I recently read a quote by someone stating that instead of forcing kids to study the same thing in school until they become all the same, to focus the entire 12 years on each one’s individual talent and let it grow. The original quote I’m sure will spark controversy because it is devaluing centuries of a schooling system that has been refined and redefined to suit modern needs and demands, but what if we focus on the positive side of what that person has to say?
I have been adamant on sharing throughout these entries the value of listening to our kids and picking up on signals they send us through their behavior and preferences so that we can know early on what their passions are and where their talents lay. This couldn’t be truer in this case especially if we insist on applying it for long term results. To give the quoted person the benefit of the doubt, what if (and this is purely hypothetical) the basic school subjects are there to allow all kids to understand languages, history, geography, math, science and philosophy but adjusted in a way to be able to add a few sessions a week for the liberal arts or any other domain needed. These classes wouldn’t be extracurricular but they would be mandated based on certain tests taken to figure out the type of intelligence each child has (I will be elaborating on this matter in future articles). That way kids could be split in groups into those who are interested in robotics, technology, drama, sports and so on. Could we as parents imagine how much more excited they will become about attending school, and how their talent is being shaped into a profession for a future career? They would graduate school and know exactly what to major in university when they have already had a solid foundation with the guidance of their teachers. We would have a generation of early 20 year olds reinventing the future and making discoveries that suit our modern world.
Many things we come across online spark a debate and sometimes it’s for the better because we start to compare systems and methods, think about alternatives, and compare traditional systems to those of countries abroad where children attend school at a later age or for less hours per day. Thinking and questioning is always a good idea, and even if we cannot change a system, we can apply what we deduced at home.
Maria Najem
Photo: daily.jstor.org
 the basic school subjects are there to allow all kids to understand languages, history, geography, math, science and philosophy but adjusted in a way to be able to add a few sessions a week for the liberal arts or any other domain needed. These classes wouldn’t be extracurricular but they would be mandated based on certain tests taken to figure out the type of intelligence each child has (I will be elaborating on this matter in future articles). That way kids could be split in groups into those who are interested in robotics, technology, drama, sports and so on. Could we as parents imagine how much more excited they will become about attending school, and how their talent is being shaped into a profession for a future career? They would graduate school and know exactly what to major in university when they have already had a solid foundation with the guidance of their teachers. We would have a generation of early 20 year olds reinventing the future and making discoveries that suit our modern world. Many things we come across online spark a debate and sometimes it’s for the better because we start to compare systems and methods, think about alternatives, and compare traditional systems to those of countries abroad where children attend school at a later age or for less hours per day. Thinking and questioning is always a good idea, and even if we cannot change a system, we can apply what we deduced at home. Maria NajemPhoto: daily.jstor.org "Pin It")
-210811120346393.jpg)
