Seattle Times: Should Learning Be its Own Reward?

BusinessGuy
Tue, 21 Nov 2006 19:29:51 +0000

I think it’s fair to say that bethievt missed the point by a fair margin.

I agree with BurnThis - why do you think parents push children to be the top of the class, to participate in as many activities as possible, to score a 1600? Is it because scoring a 1600 teaches you something, or does it make you a more valuable person? Achievement in school has no purpose besides the various rewards that people place upon it: if learning is the goal, there are far better alternatives than having teenagers sitting in a classroom with a teacher that may or may not even have a good understanding of the subject matter, and a curriculum that is supposedly comprised of the most important information a student should learn. For many students, and/or their parents, admission to HYP or whichever dream school you might consider, is the entire point to the lifestyle of a high/overachiever.

As Rick Tyler stated earlier, his son is learning much more outside of the classroom than in the classroom; if we make the assumption he gets slightly lower grades as a result of this, what is more important - slightly higher grades, or actual learning? If he does happen to be pulling top grades and learning on his own, great for him; although, the time he isn’t spending on school could just as easy be used by an equally intelligent person to make themselves that much more attractive based upon an admission officer’s completely “holistic” approach that in no way disadvantages those who don’t fit the mold of a high achieving student. As we know, students who win dirtbike races and spend their afternoons at the paintball arena are represented just as equally as the typical overachiever at highly selective universities.

I find it quite amusing when people correlate success in high school with intelligence, or in fact future success. Who’s to say that the reasonably intelligent football player who doesn’t concentrate in calculus won’t go on to a successful career as a corporate executive or politician, while the A+ student in the front row ends up teaching the same class at a local community college. Now, you may say that teaching at a community college is in fact more impressive than an occupation as a corporate executive, a fact that has some merit, however, if you were to say that, how can you say that the student paying more attention in calculus is more intelligent/better to any degree? You cannot, unless you use some incredibly “magic bullet”-esque reasoning.

I’ll leave you with one last thought - what is more important to you as a parent: having a student that excels in school or having a student that actually learns and pursues that which helps them grow as an individual? The two examples are not mutually exclusive, yet if they were, would you still push your child to achieve, achieve, achieve, or rather support activities that help the child more, even at the expense of percieved success.

Personally, I think a balance must be struck between the two extremes - the most advantageous path is one that allows the student to grow and develop on their own, yet still uphold the image of scholastic success so as to benefit from the various scholarships, opportunities, and possible college educations, that result from that success. In school, it is not often necessary to be the best, it is only required that you be near the best, or appear as though you are near/one of the best. Unfortunately for the students, the same cannot be said about life as those hardworking students who struggle to do exactly what their teacher asks to obtain A’s are the same people who end up spending their time furthering the success of their boss and coworkers. Subsequently, they may spend their youth hearing how smart they are, yet when it comes time to enter the real world, for some reason the same lessons don’t apply.