I just finished the book "Copy This," by the founder of Kinko's. He was dyslexic and hyperactive (and also kind of nuts), but he managed to get through college and become wildly wealthy and successful. One of his biggest points in the book was that US schools only reward the students who are good at everything rather than the students who are able to use other people's strengths to make up for their weaknesses. That is a more important skill to have in the real world after all. Then, this morning on TV someone was talking about how it's dumb to give every kid in the little league a trophy instead of just the star players. The real world only rewards the excellent people, after all.
The two complaints come from different directions, but they are complaining about the same thing, really: that children aren't educated properly unless their education is a sort of microcosm of the "real world." I have a problem with that. Let's just suppose that childhood is the only time that you don't have to be in the real world. Why is it necessary to make childhood more like the real world?
I think it's ok to make childhood harder than the real world in some respects by teaching children to be able to do things for themselves that they will be able to pay other people to do for them in the real world. It's ok to teach children to be able to read and understand complicated works of literature, for example. Dyslexic children will have a harder time with this, it is true, but that doesn't mean that we should ignore this portion of their education. For a dyslexic person, childhood is probably going to be the only time that they will attempt to explore literature on their own because, it is true, later in life, they will most likely choose to do something that isn't so difficult for them. I happen to think that the literature being taught in public schools is worth the struggle. And the math and the science and so on.
I should probably say at this point that I did not struggle with any school subject except physical education so, admittedly, I don't really know how difficult it is for a student with a bona fide learning difficulty. I only know that as a stay-at-home mom, I don't draw on very much of my education at all on a day-to-day basis, and I don't use any of it to make money. Still, I treasure my education, and I'm tremendously grateful for all of it, even the stupid rope climb in PE. I'd like to think that I am successful in the real world because I am able to reflect on that education whenever I choose.
I also think it's ok to make childhood easier than the real world by giving trophies to the whole softball team instead of just the homerun star: rewarding children for effort rather than results. It's true that this doesn't mirror the real world, but, you know, it's just too wonderful for children to be rewarded this way. So what if they think they are better athletes than they actually are? They'll be straightened out eventually. I strongly support any encouragement children can get to try whatever they want, not because it makes children into better athletes or whatever but because it makes them braver to try other new things.
I married a man who is jaw-droppingly successful, not because he is smarter or stronger than anyone else but because he is braver. He was willing to just go for it whenever he saw something he thought would be good to do. Maybe we can't transform dyslexic children into natural readers and maybe we can't turn clumsy children into softball stars, but maybe by telling them how awesome they are every time they try something new or do their best, we can give them more courage.
No comments:
Post a Comment