Revise of a 1k words writing

The famous French author Ernest Dimnest once said, “Children have to be educated, but they have also to be left to educate themselves.” American business executive Kie Ho wrote an article called, “We Should Cherish Our Children’s freedom to Think” in which he has talked about how the American education system is different from the rest of the world. Even though many people criticize it for not being too professional when it comes to giving adequate knowledge to children, he calls it different but the best education system there is. On the other hand, American educator E. D. Hirsch wrote an article called, “Teach Knowledge, Not ‘Mental Skills’”. In the article he has criticized on how teachers today have not been given children the standard sets of knowledge that is required to develop their common sense. Even though E. D. Hirsch has included some valid points in his article, I will slant towards Kie Ho more than towards him.

The main crux of both the articles is the importance of the education system. Kie Ho has used the comparison between his education system when he was a child, to the way his son is studying in his school. For example, he states that when he himself was 12, he was required to memorize the names of all the world’s major cities, where as his son, who was 6 at that time was told to draw the map of the route that he would take to go to school, and this included the names of the roads, parks, streets and buildings. The point he is trying to make is that, even when he was double the age of his son, he had to work and learn more, compared to his son, but what the teacher had taught his son sounded more productive and knowledgeable. I believe that it is essential for students to be informed about the general knowledge, like the name of the major cities, but they shouldn’t just tell the student to memorize the names, regardless whether the students know what country they are located in, or how to even pronounce them. I believed that Kie Ho’s son learned in a better way because he could relate to the information the teacher was asking him.

On the other hand, Hirsch used stats in his article to explain the reader why it is important for educators, to have a core-knowledge patterns in educational institutions. He then co-relates the amount of knowledge that is being given to students with common sense. I disagree with this, as I myself am a university student, I don’t think that common sense is taught through books and home work. Common sense is learned through personal experiences. E. D. Hirsch explains us the difference between typical school guidelines and the core-knowledge guidelines. The first-grade students in schools following the general guidelines will learn about maps and plants, whereas for the latter, the first-grade students will learn about the seven continents and the differences between evergreen and deciduous trees. I don’t think that making first grade students learn all this will be productive. The early grades are the ones in which children shape their mind either to be study-friendly or play-friendly, and if teachers start off with such bland and plain topics, the students will not have any interest or motivation of learning any further.

In the article, E. D. Hirsch criticizes the skill-based curriculum that is followed in many schools. He states that these kinds of curriculums lead to knowledge gaps between students, and that there is no consistency on what the students of different classes are being taught, and this becomes a challenge for the teachers. They now either have to fill in the knowledge gaps, or they have to go on with the prepared students leaving others behind. Now, I don’t think that is justified to blame the skill-based education system for such problems. In my opinions, knowledge gaps can be seen as a good opportunity for the prepared students to revise what they have already studied, and also for the unprepared students who are not left behind. The teachers who leave students behind, just to go on with their schedule should be blamed for being irresponsible, unfair and biased.

On the contrary, Kai Ho appreciates the way his son has been taught in new and interesting ways. He writes that his son was given an assignment to write a love letter to Juliet, and they had the choice to do it in Shakespearean jargon or modern lingo. Now this is a very productive way of learning literature compared to Kai Ho’s own experience as a student, when he had to memorize Hamlet flawlessly, regardless he understood it or not. I believe that students should be given the liberty to choose how they are going to complete the tasks assigned, as this enhances creativity in them. He concludes by saying that, the people criticizing the American education system can’t really understand it as it has freedom and liberty, that they themselves are not deprived off.

In my opinion, after reading both the articles, I can clearly say that students need freedom and liberty in speaking, reading and learning. Kai Ho has written the entire article by stating his own and his son’s experiences, so that the reader himself can relate to him. Whereas, E. D. Hirsch has written the article from the perspective of a lecturer and a teacher. He has only stated facts and figures in his writing, instead of any real life or personal examples. The main idea he gives through the article is that all the teachers need to fill the students with knowledge, regardless if it’s appropriate or if they really need it. I agree that knowledge is essential for students, no matter what grade they are in, but it is also a teacher’s duty to improve their mental skills, and the very name of Hirsch’s article contradicts this idea. Schools are meant to be educational institutions, but Hirsch is making them sound like ‘well-informed human factories’ with his article. I believe that every student has his/her own sets of skills, they cannot be treated like robots. They shouldn’t be tested or examined on the basis of their memory only.