When I think about education, my biggest frustration isn't the workload or exam pressures. It's that many of my friends are stuck in schools that fail to meet their individual needs.
I'm fortunate to attend a well-funded high school in New York, where experienced teachers, advanced courses, and a wide range of extracurricular activities create an environment that supports diverse academic interests. At my school, Advanced Placement classes are always available, extra help is easy to access, sports teams are well equipped, and both arts and science programs benefit from top-tier facilities and modern technology.
But just a few miles away, the contrast is dramatic.
Friends in nearby schools deal with outdated textbooks, overcrowded classrooms, and teachers stretched thin by limited resources. In these conditions, students often become victims of an education system that prioritizes one-size-fits-all policies over individualized learning.
It's not just about infrastructure. It's about how education is delivered and whom it's actually serving.
I've seen firsthand how a school tailored to a student's needs can transform the learning experience.
As someone with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), I know the impact personalized support and accommodations can have. In the right environment, I can thrive.
But for many students with learning differences, support is simply not available.
For them, school choice isn't a luxury. It's essential.
The national conversation around school choice has gained momentum, especially following reforms under the Trump administration, which aim to expand options through vouchers, charter schools, and greater autonomy for institutions.
Giving a family the ability to choose the school that best fit its child fosters healthy competition and pressures underperforming schools to improve.
Critics on the left, including figures like former President Barack Obama and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, argue that school choice undermines public education by siphoning funds and weakening the traditional system. But that argument misses a critical point: Forcing students to stay in failing schools doesn't protect them; it limits them.
Students facing serious challenges — whether it's poor classroom conditions or the lack of accommodations for disabilities — should not be stuck in schools that only make their struggles worse. A student's future shouldn't be dictated by a ZIP code.
School choice doesn't mean abandoning public education. It means offering alternatives when the current system falls short.
A competitive model can drive all schools to do better.
When families are empowered to seek better educational environments, schools are motivated to enhance their services to retain students. That benefits everyone.
All children deserve the opportunity to learn in a setting that supports their growth — regardless of where they live.
Too often, we accept overcrowded classrooms, worn-out textbooks, and inadequate support as inevitable. These problems have become so normalized that we forget they're fixable.
But real change begins when we stop accepting these conditions and start pushing for alternatives that actually work.
History shows us that real reform happens when we challenge broken systems.
The civil rights and labor movements demanded equal opportunity. And now, the push for school choice demands the same for education.
Whether it's through policy reforms like those advanced by the Trump administration or grassroots efforts to support students with learning differences, the goal is the same: to ensure every student has the chance to succeed.
Education should be a launchpad for opportunity — not a system that traps students in failure due to outdated policies.
Gregory Lyakhov is a young advocate for Israel. His work has been published in the New York Post, The Jerusalem Post, and several other Jewish media outlets. He's also appeared on "Fox & Friends" to discuss key issues. Read More of Gregory Lyakhov's Reports — Here.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.