Learning English, Learning to Survive

When I first arrived in the United States, I didn’t speak a single word of English. I was thrown into a classroom where I couldn’t understand the teacher, my classmates, or the lessons. I remember feeling frustrated, confused, and isolated. It wasn’t because I didn’t want to learn—I did. I just didn’t have the language or the support I needed to succeed. Over time, I began to understand more, but the feeling of being left behind never really went away. It’s only now, after reading about the history of the U.S. education system, that I understand my experience was not just personal—it was shaped by a system influenced by much bigger forces.

One of the major changes brought on by business-led reforms was the push for standardization and accountability. This meant more testing, stricter curriculum requirements, and higher academic standards for all students. On paper, this sounds like a good idea—who wouldn’t want high standards? But in practice, it meant that teachers had to spend more time preparing students for tests, rather than focusing on individual needs or creative learning. Students who didn’t do well on these tests, often because of language barriers or lack of support, were held back or even prevented from graduating. The pressure to perform replaced the joy of learning.

At the same time, vocational education—classes that prepared students for jobs in the real world—was pushed aside. Instead of recognizing that not all students want or need to go to college, the system began treating every student as if they had to follow the same academic path. For immigrant students or those from low-income families, this made it even harder to succeed. The system became less flexible, less personal, and more stressful.

Another major reform was the idea of "school choice," including vouchers, charter schools, and private management of public schools. Supporters argued that competition would force schools to improve, just like in the business world. But the reality is more complicated. While some students benefited from these alternatives, many others were left behind in underfunded public schools. As the text points out, turning education into a competitive marketplace often leads to more inequality, not less. Wealthier families can navigate the system more easily, while low-income students are often stuck in failing schools with fewer resources.

I’ve also seen how education has become a political battleground. Leaders argue over test scores, budgets, and standards, but they rarely ask the most important questions: Are we supporting the whole child? Are we preparing students not just for jobs, but for life? Are we giving every student, no matter their background, a fair chance to succeed?

What’s missing in all of this is the student’s voice. My story is one of many. There are thousands of students like me who arrive in this country full of hope but face a system that sees them as a number, a test score, or a future worker—not as a human being. We need to rethink what education is really for. It should not just serve the economy—it should serve the people. It should build communities, nurture curiosity, and empower students to shape their own futures.

Despite its many problems, I still believe in the value of public education. Like Diane Ravitch said, we must connect excellence with equity. One cannot exist without the other. The goal should not be to make all students the same but to give each student what they need to reach their full potential. This means more support for English learners, more respect for vocational paths, and more freedom for teachers to teach in ways that inspire.

In the end, the U.S. education system has offered me both opportunity and struggle. I’m grateful for the chance to learn and grow, but I also know how much better it could be. Reform should not come at the cost of fairness or humanity. If we want a stronger future for this country, we must start by making sure every student—regardless of language, race, or income—is seen, supported, and truly educated.

The reading also shows how standardized tests and accountability changed the way education works in the U.S. These changes, influenced by business leaders, were meant to improve schools, but they ended up focusing too much on test scores. Classes became more about memorizing and less about thinking or doing creative work. Many teachers stopped using hands-on or project-based methods because they were told to follow strict curriculums. Interestingly, older reformers used to criticize this kind of teaching, but now the system returned to it, just with more pressure on both students and teachers.

The text also questions what happens when education starts to follow the rules of business. Vouchers, charter schools, and private companies running public schools were all created to increase competition, but this often helped only a few students. While some examples like East Harlem showed improvement, most public schools were left with fewer resources and more challenges. Instead of fixing the system for everyone, these changes gave advantages to students who were already better off. The reading asks an important question: if schools become like products, do we lose the idea of education being a right that belongs to all children?

By; Alba Sánchez 

false