Against School by John Gatto

because i'm not writing a formal english paper on this right now, lemme get out some thoughts in 'informal' english.

let me begin by saying this is such an interesting read! gatto was a teacher in the public school "trenches" for approximately thirty years, which i believe gives him credibility, and why we should take his word into consideration. there were a few things that jumped out at me. first, the american secondary school system is based on the old, failed Prussian system of educating its citizens, i.e. "creating not only a harmless electorate and servile labor force but also a virtual herd of mindless consumers." now take a look at Alexander Inglis' take on the system as mentioned by Gatto:

1) The adjustive or adaptive function. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. This, of course, precludes critical judgment completely. It also pretty much destroys the idea that useful or interesting material should be taught, because you can't test for reflexive obedience until you know whether you can make kids learn, and do, foolish and boring things.

2) The integrating function. This might well be called "the conformity function," because its intention is to make children as alike as possible. People who conform are predictable, and this is of great use to those who wish to harness and manipulate a large labor force.

3) The diagnostic and directive function. School is meant to determine each student's proper social role. This is done by logging evidence mathematically and anecdotally on cumulative records. As in "your permanent record." Yes, you do have one.

4) The differentiating function. Once their social role has been "diagnosed," children are to be sorted by role and trained only so far as their destination in the social machine merits - and not one step further. So much for making kids their personal best.
5) The selective function. This refers not to human choice at all but to Darwin's theory of natural selection as applied to what he called "the favored races." In short, the idea is to help things along by consciously attempting to improve the breeding stock. Schools are meant to tag the unfit - with poor grades, remedial placement, and other punishments - clearly enough that their peers will accept them as inferior and effectively bar them from the reproductive sweepstakes. That's what all those little humiliations from first grade onward were intended to do: wash the dirt down the drain.

6) The propaedeutic function. The societal system implied by these rules will require an elite group of caretakers. To that end, a small fraction of the kids will quietly be taught how to manage this continuing project, how to watch over and control a population deliberately dumbed down and declawed in order that government might proceed unchallenged and corporations might never want for obedient labor.

Honestly, i can near 100% relate to almost all these points made by Inglis. The only outcast is the last, because I wasn't selected. Does it make me jealous of the other students who were obedient and retained only the information they were taught to retain? Not in the slightest. Sure, I may have been to summer school four years in a row but does that make me dumb? I'd like to think not, judging by my recent college level work. Despite high school, I've got my life goals set. I truly did feel as though my life was never going to go anywhere because of my grades and summer school and general lack of giving a shit because this system really does categorize you and does a good job of "wash[ing] the dirt down the drain."

writer's block

anyways read the essay here

I've read his "Dumbing Us Down'. I agree with it. We need to get back to basics and individualize.
A test..what is a test? It measures nothing if the test isn't designed for how that person learns. Some people are hands-on vs. book learning. Some people are visual vs. auditory learners and vice versa....

I wrote on a blog piece on this book a few years back 🙂