Children of the System

At a party i couldn't help but overhear a conversation between a teacher and a principal of a school. The later talking about making a way in which he could construct a teaching system which would be perfect. A system which would account for infrastructure, teachers availability , schedule and teaching system. I giggled , he noticed. In a gentlemanly way we got introduced.

So why did i giggle?
I admired his idea for creating that perfect process, he was concentrating on a big problem. He would definitely get acclaims and recognition for his effort, no doubt about it. I giggled cause he forgot to include the main ingredient of the process "Children".

So what about "Children"?
These so called schools are not nurturing them but are "Manufacturing children". They call it a system, and they have discipline ,they cant stand any imperfection to them. Then why is it that there is different performance ? If the input is the same ( children and their system ) how come the output is different?

Children are different in so many ways that putting them in the same system wouldn't help. The principal was sounding as if he was to open a production line to assemble and manufacture children of the future. Not such a good idea, isn't it? Just imagine children "Reading the same books","Asking the same questions","Behaving the same way" etc. No Newton no Einstein no Sachin no Mozart ,just a lot of you's and me's - having a - be alike competition. No - The idea is to think different, be different and behave different. The difference here is not chaos but LIFE itself.

For a class of 30 put in a system , 10 will be good ,10 will be average and 10 are supposedly goner's who have a high probability of flunking (At least that's what the teachers tell).

So what about the bottom 20?
No special mention required. These student need something else to do. Each school should have a behaviour analyst who should sit,talk,listen and notice children. Assign and remove children from classes until found suitable for it. These analyst should not be parents.If that activity is conducive to them then why not pursue it ,instead of some subjects that they can catch up on when they grow up. My intention here is to not produce toppers but to make comfort zone in students and children ,which they can rely on even as they grow up.

What about the top 10?
Well if they are consistently good in academics then they definitely belong there. Kudos to them they excel according to today's system. If not consistent then we need to look as to why? Here again will come the role of a behaviour analyst. Are they being subjected to books? Do they have their interest elsewhere? What if their interest vary? We have heard about a phrase "Jack of all and master of none". If a child has the ability to take up many things at a time then it is definitely increasing his capacity to absorb and increase comfort zone, but this should not be done by giving up his family time. An analyst should change that child to "Jack of all and master of some", cause the capability is there.

Now what?
I believe the option should be to study subjects that they decide and some of the curriculum. If they are not interested in taking up the extra subjects then there should always be sports and adventure camps. Men have take up inspiration from nature, then why not children?

Now most of us will blame the teachers of not paying attention or the children for not doing so well. No - Its the process. So think this in a way - "They do not learn what you teach them , they learn what they UNDERSTAND".