Examine just for a moment an average sized classroom of twenty-eight or so students; they are fidgeting, squirming, a tad rambunctious, undoubtedly bored, and most likely not retaining anything. Their grade does not matter. These could be third graders practicing their cursive. Or perhaps they are eleventh graders paraphrasing Shakespearean literature. The problem still stands, they are wasting their time. Many people assume that this is strictly the student’s fault, others might suppose it to be the teacher’s fault. While it is true that there can and sometimes is an issue on an individual’s level either student or teacher, it does not necessarily follow that individuals are the primary cause of the problem in public schools. The schooling
…show more content…
Starting with his fair premise that the generally accepted purpose for a school includes “1) To make good people. 2) To make good citizens. 3) To make each person his or her personal best.” (Gatto). He goes on to insist that this is not the actual outcome of schools. Instead, the schooling system creates immature, dependent, and childish adults. A schooling structure that teaches them to not think. Instead, learning thing like how to react to authority excluding critical thinking. Or becoming alike to their fellow students in thought processes. He even goes as far as to draw parallels between our school structure and the structure of the 1820’s Prussian institutes. Gatto is right that schools do not ultimately end in mature functioning adults, but he seems on more dubious ground when he claims that the system is set up purposefully to aid the downfall of students. Still, one does not need to agree with Gatto’s conclusion to agree with the rest of his reasonings and observations. (Gatto) Ultimately at the end of Gatto’s article he says children need more independence. Being that his article is geared towards parents, that solution is easy. A parent can more easily dictate how much independence is appropriate for their child than a teacher could dictate how much independence is appropriate …show more content…
A piece in which he starts by explaining his childhood troubles. The divide between his peers with the need to appear ‘street-smart’, and his future with the need to be academically smart. Like many children, his primary interests laid outside of school bounties. For Graff, the interest was sports though not merely just the act of them also the discussion of them. He recalls his interest in sports magazines, novels, and the discussions/debates of them between his friends. Graff’s point of bringing up his childhood interests was to compare ‘street-smarts’ and academic smarts. More specifically how people equated ‘street-smarts’ with anti-intellectualism. He counters saying intellectualism does not need to be within certain categories, e.g. intelligence does not need to be limited to topics such as Shakespeare or Plato. Instead, intelligence is based on how you think, not what you think about. Being analogical, understand and interpreting fact/data, as well as considering multiple points of views at one are the marks of intelligence. Or in other words looking at something through an ‘academic eye’. Graff’s theory of what is truly intellectualism is extremely useful because it sheds insight on the difficult problem of what to do with bored children in school. (Graff) Rather than teaching them how to think intellectually through specific
Starting with his fair premise that the generally accepted purpose for a school includes “1) To make good people. 2) To make good citizens. 3) To make each person his or her personal best.” (Gatto). He goes on to insist that this is not the actual outcome of schools. Instead, the schooling system creates immature, dependent, and childish adults. A schooling structure that teaches them to not think. Instead, learning thing like how to react to authority excluding critical thinking. Or becoming alike to their fellow students in thought processes. He even goes as far as to draw parallels between our school structure and the structure of the 1820’s Prussian institutes. Gatto is right that schools do not ultimately end in mature functioning adults, but he seems on more dubious ground when he claims that the system is set up purposefully to aid the downfall of students. Still, one does not need to agree with Gatto’s conclusion to agree with the rest of his reasonings and observations. (Gatto) Ultimately at the end of Gatto’s article he says children need more independence. Being that his article is geared towards parents, that solution is easy. A parent can more easily dictate how much independence is appropriate for their child than a teacher could dictate how much independence is appropriate …show more content…
A piece in which he starts by explaining his childhood troubles. The divide between his peers with the need to appear ‘street-smart’, and his future with the need to be academically smart. Like many children, his primary interests laid outside of school bounties. For Graff, the interest was sports though not merely just the act of them also the discussion of them. He recalls his interest in sports magazines, novels, and the discussions/debates of them between his friends. Graff’s point of bringing up his childhood interests was to compare ‘street-smarts’ and academic smarts. More specifically how people equated ‘street-smarts’ with anti-intellectualism. He counters saying intellectualism does not need to be within certain categories, e.g. intelligence does not need to be limited to topics such as Shakespeare or Plato. Instead, intelligence is based on how you think, not what you think about. Being analogical, understand and interpreting fact/data, as well as considering multiple points of views at one are the marks of intelligence. Or in other words looking at something through an ‘academic eye’. Graff’s theory of what is truly intellectualism is extremely useful because it sheds insight on the difficult problem of what to do with bored children in school. (Graff) Rather than teaching them how to think intellectually through specific