Should high school students have more power?

Why do most Americans complain about their government and the plethora of issues in our society yet are not actively involved in creating solutions? Are students indirectly taught to complain or ignore problems when they are not given an equal voice in creating solutions, participate in coursework that does not directly engross them in the application of civic power, and are powerless to address and correct issues within their own school community? Is there a possibility correlation between this lack of student ownership in their own school community and the molding of an apathetic and disillusioned citizenry? For example, why is it that when a group of students choose to drink irresponsibily or fight students are not creating practical solutions but instead have to yield to rules that only punish instead of creating positive resolutions? Can we honestly say that these rules truly teach the value of finding solutions to conflicts? Can students really understand the nature of creating and implementing rules when they are only the receivers? Could involving the entire school in the process of issue identification and solution creation create more powerful and accepted social contracts? What real voices do students have in the formation and implementation of the programs of studies and rules that are suppose to serve their interests? In essence, can school government be more than a popularity contest and futile attempts to shape administrative and teacher directives by simply changing its structure, making it more accessible, and enumerating more power in a school constitution? Perhaps with a new form of school government I might be able to find answers to these tough questions.

Student governments are generally powerless and are focused on creating social activities such as planning dances, essentially making them more of a party committee than an actual governing body.

The most useful evidence of learning is when students are actually genuinely practicing the skill and adapting the current body of knowledge to new questions. So when teachers and administrators create a new school policy that excludes for example the use of cell of phones in schools because students text message in class or perhaps take a picture of an exam question did we actually solve the problem or just create student-resentment and curtail the use of a great learning tool? Cell phones could have tremendous teaching and learning applications in the classroom some which could include the teacher's need to access all learning styles and even address some of the financial limitations of building technological advanced classrooms by utilizing student-owned resources. For example, a student who already owns a cell phone could access the web immediately to conduct research, create video, record a voice memo that can be published on-line, update their daily planner that could alarm them when assignments are due or remind them of an important meeting, or even call an outsider that could convey a story at a click of a button. Like expensive desktop or laptop computers, cell phones are a direct line to our increasingly multimedia world. But how can you turn the cell phone into an learning tool that reflect the direction our society is already going while simultaneously raise awareness of the fears that schools operate under? How do we train students to respect rules and openly as well intellectually challenge those that run counter to a productive, adaptive society? A practical policy can be created that students and teachers can work with but this more democratic approach requires adjustment to the school's approach to creating rules. Should we give students this power?

I seen so many students exhibit rebellious attitudes and ignore students' rights. As young citizens, students’ rights are constantly being curtailed in order to create a more orderly school environment. This is done with the implementation of legislation that ignores various learning styles, school-created policies, and court decisions that chip away at fundamental liberties such as private property and speech. But we must remember Justice Brennan’s warning in which, “(t)he schoolroom is the first opportunity most citizens have to experience the power of government. Through it passes every citizen and public official, from schoolteachers to policeman and prison guards. The values they learn there, they take with them in life.” In his dissenting opinion in the case of New Jersey v. T.L.O, Justice Brennan was emphasizing the role schools have in educating students about government and the nature of authority. Being that students academic and social development is part of the reason schools have been given discretion to utilize administrative power to find practical ways to educate students through rules and program of studies it is imperative that a school's culture reflects the realities of governing in a diverse democratic republic so students can learn how to manage conflict and compromise. Otherwise, schools could reinforce socially unacceptable attitudes and behaviors which then are replicated within and outside the school walls towards authority and its agents.