In the labyrinthine corridors of our public education system, one encounters a peculiar phenomenon: the truancy case. These cases, which land on my prosecuting docket with disheartening regularity, reveal a dismal truth about the state of our schools and the priorities of those who run them. The scenario is depressingly familiar: a child, absent from school for an inordinate amount of time, and parents who seem indifferent to the consequences. The penalties for such neglect are laughably trivial—a mere $50 for a first offense, and $100 for a second. One might ask, what deterrent effect does such a paltry sum have? The answer, of course, is none.
Yet, the absurdity does not end there. The real travesty lies in the fact that these children, despite their chronic absenteeism, are routinely promoted to the next grade. It is not uncommon to find students who have missed a quarter of the school year, yet continue to advance through the educational system as if by some perverse magic. One is left to wonder: what is the point of prosecuting the parents when the schools themselves undermine the very notion of education by promoting children who have not earned it?
The answer, I discovered, lies in the insidious concept of “social promotion.” This policy, which prioritizes keeping children with their age group over ensuring they have actually learned anything, is a testament to the vacuousness of our educational philosophy. It is a system designed to perpetuate mediocrity, to reward failure, and to ensure that no child is left behind—regardless of whether they deserve to be.
I am reminded of the fanfare that accompanied George W. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” policy. It was a slogan that resonated with the public, a promise of educational equity and opportunity. Yet, no one paused to consider the implications for those children who, by any reasonable measure, should indeed be left behind. The policy, like so many well-intentioned reforms, failed to address the root causes of educational failure and instead perpetuated a system that rewards attendance — well, even that’s not true; how about “enrollment” — over achievement.
Meanwhile, in the realm of family law, I encounter a different but equally troubling trend. Parents, eager to give their children a competitive edge, are holding back perfectly capable kids for an extra year. The rationale is simple: an older child has an advantage, both academically and athletically, over their younger peers. Thus, the children who should be advancing are being held back, while those who should be held back are being advanced. It is a system that defies logic and undermines the very purpose of education.
The result of these contradictory policies is a public school system that is the laughingstock of the developed world. We have created an environment where mediocrity is rewarded, where failure is promoted, and where the pursuit of excellence is sacrificed on the altar of social conformity. It is a system that fails our children, our society, and our future.
There is, in short, a fundamental disconnect between the goals of education and the policies that govern it. Until we address this, until we prioritize learning over attendance, and achievement over age, we will continue to fail our children and ourselves. And then, of course, in truly American fashion, blame everyone else.
