonly opened by parents and community leaders from a whole range of socio-economic backgrounds, and they are fully funded by the government. Like the US, they do not charge tuition, however unlike the US, they typically run solely off of government funds. The funding for each student is the same as it would be in a public school while in the US charter school funding is on average 40% lower than that of public schools. Additionally, in the United States, the charter school system is mired with fraud. For-profit enterprises run 65% of charter schools in the US. These go against the principle of schools-putting the student first. Charter school reform could enormously aid lower-income students, however currently the system is a victim of bureaucracy and politics.
The US needs to concentrate on enhancing and reforming the public education system. A country cannot prosper when it only educates the rich. We don't need to make drastic changes, only allow students to study what interests them, and allow community leaders to educate students without having to navigate through bureaucracy and restrictions. We can't fix education by throwing more money at it; we need to start at the lowest level-the student-and work to give every child an education that interests them and allows for success.
Please feel free to give broad suggestions along with grammar, syntax, and vocabulary suggestions. This essay is very important to me as it is to my top choice school so please help!
One of the greatest indicators of development in a society is the shift from labor based jobs to an economy run on knowledge. The United States definitively at this point, being at the forefront of research, medicine, and technology, however despite this, the US still has one of the worst performing education systems of developed nations. The system is widely recognized as unequal and elitist, offering greater opportunity to those who live in wealthier families and areas. Every $20,000 of average yearly family income increases average SAT scores by 40 points, and the same trend is evident with the AP, ACT, GPA's, and nearly every other quantifiable measure of academic success. As a result of bureaucracy and organizational faults, the United States public school system leaves low-income students to fail.
One of the most commonly cited reasons for the failure of public education for low-income families is the lack of interest by the students in their education. No matter how highly certified teachers may be, uninterested students will rarely perform well. 70% of high school drop-outs cite lack of motivation as their reason for quitting. Innovative programs such as awarding students cash prizes for good grades have been piloted in certain districts and schools, but these programs are widely criticized for going against the principle of education since they don't provoke curiosity or engage interest in the curriculum. Rather they reward the already high performing students for doing better, and leave the poorer performing students feeling increasingly separated and dejected.
A system that I have been widely exposed to, the French lycée (high school) system, has a compelling strategy that helps shrink the income gap and allows students from all backgrounds to find a niche that interests them. Starting in the equivalent of ninth grade, students have the choice to go to either technical, professional, or normal school. Lower performing students are often encouraged to start learning a trade, while those who have already found a passion can start specializing in fields such as theatre or culinary arts. Some of these tracks will allow students to graduate high school with the highest level of certification in their field, and immediately find a job. From my visits to both technical and professional French schools, I met students who were genuinely interested in what they were studying. Since they choose what they study, almost all French students are curious and motivated in their studies. While there are some public high schools in the US that allow of specializations and concentrations, these schools are rare and often highly selective. An expanded and open system of trade and professional schools could offer lower-income students an opportunity to become competent in a higher paying and more significant job.
Sweden is universally recognized to be a model for how an educational system can succeed. Similar to France, they allow for specialization and range of curriculum, however, they do this through a network of high-performing charter schools. These schools are commonly opened by parents and community leaders from a whole range of socio-economic backgrounds, and they are fully funded by the government. Like the US, they do not charge tuition, however unlike the US, they typically run solely off of government funds. The funding for each student is the same as it would be in a public school while in the US charter school funding is on average 40% lower than that of public schools. Additionally, in the United States, the charter school system is mired with fraud. For-profit enterprises run 65% of charter schools in the US. These go against the principle of schools-putting the student first. Charter school reform could enormously aid lower-income students, however currently the system is a victim of bureaucracy and politics.
The US needs to concentrate on enhancing and reforming the public education system. A country cannot prosper when it only educates the rich. We don't need to make drastic changes, only allow students to study what interests them, and allow community leaders to educate students without having to navigate through bureaucracy and restrictions. We can't fix education by throwing more money at it; we need to start at the lowest level-the student-and work to give every child an education that interests them and allows for success.
