Schools that are known to churn out talented individuals because of their prestigious nature are wrong footed right from the start. They do churn out people, but of the same type. Years and years of constant fine tuning and at last, a subject is produced. This subject is never open to curious learning. The teacher has followed the school system and it influences his thoughts. He grows up to be just like the policy makers who formulated the guidelines- nothing more, nothing less. They are taught to grow accordingly. This can be seen in every other person in that they only emulate people depicted in the books as a student and many pupils in school do that still- it’s an unavoidable reality.
Education is one of the main obstacles to intelligence and freedom of thought- Bertrand Russell
Holy curiosity of inquiry is a delicate plant, apart from stimulation, it mainly needs freedom.- Albert Einstein
Originality needs to be emphasized. Couldn’t he be encouraged to build his own understanding of things, his own models, rather than be carried away by the policy maker’s whims? Authority figures should just provide him with the skeleton. Later, he can build up the paraphernalia. This way the curriculum can be student-centric.
If role models are to be followed, then fine. What about these greats telling people to do the soul searching? Great people always advise everyone to ‘follow their mind’ or ‘be yourself’: Oscar Wilde, R. W. Emerson, Judy Garland and a few hundred others advised people thus. Why are these suggestions not followed? Does it mean that schools assume there won’t be another Shakespeare or Milton making their own road without budging?
….(our reform)recognizes the need to adapt rather than replicate ‘best’ practices’, so that they address local conditions and aspirations……the specific needs of students, schools and families are best understood when the local context is treated as a potential source of development rather than solely as a neutral or negative circumstance.
Simmons, Warren. annenberginstitute. Brown U, n.p. Web. 13 Feb 2014.
Yes. This is very clear to anybody observing Schools. They are built on the assumption that all the pupils are less-endowed strugglers and are admitted in them to walk out as great and polished people. Why not adjust the curriculum to accommodate a latent immense potential and adapt likewise? Everything should not be controlled and the pupil spoon-fed. There should be varied degrees of treatment for pupils of different level of intellect and needs: Russell was a revolutionary thinker; Einstein’s curiosity alone paved the way for many scientific breakthroughs like the famous relation between energy and mass, with other more profound insights.
This is a real handicap and more research should be done to give freedom to the pupil. Then, a good strategy can be formulated in structuring this system.
It is evident that schools need to be more focused on: providing more freedom in thinking for the pupil; assume they all are not the same in terms of intelligence- some are superior to others; they have their own strong points to be cared for and may build the paraphernalia around, later in life.