Age-based segregation

Brown v. The Board of Education prohibited schools from intentionally segregating schools by race. Not every possible influence on racial makeup was part of that ruling, and arguments can be made that racial segregation persists. I don't want to go down the path too far for one key reason. There are already a lot of people discussing how racially segregated today's schools are and why, but what about other forms of segregation?

Segregation on the basis of age is foundational to our disastrous K-12 schooling system. There are even multiple layers to this segregation. We divide children into rigid age-based groups known as grades. Although there are rare instances in which a child is not in the grade most commonly associated with their specific age, these groupings are aimed at a very narrow one-year range. On top of that, individual schools target ranges of grades. Even all-school events and activities clearly embrace segregation. As an example of this situation, a five-year-old is not going to be allowed to attend a high school.

A lot of this segregation is built on a seriously flawed understanding of childhood. Most schools incorrectly embrace the idea that age is sufficient to define an individual child. In reality, each child has unique strengths and passions. Their needs are all unique. If you diminish a child to just an age, you diminish who that child is as a person.

Yes, a five-year-old is more likely to have similar needs to another five-year-old than someone in his twenties, but that doesn't mean needs can be adequately met in rigid age groupings. This approach does little more than giving teachers an excuse for not caring. If you try to meet the needs of an age instead of the needs of the child, then you are not adequately meeting needs.

By grouping children by age, you ensure that's how people see them. You encourage stereotyping. Stereotyping leads to discrimination. Much like racial segregation is a discriminatory practice, so is segregation on the basis of age. The K-12 schooling model is built on top of a discriminatory foundation. This includes government-controlled schools that insist that they are not allowed to discriminate.

If teachers are doing an adequate job of meeting the needs of children where they are at, these rigid age-based groupings aren't needed. If we came up with a better model, children could see what older kids are learning. If they see more advanced learning, they can develop a deeper understanding of what they are currently learning while developing an interest in where their learning can take them. They can still learn alongside others who are at similar levels. They can even help children who are earlier in development, which could be more effective than teachers who are more disconnected from learning at that age. This can also deepen understanding since children could stumble on something that was previously overlooked.

I am not arguing that age never has value. Although it will never be perfect, there are some situations where age can help us understand what is appropriate for a child. For example, I don't mind not offering a detailed sex-ed program to a five-year-old. Unfortunately, that's not how our schools see age. Instead, they try to use age to precisely control what, where, when, and how diverse children with drastically different needs are allowed to learn. We would be far better off scrapping the overly rigid and discriminatory model in favor of something that can actually meet the needs of children.