one more good reason to home-school

Posted in Ranting by dave on July 19, 2005 1 Comment

When and if Kelly and I ever have kids, you can bet money I’ll be behind home-schooling for them. Why? Because of people like Susan Black.

Ms. Black holds the prestigious-sounding title of “education research consultant”, but in reading her essay, it’s pretty clear that her true goal is dumbing down our kids. Unfortunately, the bulk of the lefty-infested public education institution is behind her. Susan is pushing for the outright elimination of competition – of any sort or fashion – in the bubble-world of education.

When I went through grade school, which wasn’t all that many years ago, most of the teachers stressed that it was important for us to succeed for the sake of our preparation for entry into The Real World. We heard it from fifth grade all the way through the end of high school, and then most of us went off to college – a place that’s about as “real” as Disney Land, but put new demands on us nonetheless.

Now that I’ve been out in the real “real world” for a few years, there are a few things that strike me. First, competition is everywhere. You have to compete to be successful at college, you have to compete to land an enjoyable, good-paying job, you have to compete to succeed in the world of dating, and you have to compete to succeed just about everywhere else, too.

Second, though drastically more important (and difficult) for our schoolkids to realize, is that if you fail to compete, then you fail to live. At the end of the month, the bills and the rent have to be paid. At the end of the week, that staff meeting is coming whether you like it or not, so you’d better be ready to show off some competitive results. When that project bid gets mailed in, or when that quotation gets sent out, or when that paper is up for review, you’d better be playing to win – or you’ll end up not making it to the men’s room.

So why, despite the fact that she lives in the same competition-driven world where the rest of us live, is Susan Black pushing for the abolition of merit-based recognition in the schools that the rest of us pay for? If she had her way, there would be no “star student” bulletin board, no gold stars on returned homework assignments, and no words of praise to students who actually complete assignments properly!

Wait – bzzz bzzz ker-clunk – I think my knuckle-dragging conservative mind is figuring it out! Susan doesn’t want to recognize successful students because she doesn’t want students to be successful! If the kids all feel good about going to school, and if the parents think the kids are learning when they’re not, then eventually they’ll get out into the real world and they’ll crash and burn. Think it’s not already happening? Look at the freshman-year attrition rates at “higher education” institutions everywhere. Look at the number of people out there flipping burgers and sweeping floors for a living. Look at the teachers that put them there because they figured it was more important for the kids to have high self-esteem than to actually learn something in school.

Then look at the welfare system. And finally – ding! – look at the people behind it. Amazingly enough, they’re the same people who want little Johnny to feel good, even when he won’t do his math homework and can barely write a sentence in English class. When I was in school, we didn’t have to walk uphill ten miles each way to get there and back, but we did have to complete our assignments and earn good grades.

Thanks in part to Susan Black, tomorrow’s generations might not have to. I hope, for their sake, the real world starts getting simpler to keep up!

Comments
  • Barry:

    “Those who can DO – those that can’t TEACH.

    Don’t forget about the “Fair Factor” – I took the word “fair” out of my vocabulary years ago because it was subjective and meaningless – which I guess is to your point Dave. If all things are subjective and meaningless, you can do no wrong – therefore accountability is no longer required….so all things must be made “fair”. Which can only be done by benchmarking all things by the LOWEST common denominator…only problem is there is NO rule as to how low you can go with that denominator. This means that it is possible that we could go so low as to expect our children to function like singled cell organisms. A parasite could be an organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered ON or IN a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host. I like the definition of a parasite, which is…believe it or not – A professional dinner guest, especially in ancient Greece. Go Figure!!!

Leave a Comment