Here I am, sitting in the cafeteria, reading an article with one of my college freshmen that she has to respond to as a communications class assignment.
I have never attended or taught public school in this country, so I am obviously no expert in anything when it comes to schooling. My high school graduation class had north of 1200 students in 22 classrooms. But that was 1979 and that was China.
I should say I agree with many of the author's points. I do think a school could be a boring place, especially if a student doesn't get to participate in much of what are happening in the school, or if a student gets unlucky teachers who are not interested in teaching. But I also agree with the author's grandfather, "that
if I was bored it was my fault and no one else's."
I don't think leaving children's education solely to the devices of their own or their families' serves the best interest of a society as a whole. We have not yet eliminated poverty, inequality and many other ills of human societies. The public school system may very well need reform, re-engineering, and so on. But it may be the only vehicle to an education available to many people. True, the author provided many good example of success without a crippling schooling, but it seems not unfair to argue that the author is trying to prove a rule with exceptions.
If schools are holding children back in childishness, isn't that the entire society's doing? Kids today may not be home alone until a certain age, they are driven around to play with friends or to any activities, they are told from a very young age to not talk to strangers. The grown-ups try to keep them safe in every possible way, while ignoring the risk of keeping them childish at the same time.
It seems that we should not be against school, rather, we should be against how people operate schools.
