Erin Burchill ‘25, Editor-in-Chief
Since the establishment of the U.S.’s political systems in the late 1700s, politics and the debates stemming from them have been an unavoidable part of nearly everyone’s daily life. Legislation affects us all, despite how disconnected from politics we may attempt to be. It is, often unfortunately, impossible to escape the impacts and stress that go hand-in-hand with politics.
This topic is controversial territory within academic settings. It is a well known fact within SLHS that teachers are not permitted to discuss their own politics with students: because of the many possible ways political discussions could develop into hostile arguments, they are fully off-limits to staff. However, students have the ability to discuss politics amongst themselves, unhindered by administrative action as long as discussions remain civil and are not disruptive to the learning environment. But because of the taboo nature of politics, many students are hesitant to bring the topic up, creating an environment somewhat unwelcoming of effective and educational political discussion.
[student opinions when they respond]
The potential to foster deep conversation and understanding is possibly the biggest benefit to the discussion of politics in an academic setting. As students, our job is to learn about the world around us in every way possible, and with the growing tensions surrounding American politics, educating ourselves in this area is more important than ever. Due to the March 20 signing of an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education (ED), educators all over the country are pushing back and demanding more support for and recognition of public education. This is a legislative action that directly impacts our learning environment: the day before this order was signed, SLHS staff participated in a rally in front of the school, wearing red and holding handwritten signs as a part of the Red for Ed movement. Halls and classrooms were filled with talk of this demonstration, though not much was known about the meaning behind it.
An SLHS staff member who prefers to remain anonymous gave some insight into the behind-the-scenes of this event: “Red for Ed started for…bringing attention to public schools and the funding needed. The new director for the [ED]…cut off grant funding. The state of Michigan is losing $41 million dollars collectively. So, awareness is where we’re trying to go with it.” She also touched on the community’s response to the rally: “Kids were like, ‘what were you guys doing, what was that all about?’ And I said, ‘we’re just raising awareness that public schools don’t work unless we have money.’ And they’re like, ‘well, my parents are pissed that you guys were protesting.’ And that’s really sad. Why would your parents be sad that we’re trying to make sure we keep our funding?” Staff were seemingly criticized for their participation in the rally, which many dubbed a protest and saw as too political; South Lyon is a very politically divided city, but it is also the lowest-funded school district in Oakland County. The staff member mentioned that, because of the political nature of the current public education dilemma, South Lyon parents do not realize what could truly be at risk.
SLCS Superintendent Mr. Steven Archibald shared his perspective on the potential setbacks to our district and on the place politics have in school. “To date, there has been little detail shared to know exactly what will take place with the current oversight and federal funding that is handled within the current ED,” he said. “SLCS receives approximately $1.5 million for the Federal Meals Program…[and] an additional $3.5 million dollars to support our highest needs students. This includes those who are at-risk, economically disadvantaged, English Learners, and/or students with an Individualized Education Plan. Many students fall into one or more of these categories.” He also touched more specifically on the impacts if this funding is cut: “Whether this funding is reduced or eliminated is a question yet to be answered. Both are problematic…As a district, we do not have the general fund revenue to offset any reduction in federal funds in a meaningful or sustainable way.”
At present, the ED has not been entirely dismantled, though president Donald Trump has passed an executive order to begin the process. It requires an act of Congress to fully pass, meaning the ED will remain for some time despite already cutting grant funding. However, if the ED were to disappear, South Lyon schools would experience direct consequences such as losing our free lunch programs and access to many modified learning pathways that benefit a percentage of students.
In regards to politics’ place in academic settings, Archibald said, “A discussion that is based in fact and represents multiple sides of an issue can be healthy. The emphasis in a school setting should be to inform students to get them to think critically about issues as opposed to attempting to persuade or dissuade them to be for or against any candidate or issue. Activities, including discussion, which may cause a disruption to the educational environment or infringes on the rights of others should be avoided.”
The question of whether opinionated political discussion has a place in schools is quite a divided debate, but taking into consideration the various pros and cons, these conversations truly can have an impact if they are handled well. High school is the final phase in a student’s life before they move into the adult world, where they will face endless opposition and challenge: it is important to teach students to think critically and explore their own ideas and beliefs rather than echoing the beliefs of their peers. In order to produce generations of capable leaders, placing a strong emphasis on self-education and independent thinking is the first step. From there, students will develop their own opinions, ones that will shape the future of our country, and perhaps, the entire world.
Lyon Life 