Anya Yang (11) | STAFF REPORTER
Specialized programs admissions are changing more than ever all over the public education system. Dubbed “voluntary program(s) that uses alternative instructional strategies that respond to individual student needs and learning styles”, students who are especially interested in certain topics have the opportunity to receive a more focused education in those areas. In the past admissions have mostly been based on standardized testing, interviews and written applications, but recently they have become “interest-based”, meaning anyone can apply regardless of skill, making it a lottery: anyone can get in, and luck will determine the final decision.
School boards increasingly argue that this evens playing fields and allows for students from disadvantaged backgrounds enter educational institutions, boosting their potential. However, this decision only diminishes the enrichment value of specialized teaching and neglects students who have financial difficulties who want to attend specialized programs, leading to a loss of learning and subsequently a worse educational system.
Lottery admissions diminish the educational enrichment value of specialized teaching as teachers seek to balance curricula amongst the vast skill set of their students, leading to a loss of learning and a not-as-enriched curriculum.
Since anyone and everyone can attend specialized programs, students from all skill ranges will be enrolled, hoping to reap its benefits. This means that many students will be learning different things and that diverse classes will have different points of learning. Thus, some students will be far ahead of their peers, while others won’t be able to catch up to the accelerated curriculum.
When educators notice that students are struggling, they will adjust the curriculum, and eventually, the program might be at risk to be removed entirely. An example is the TOPS program, one of the best programs for the maths and sciences in Toronto, which likely removed its enriched curriculum for science due to the new lottery format.
This was because students who were falling behind couldn’t get the help they needed, often being shamed by their more experienced peers on top of struggling to comprehend course material. Hence, they may become more frustrated with their learning, prompting them to give up or quit trying. At the same time, students with more educational experience will not be able to learn at their typical pace, rendering them bored as teachers try to find a median area to teach.
This means that the implementation of lottery admissions only diminishes the educational value of specialized programs, rendering them useless to all students. Hence, lottery system implementation in enriched programs only leads to a loss of learning and a worse educational system.
Lottery systems only serve to diminish public enrichment programs for students who cannot afford private or more expensive schooling instead of balancing the playing field, losing learning and educational system value.
Enrichment programs attract students of all financial backgrounds, serving as a meritocratic way to improve one’s education in a cost-efficient manner. However, the recent implementation of lottery systems only serves to diminish the social and educational effectiveness of the school.
Students who originally can afford to attend private institutions but instead rely on enriched public school programs might choose to flock to private schools or to IB and AP programs, as they are not affected by the policy and will maintain their original curricula. They will only become more popular, and this will diminish the amount of equal opportunity available. Not only this, but oftentimes, these programs will cost even more as people are willing to pay more because of limited supply. Private school tuition in Canada, for example, can range from 30,000 to 80,000 CAD per year.
Thus, though some who students can afford it will be able to get an enriched education, students who are from disadvantaged financial backgrounds will not be able to get the resources they need to succeed and fuel their education, though they deserve it as well. Furthermore, these students who can succeed in the program originally and also have financial difficulties might not be able to get in to the program by lottery anyways.
Finally, those who do get in and do have the abilities to succeed, with financial difficulties, might not have as many resources or opportunities as they originally would have had because the curricula are likely to be diminished. Thus, lottery admissions only drives students with financial means to attend other institutions, and gives students with disadvantaged backgrounds less resources and opportunities. This eventually leads to less learning and subsequently worse educational provision.
As education is extremely important and is the foundation of the future, lottery admissions should not replace meritocratic testing. Admissions should be based on skill and level, allowing for fair chances for all students, allowing for enrichment and opportunities to flourish.
We should bring back fair admissions in enrichment programs.
