As part of my class readings, I listened to Seth Godin’s TedEx Talk about “What is school for?”. In his talk, Godin emphasizes on the view that schools are “factories” that manufacture workers for the industry. He gives examples on how the current system, being heavily based on memorization and instilling obedience into the students’ psyche at an early age, is broken.

I found his talk inspiring. I certainly can relate to the challenges he narrates. I can attest to how most tests and grading schemes do not necessarily encourage exploration or learning, but rather gaming the system and doing the minimum requirements for the grade. Having grown up in a 3rd world country, I have also witnessed many gruesome examples of scare tactics and corporal punishment to keep students in line.

That being said, I do want to make two counter arguments that I hope are thought provoking and lead to some interesting discourse. First, I want to address the “memorization” issue. The school system I grew up in valued memorization above all else. I had to recite entire texts, word by word. Understanding what I was reciting in many subjects, including scientific ones such as biology, was irrelevant. The grader looked for exact words and sentences in my answers. However, I do not think abolishing or vilifying memorization is the answer. I think it does more harm than good when people go for the other extreme whenever something is dubbed with backwardness. Obviously, overemphasizing on memorization does not help students grow intellectually. However, the ability to memorize is a positive skill that should be cherished instead of looked down upon. Yes, we live in the time of the internet. We can look up anything at any time. However, when one needs to have internalized certain information or lessons in order to create new knowledge. For example, can we really function as seamlessly if we don’t at least memorize some basic mathematical operation such as multiplying small numbers? What about careers that hugely benefit from memorization, such as public speaking and standup comedy? How about political science and history? Of course, it is pointless to memorize exact dates and names. However, I would contend that in order for a historian to find patterns and lessons, they need to have internalized some information about different eras and regions of the world in order to connect the dots. Finally, when I debug a certain piece of code, I don’t search for the proper syntax every single time. There is a minimum syntax memorization I need to commit so I could function. So, I don’t think this “war” on memorization is really the right approach. I think a healthy balance between memorization and inference, depending on the subject and problem at hand, is key.

The second issue I want to address is “respect and obedience”. Since I had lived in an authoritarian education system throughout my childhood, I am a staunch opponent of oppressive practices in education. The class should be a safe environment for students to flourish and be creative. However, I do believe that “respecting the teacher’s status” is imperative. This is not for the sake of the teacher’s ego, but rather because students should respect the experience of the teacher and not take it for granted. So, I do not see anything wrong with “Good morning, Mr. Godin” at the beginning of class. In fact, I think manners are a great virtue to teach. For those who are sensitive about the origins of this practice in “western Judeo-Christian” values, I am sure you would find this in other cultures as well. For example, when I attended martial arts schools, I had to bow to the teacher every day and be very attentive when they speak and teach. There are people who might argue that this archaic indoctrination practice has no place in the 21st century. But, I would argue that some belief in your teacher’s methods when you are a beginner, even if it does not sit 100% well with you, is well-founded. I, as an amateur martial artist, do not have enough knowledge and experience to absolutely critique my sensei. My sensei might still be wrong, and I have the right to believe that and try to prove it. However, I think I should proceed with skepticism rather than dismissing the teacher altogether prematurely. This line of reasoning also applies to many scientific disciplines, such as physics. Those who have come before us have lead us where we are for a reason. I think we should listen to what they say with good intentions and an open mind, and only then objectively critique whether or not their reasons were well-founded, and what can be done about that.

Ultimately, I would hope that the next generation of educators does not sway into the opposite extreme from where they came from. This is not about feeding our egos or exacting revenge against a system that did us wrong. The system is a collective not only of teachers, but also of students. Let’s not mess the students up in the process with our “wars”.