Introduction
The trivialization of school in the present educational organization for teens has been posited in the public; however, it is one vital issue that is being debated on lately.
Is it really right for schools to be abolished from the teen’s system of education? This question has been a vital issue in the present age educational structure. According to research carried out by many educational researchers lately, it was discovered that the two-year schooling scheme is irrelevant and obsolete in the educational structure for teen’s, and should be abolished from their system of education or scheme of learning.
Under contemporary rules of the management of public affairs and human capital formation, limitless faith in mass schooling has swept across the earth. But at times families do not share this religious feeling of great warmth and intensity for education, or other demands, such as for the labour power of their children, impinge on demand for schooling. This, consecutively, results in difference in educational success, reinforcing inequalities across ethnic groups and social classes (Fuller, 2006).
Botstein once argued in his book Jefferson’s Children that “the American schools are obsolete”. In detail, the dissemination that the current method of education has entirely strangled the scheme is an important issue which has to be scrutinized critically.
The public analysis on this matter is far-off from the mainstream. Besides this, the suggestion of eradicating this scheme in education has emancipated teacher’s recession, thereby, rises of unemployment in the teaching industry. Nevertheless, the recent innovation is due to the archaic system being practiced in the dissemination of knowledge into the teens. In addition to these points, the public has to understand that teacher cannot be everything to all simultaneously. Additionally, anyone who decides to take teaching as a profession should understand that they have embarked on a psychologically treacherous profession. Nonetheless, the public should comprehend that personal success depends on whatever is disseminated by the teachers into the young minds, because teens absorb whatever is being propagated into their minds, hence reverberating these metaphors across the ages.
The teachers conversely are the models of creativity in the flexible minds of future leaders.
Responsibilities of a teacher
In the first chapter of the book “on being a teacher” titled “why are we here? What is the job that we are being asked to do? By Jonathan Kozol, he expatiated that painstaking teachers who have researched the foundation of open education is confronted with choice making (Kozol, 2009, p.3).
He further stated that with all sincerity in themselves and colleagues, public school is now regarded as outmoded and barbarous. This thought, according to him is both observable to students and the teachers alike, but the students inhabit in it for a short period, while the teachers are condemned to it. Pursuant to teachers condemnation, they live and work as intellectual guerrillas strong-minded to stimulate students, ignite their inquisitiveness, and to open their minds, yet reluctant to stay behind in their profession. Together with this, teachers put their personal obligation in mind (Kozol, 2009, p. 3).
Apparently, Kozol stated some of the measures guessed by teachers in freeing from inability and disinterest. Consequently, the logical step taken is to deconsecrate schools into outwardly irreversible place of esteemed value of social order. He further noted many ways of opening the issue in complete observation of the class, which he believed can be attained by the quotation of many respected people’s word, such as Horace Mann who was diffident in articulating the real utility of public schools. Nonetheless, he also provided some other ways of embarking on this which he conscientiously noted that has exposed their assumption of public schools as adults. Additionally, the best way of achieving this is by disseminating the purpose to students through dialogue as recommended by Doris Lessing (Kozol, 2009, p.4). Finally, there is no deceit of learning to be a responsive, affectionate or sympathetic person.
Furthermore, Kozol, stated that, students are to be taught to speak in a polite and understandable approach, and if in any way the word comes out as rude or impatient, the teacher is at liberty to correct the student (Kozol, 2009, p.10). Additionally, it is inaccurate to epitomize a student’s intolerable conduct, since they impact more ideas into a dormant brain.
Consequently, we are made to understand that teachers are also human beings with feelings and wishes. They too are free to articulate their expressions freely as they wish to. They are allowed to express amusement, weep, show anger, hurting, nervousness or fear openly when there is the need to (Kozol, 2009, p.13).
In as much as teachers are to keep and support their professional standards and behaviour, one wonders if they are allowed to weep or even sigh before the students, like in a situation where a teacher knocks his knee at the edge of table and starts bleeding, is he not human enough to stop whatever, he was doing and attend to himself? This tells us that the teachers are also human and needs to be attended to where the need be. As a result of this, students learn to express themselves by depending on what they learn from their teachers (Kozol, 2009, p.13).
This should be done often and freely, with much love to enable the students learn how to struggle individually either in the future or at any point of their life.
Nevertheless, in the third chapter of his book, Kozol talked about conflict resolution. He noted that the teachers rarely openly state the truth when their student’s mode of expression is wrong. Additionally, he asserted that confrontation is perceived as a result in every case. He advised that we need to know both how to learn, listen and understand children to avoid unnecessary confrontations. Kozol further stated that “an extreme reaction to an extreme ordeal is not only healthy and intelligent at times, but also very often the sole ethical response of honourable people in the face of human pain” (Kozol, 2009, p. 17)
Extremism is said to be a deceptive phrase, as it convinces students on believing that one should just be in the middle (Kozol, 2009, p.16).
Why Schools must be abolished
Epstein in his interview with Leon Botstein on “why high school must go” emphasized on the disadvantages of culture on the teens, somewhat that it crafts some irresponsibility in them (Epstein, 2007). According to him, he said that the public believes the teen years are a time of “storm and stress”. To supplement this, he said people are of the view that the teens are naturally unskilled and irresponsible, hence, the compulsion in urging them to learn because without education, their future will be jeopardised in that they will only indulge in menial jobs. They insisted that they need protection and training at all cost, hence, confining them to some socialization and basic amenities (marrying, drinking of alcohol, smoking of cigarettes) still, they are not allowed to establish their own businesses and bidding for tenders or contracts (Bhatti, 1999, p.205; Epstein, 2007).
Interestingly Botstein in his own perspective contradicted all these assumptions about teens and gave his view on why schools should be abolished. Botstein is of the view that children are as competent as adults and talented to learn exciting things. Additionally, he said that schools should be abolished because it degrades the teens, thereby exposing them to the empty world and making them unprofitable with their time.
According to Botstein, he said, the survey research that was conducted by him on the competence of adults with teens proved somewhat, comparable in many ways, because the teens are more dynamic than adults.
He further argued that high school is an infantilizing arrangement, because it fails to nurture the youths when they have the ability of learning, hence failure in meeting their enthusiasm towards learning. Moreover, children should be able to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate authority, therefore enhancing their ability to give relevant answers when questioned.
Additionally, Botstein perspective is that the youths should be taught not to dissipate much of their lives because they are an extension of adulthood. Undoubted of the fact that the teens are naturally competent and that childhood is a time of learning, shaping up morally and developing of self-assurance and quality. However, he emphasized about his view against the institutionalization and segregation of youth by so-called adults.
References
Bhatti, G. (1999). Asian Children at Home and at School: An Ethnographic Study. New York, NY: Routledge.
Epstein, R. (Interviewer) & Botstein, L. (Interviewee). (2007). Why High School must go.
Fuller, B. (2006). Children’s Lives and schooling Across Societies. Research in Sociology of Education, Volume 15, 231-237.
Kozol, J. (2009). On being a teacher. Oxford, England: One world Publications.