1. Writer: Duong Kim Thanh Class:QH2013.F1.E11
1
WRITING ASSIGNMENT 1
(Version 2)
Topic: State your opinion on the following statement: “School is bad for
children.”
One of the conventionally agreed stages in life is schooling. After attaining
the appropriate age, one is expected to go to school. Caregivers take toddlers for
formal learning operations in an institution. However, the idea of everyone going
to school to learn and accomplish good grades does not fit all categories of
human. It actually disturbs children rather than guarantees a successful life after
its completion because schooling overworks the young ones by homework after
long hours of following a predetermined course work, which they may never
utilize in life. In school, pupils are also denied the chance to nurture and hone
their intellectual capabilities. Consequently, today’s schools are an inappropriate
center for children’s learning.
To begin with, school is killing children’s motivation. Amabile (1998)
suggests that intrinsic motivation in learning and creativity is boosted by
fulfillment, challenge and interest. However, it seems that rarely are these three
constructs presentin schoolan. Itis this absence that slowly diminishes children’s
urge to acquire new knowledge, which is worsened by being subjected to a rigid
schoolsystem. Demoralization of children also takes place because of the school’s
requirement to follow prescribed syllabi that disregard their talents (Ofsted,
2015). In addition, learners are learning for the sake of attaining knowledge. As
indicated by Holt (1982), the children’s love for education is eroded by the
practice of teaching them. They hate being taught now that their natural curiosity
is incompatible with structured tutorials and generalizations employed by
schools. Presently, pupils perceive a school to be a “prison”. Such is the
perception because schools have no concern for learners’ areas of concentration.

2. Writer: Duong Kim Thanh Class:QH2013.F1.E11
2
Moreover, the presence of various unsuitable disciplines before specialization
contributes to depreciating children’s enthusiasm. Taking courses that later
translate into time wastage develops stress to children who possess diverse
endowment levels.
Secondly, emphasis on good grades the gateway to future success is
detrimental to any studying process. This notion is wrong for learners have
different gifts and the one who succeeds in life is the individual who fully utilizes
his or her talent (Brooks, 2012). To add on to that, children are forced to work
hard to get attain admirable scores in order to fulfill high expectations from
guardians and teachers. Since the study drive does not originate from the learners
themselves, they assume study to be a punishment and do it in fear of caregivers.
Schooling also develops pressure when learners toil to pass so that both the
parents and the instructors are satisfied. As a result, students enjoy school just
when they pass and when the opposite happens, they are depressed and develop
a negative attitude in all life affairs. Importantly, undue attention to grades
appears to separate education from children’s normal lives, a factor that makes
schooling an adverse variable to productive education (Holt, 1969)
Last but not least, the ideologies being taught and practices in school
represent submission to orders and conformity to rules. “Trial and errors” is
inhibited when a school does not give a child the chance to try new ways of
learning. This ends up in frustrating the child after he or she fails. Additionally, the
formal education promotes an atmosphere of fear in young ones not to try
innovative ways, as they are scared of making mistakes (Robinson, 2006). Errors
are prohibited in schools, but in life, they are inevitable. In the fear of making
faults, they ask for guidance from the adults instead of having a go and getting
way out. This brings about unhealthy dependency as opposed to striving for
independence. To support this argument, the dictatorial methods of teaching in
school narrows a child’s thinking ability because he or she is restricted to a
formatted manner of performing tasks. Alternative learning approaches initiated
by the child are discouraged. The God-given gifts are not developed, and even are
“deeply buried” until later in life when a child can show bias in critical life aspects
and activities.

3. Writer: Duong Kim Thanh Class:QH2013.F1.E11
3
Some scholars have come on board and disputed that school is bad. The
counterargument is founded on substantial reasons why a school is good and
every child should be subjected to a programmed learning (Crow, 2014). Firstly,
with the current level of technology, one has to be literate, a condition only
accessible through formal education. Besides, the global changes are dictating
that individual has to be formally educated since one has to be in line with the
emerging training needs. In relation to this, a fully equipped learner focuses on
understanding diverse cultures, and the only place where one can do that is at
school. However, the current learning environs inhibit such possibility due to
inflexible teaching practices and unfriendly time allocation. In addition, some
sources insist discipline is better instilled in school where one studies following
restricted schedules and obeying orders from seniors (Lipman, 2013). With that,
schooling is trusted to develop their said virtues. In developing a profession, there
are those that argue a person must undertake learning in school for him or her to
acquire the required knowledge and skills. For example, in aviation one has to
train a structured school. While these arguments are quite convincing, it is
justifiable to state that children would process better skills and exhibit high
motivational levels if schools were sufficiently flexible.
After a thorough review of whether schools are bad for children or not, it is
evident that institutions are not efficient learning facilities. However, the
advantages that come with educating children outweigh the outcome of lack of
schools. This regards the fact that as much as people want their children to grow
in less stressing situations, the present world dictates otherwise. Consequently,
all stakeholders have a mandate to develop a curriculum that considers the
overall need of prospective learners. Such a system is the one that does not focus
on the grades only, but also considers nurturing the talents of children in all areas
and levels of education.
(984 words)

4. Writer: Duong Kim Thanh Class:QH2013.F1.E11
4
References
1. Amabile, T. (1998, September 1). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business
Review. Retrieved from
http://hbr.org/1998/09/how-to-kill-creativity/ar/l
2. Brooks, D. (2012, April23). Thecreative monopoly. New York Times.
Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/opinion/brooks-the-creative-
monopoly.htlm?_r=0
3. Crow, D. (2014, February 7). Why every child should learn to code. The
Guardian. Retrieved from
http://www.theguradian.com/technology/2014/feb/07/year-of-code-
dan-crow-songkick
4. Holt, J (1969). School is bad for children. Rogue Forum. Retrieved from
http://www.rougeforum.org/newspaper/winter2003/HoltJohn1969.htm
5. Holt, J. (1982). How children fail. New York: Pitman Publishing Company.
6. Lipman, J. (2013, September 27). Why tough teachers get good results.
Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304213904579095303
368899132
7. Ofsted. (2015, March 4). Schools not doing enough to support most able
students. UK Government. Retrieved from
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/schools-not-doing-enough-to-
support-most-able-students

5. Writer: Duong Kim Thanh Class:QH2013.F1.E11
5
8. Robinson, K. (2006). How schools kill creativity. TED Talks. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity/tr
anscripts?languale=en