Having gone through the school system for the last twelve years, I feel inclined to defend the “system,” because accepting Gatto’s arguments against schooling would mean that I am merely a dumb, dependent child instead of an independent adult. However, I do see some truth in his essay, based on my experience in the meritocratic school system. The competition among students for grades, various awards, and distinction does divide them and breed the “trivializing emotions of greed, envy, jealousy, and fear” (Gatto 38). Moreover, the assessment of study material rewards those who simply regurgitate information and punishes those who challenge existing knowledge or authority. In this way, schools produce kids happy to take in information as it is given to them, without questioning or processing it. I think, or at least would like to believe that institutions like Williams try to combat these effects of school. Its seminars and tutorials foster critical thinking and discussion. The lecture classes are more akin to the system, but perhaps they are necessary to enable participation in thoughtful discussion.  Our class is certainly far from Gatto’s idea of school because it encourages me to challenge traditional notions of politics and even the professor, the supposed authority figure. More importantly, it does not have any mindless assessments. Further proof is that Williams and our class would not allow students to read this essay if they wanted to reinforce Gatto’s claims.

The purpose of the American school system as presented by Gatto is one premised on making the general populace more manageable is an idea that I had heard before as a criticism for the American school system. While I do agree with many of the points made by Gatto, I feel like he fails to give adequate means of replacing and improving upon the current system and fails to outline an effective way in which parents can counteract the effects of school on their children. While he suggests alternatives like private school and homeschooling, which may not entirely conform to the current system, they still share many similar qualities and without proper oversight can take advantage of students and their families as seen in the Charter school movement within Chicago. Gatto also fails to address the concrete ways in which he would reform the current school system. While he mentions the development of certain traits such as free thinking, inquisitiveness, maturity, he leaves it up to the parents to combat a system in which they have already been inculcated and teach values to their children that they may have never been taught themselves. Additionally, the solution presented by Gatto of having the parents counteract what the school system teaches their children becomes problematic for low-income and single parent families who don’t always have the time or resources to engage in the activities Gatto suggests. So while I think the ideas presented in this article are important I believe that he fails to provide adequate solutions for the problem, especially among low-income students that suffer the most from such a system.

I agree with Alexandra’s comments on the public education system and its impact on equality. One often forgets to look outside of their bubble; I always assumed that Algebra was a standard course that everyone would take around the United States regardless of the structure of a school system. Standardization allows those who would never have had the opportunity to learn certain subject matter study in a generally supportive environment. The reality is that if left to explore their own methods of schooling, many parents and their children would not be able to or have the desire to properly study algebra. At the same time, however, standardization limits the ability of the individual to exceed and excel in the educational system. For those able to learn at a faster rate than the norm, equality in the public education system is a hinderance to academic growth. While I agree that switching to a positive viewpoint helps one view conformity as equality, it is merely a viewpoint. One’s perspective doesn’t alter reality; the education system in the United States has massive flaws. Overall, I agree that equality in public schools is not a bad thing, but if the system were altered to allow the individual to excel while still holding others to a standard, forced education would be much better.

In his 2003 Harper’s Magazine article, former teacher and author John Taylor Gatto asserts that public schooling in the United States is meant to be boring, repetitious, and often meaningless to, as he quotes from H.L Mencken, “‘breed and train a standardized citizenry’” (qtd. in Gatto 35). Gatto further describes this phenomena as the “conformity function” that has the “intention…to make all children as alike as possible” (36). I believe that this neutral assertion is correct. As Gatto indicates, coming out of primary and secondary schooling American children are expected to have a certain level of education in core subjects of Math, History, Science, and English–in this sense, every citizen is standardized on some level through the education system. Gatto, however, takes this concept of standardization and views it through a decidedly negative lense. Standardization of education, he writes, creates an “ignorant mass of mankind,” (36) that is unable to think “critically and independently” (38). And yet, standardization of public education was hailed as a hallmark of American progressiveness when it was first became mandatory in Massachusetts in 1852. Public education is also a symbol of unity and equality (although that can be contended) across the country. For example, the vast majority of American high schoolers have taken Algebra I, no matter where they are from or their socio-economic status (quality of the course, however, may not be equal). It is an amazing thing to think when you are struggling through a concept that every other teenager is or will go through the same experience. This is the equality of standardization: it can be a beautiful thing that allows students to have some understanding of each other. All in all, a simple switch from a negative to a positive viewpoint changes the fearful concept of conformity to one of equality.

I would love to write that Gatto’s perception of the public education system is the result of a small sample size and therefore inaccurate, but that would be wrong. To address the stated reasons for implementing mass schooling in the United States, the public education system does not produce good people, good citizens, or allow each person to be his or her best. Students are thrown into a situation where there is always a clear power structure, and are essentially obligated to create a place for themselves. If by “to make good citizens”, however, one means “force children to conform so they are easier to control”, then the public education system is, in fact, successful. Finally, children are either held back or pushed along at the classroom pace, which will almost always mean that one is not able to become his or her best.

While I agree with Grotto that the public education system does not achieve its stated goals whatsoever, I do believe that society needs a system like forced schooling to continue functioning. It is not a bad thing that we associate grades with knowledge gained, and the prestige of one’s school with success. Civilization requires structure; if everyone were simply educated on their own, there would be no common ground, and no basis for control. Williams is as different from Grotto’s description as an institution can be in real life; we are here by choice, and the college is structured to allow the individual to create their own learning path. But, while we did choose to be here, we are also at Williams for everything that comes with the degree.