At the end of this article, Scott & Leonhardt argue that "Americans, constitutionally optimistic, are disinclined to see themselves as stuck," in terms of their class positions. While I think, in some instances, failures can be wrongly blamed on class disadvantages rather than actual laziness, I do agree that class causes people to be 'stuck' in different ways. I don't think that a lower class necessarily implies less ability or motivation in a person, but it can cause consistent, fundamental deficiencies. In this way, class moves each person's starting line of social mobility.

This starts with a person's education. The phrase "constitutionally optimistic" struck me because the idea of equality and classlessness is literally written into our constitution, with equal opportunity to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" for all. Jefferson's meritocratic pyramid scheme for education was also based on these principles, but the class system in America still has semblances of aristocracy. In order to close this gap, schools need to provide all citizens with the same, base education from which leaders can emerge and pursue further education based on their merits. This requires standardizing curricula across the nation, no only so students achieve on grade level and have similar core knowledge, but also to ensure that these standards of quality education are met by all schools in all areas. In order to make this happen, I think the federal government has to create legislation or committees to form these standards, and provide financial support to the public education system. All citizens need quality, comprehensive educations in order to be have equal access to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," so America needs to promote (and fund) that change.

In response to khermes and Lisa:

You are both right, standardizing curricula will/would be a difficult, maybe unrealistic, task. I think, in my vision, if this curricula were to work then the standards would have to be broad and flexible. This may seem to defeat the purpose of a "standardized curriculum," but this standard should be a skeleton that each school, classroom, and teacher interprets and specifies. It's not simply the hard work of creating these curricula and implementing them on a federal or national level, but also depends on what the individual educators do with the curricula. The idea of students knowing decimals versus the parts of an engine intrigues me. I think that accepting and embracing the idea of these flexible curricula opens so many opportunities for broader, expanded curricula, if American educators are willing to do the necessary work and provided with the proper resources.

Hey everybody, this is a report I found from the "President's Committee on Arts and Humanities" that outlines the benefits of arts education, the current state of them in American public schools, and possible reforms to change the situation. There are a lot of good studies in here about the benefits and impacts of arts education, as well as information about arts integration programs. Hope it maybe helps someone!

I like that you chose an article not just about American diversity, but also about global diversity. I think that is often overlooked in the understanding of 'diversity.' When I read this article I started making connections with the different versions of the American Dream that we have discussed in class. Current employers and companies encourage diversity and aim for tolerance as an ideal. This is much like the ideals of our Constitution, aiming for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," for all. However, both of these ideals prove fallible, because they are not implemented in education systems. Diversity is valued on paper yet insufficient action is taken to promote diversity amongst students, who are the future employees and citizens. The ideal "America" taught in schools is not the America that students actually learn to live in. While we've changed our efforts of Americanization since the early Native American boarding schools, we're still doing little to promote and truly teach diversity. Students, and their future adult-selves, will not learn this by the guidance of an "invisible hand," as Hirsch says, so it must be an included in curricula at all grade levels.