I agree with Atzin that Gatto fails to conclude his argument with a reasonable solution. Gatto’s suggestions of critical thinking, leadership, and serious study, are all wonderful goals, but they are ideals, as demonstrated by the fact that, ironically, they are the same goals that the current education system, the same system he criticizes, has in place. This irony is compounded by Gatto’s lack of a concrete solution. He mentions parents as the teachers and role models, but if the details are considered, his solution fails as it doesn’t take into account students from nontraditional families (such as single-parent families or foster children), students from socio-economic classes where parents don’t have the resources to educate their children, and students who need the social routines and order of school. To my great-grandparents who worked on family farms in rural Pennsylvania, school was a gift, a reprieve from home life and work. While mandatory schooling has changed the curiosity of school, many students look forward to the day, whether it is due to a hard home life or a simple love of learning. Gatto also forgets that school is not just traditional schooling. At risk of sounding cliché, school is about discovering yourself and who you want to be, whether that’s through academics, sports, the arts, or social life. The qualities he prioritizes can’t just be developed in any academic sense, whether that is traditional public school, home schooling, or parents as role models. Leadership, drive, inquisitiveness, and maturity are skills learned by action, and the education system provides an environment for those skills to develop, even if it does not actively show that through repetitious and boring academic work. In this way, the current education system may need to be re-evaluated and changed, but its positive aspects and similar ideals should be considered before the system is completely demolished.