What Missouri's constitution says

One thing I’ve been wondering about is the state’s language guaranteeing a “free and appropriate public education” for all Missouri elementary and secondary school-aged children.

Perhaps a constitutional scholar or lawyer will answer this for me. The language (that I find quite lyrical) is as follows:

A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, the general assembly shall establish and maintain free public schools for the gratuitous instruction of all persons in this state within ages not in excess of twenty-one years as prescribed by law.

I’d take issue with the idea that intelligence can be diffused, or spread over the population, because intelligence is inherent (to an extent) and independent of learning. We can measure a child’s IQ at a very early age, and even though we may see that fluctuate throughout someone’s life it is not a thing that can be “imparted” to a child through a series of verifiable tactics. As I understand it, intelligence is just one of many characteristics that influence academic achievement, and the correlation is not necessarily strong!

Children with higher IQs tend to perform better on tests, but The American Psychological Association's report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns says that IQ only accounts for 25% of a given variance in test scores, suggesting that there are other factors at work that are more significant. We see that phenomenon clearly with many autistic children who have very high IQs but aren’t able to retain new information or express themselves.

At any rate, I’ll concede that a “general diffusion of knowledge” is essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people. We have to know our rights in order to defend them, we have to be skilled and learn a body of knowledge to be able to pursue our life and our happiness as well. I’m sure there are cases where that isn’t true, but certainly to simply provide for one’s self a minimum amount of education is needed.

We talk about a “free and appropriate public education” as something that only public schools can offer, but I don’t think that is necessarily true. I think that the obligation to provide knowledge is paramount to the obligation to maintain public schools as we know them. We have, since the inception of the public school system, relied on it to provide that, and upon discovering time and time again that it does not, and that our efforts to improve it aren’t working and are leaving children behind, to camps emerged: those who feel our primary duty is to the public schools at any and all costs, and those who feel our primary duty is to educate and diffuse knowledge.

Tonight I’m watching Gattica, a Gore Vidal adaptation about genetic mapping and predestination—a very disturbing look at chance and editing out “bad” genes, and about the possibility of discrimination based on genetics more than race or social status. A scary thought, indeed, though the story is old—but the moral says that your possibilities are not limited by any definition, disability or restriction. We do have the opportunity to give every child a chance—and a bigger one even than they may be born with, but it will take a leap of faith, and a look at education as a general diffusion of opportunity. The more choices we offer our diverse and unique children, the more knowledge and skills we can offer to all.