From ChatGPT to personal finance, nearly every decision we make in our daily lives is now dominated by data. Eight out of ten of the fastest-growing careers this year involve data science. A decade from now, it will be difficult to find any job that is not data-driven.

We need to equip our students for this new reality by teaching them basic data literacy in K-12. We can all see this, but somehow the politics of the moment have turned this idea into a raging debate.

The new critics of data science instruction seem to have three common objections. Their first claim is that data science programs are somehow “watering down” math. That is indeed possible, especially if districts treat data-related classes as a form of remediation, but this should not be the case. Data science is a very challenging subject, combining traditional math, statistics, computer programming, and complex datasets. In many ways, it demands more of students, requiring critical thinking, creativity, and a nuanced understanding of the context within which data have been generated. 

A second objection is that learning data science in high school is somehow illegitimate because students won’t yet have the mathematics skills required of professional data scientists. This is an odd argument. Can high school students never learn anything about physics because they don’t understand differential calculus? Can they not find beauty in a Shakespearean sonnet if they don’t know the rules of iambic pentameter?

The third claim is that data science coursework will crowd out calculus or some of the other math required for college STEM degrees. This is an important concern, but it assumes that every part of today’s curriculum is absolutely critical to that path. Do we really think that is true? Having spent many nights at the kitchen table helping my kids with their homework, I suspect it’s not. And we (parents) shouldn’t ignore the more than 130 college disciplines that now require data and statistics basics as the world changes–including math and engineering.

We adults can stand around and dither, but young people are not waiting for us to figure this out. In college, students are rushing toward data science courses with astonishing speed. The number of data science undergraduate degree programs has exploded nationally–and in every state. At the University of Wisconsin, Madison, it has quickly become the fastest-growing major. Not to be outdone, UC Berkeley recently launched an entire college dedicated to the subject. Our own institution, the University of Chicago, has hired 25 faculty in data science to keep up with student demand.

Sixteen other states have already officially launched or recommended data science in K-12. Some are creating full-year courses, while others are completely redesigning their math pathways. Leading STEM high schools throughout the country are teaching their students the UC Berkeley Data8 program, one of the best collegiate data science courses in the country. Just recently, a group of AP Statistics teachers organized a national data science challenge that attracted more than 5,000 students. 

Without leadership from policymakers and educators, this revolution will still happen, but the benefits will go disproportionately to the students who are already advantaged. Wealthy parents and tech employees will teach their kids these skills through summer and after-school programs. Is this what we want? Or do we want to ensure that every child gets at least a basic level of data literacy?

If this all rings true to you, if you believe that a modern K-12 education requires at least some data science instruction, then you can help move us toward action. Ask your local school to incorporate data across school subjects throughout K-12. Ask your teachers to bring modern data tools into the way they teach. And ask your school leaders to offer data-focused math courses–and support their educators with the right resources to do so.

Let’s put down our weapons in this math war and start fighting again for our kids’ futures.  

Steven Levitt is an economist, the founder of The Center for Radical Innovation for Social Change (RISC) at UChicago, and the author of Freakonomics.

More must-read commentary published by Fortune:

• Return-to-office mandates: Why tax breaks are not a reason for companies in states such as Texas, Utah, and New Jersey to force employees back
• We analyzed 2 years of performance reviews for 13,000 workers. Here’s the proof that low-quality feedback is driving employee retention down
• Burnout is attacking our brains and making it harder to excel at work. ‘Deliberate calm’ can help us adapt
• The growing case for doing less: How harmless cancers are being overdiagnosed in America

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.