Over the years, I have been writing about misconceptions regarding the schooling process. The purpose of these posts is to explain why I disagree with various comments that I have heard people make about schooling. These are meant as personal thoughts rather than conclusive proof, and I will admit that I'm not always the best at explaining my thoughts. Regardless, I have decided that I should be willing to share these posts when I encounter someone online who makes an argument that I have already discussed.
I'm going to redo yet another one of my old misconceptions. In this case, I felt like I missed some ideas. I suspect that I was a little worried about coming off as too extreme and held back. This time, I'm going to try to open up a bit more and explain just how absurd it is that it became so popular to write, "If you can read this, thank your teacher."
One of the big problems with this cliché is that it's shown broadly to everyone. Although a minority, there are people out there who did not go through a schooling system. They were not taught by the teaching profession. It's quite common for those without teachers to be literate.
Even for those who attended schools, that doesn't mean that they learned this skill from their teachers. Many of them taught themselves. They should not be told to thank people that clearly weren't responsible for their ability to read.
I can take this further. What about people who legitimately learned to read while they were in school? Even if teachers helped, the learners undeniably played a role. Teachers aren't demanding thanks for helping their students. They are demanding thanks for the ability to read. This diminishes the role that learners play in their own educations. By diminishing their role to satisfy the egos of teachers, we are also taking away the sense of accomplishment and harming the natural desire to learn.
The vast majority of the population would be literate even if the schools didn't exist. One of the arguments made to develop schools was the increasing importance of literacy. The increased importance alone would have increased the literacy rate. There are a lot of factors in the literacy rate, and they are difficult to isolate. To date, I have not seen a single piece of evidence that our literacy rate is higher today than if we had not pushed people through schools.
The most absurd component of the cliché comes when you look at what would have to be true in order for the statement to be valid. If you could read it, you had to have learned from your teachers. If you didn't learn from teachers, then the only way for this to make sense is if you didn't learn how to read. You would have to believe that the literacy rate would be zero without teachers.
Literacy predates the schools. Even with schooling, modern-day citizens can learn to read elsewhere. This cliché is not only flawed, but it's an assault on common sense. Again, this also diminishes the role of the learner. Let me finish this post by making one thing clear. If you can read this, there's only one person I can reliably thank, and that's you.
No comments:
Post a Comment