I think Gatto is right to question the generally (and naively) accepted mission of public education. This mission, as Gatto writes on page 35 of his essay, is to help children grow into good people and citizens. I, however, disagree with Gatto’s radical and perhaps excessively cynical view that the government saw mandatory education as an opportunity to produce a “docile” population of “mediocre intellect” (36). Additionally, I reject the proposition that education is intended to keep the young population childish for as long as possible. Granted, Edison and Farragut (neither of whom was educated like we are today) were more accomplished by the time they reached high school age than most people nowadays are as adults – but it’s also true that they were far more accomplished than their peers. These people were exceptional, just like there are exceptional children – and adults – now. I would still say, though, that today’s population is, on average, more intelligent, knowledgeable, and/or accomplished than Edison’s.

I won’t deny that public education creates a more easily governed population. In fact, I think it’s definitely easier to manage a population that has gone through a uniform system of schooling. This part of Gatto’s assessment is fair, and I’d think it likely that this was an incentive for the introduction of a public education system. But I just don’t buy that this and the government-supported dumbing down of young society is the primary purpose of public schooling.

One reason I find Gatto’s proposition so difficult to accept is that I actually think the American system of education is pretty liberal and affords students and teachers a decent amount of freedom. I grew up familiar with the Lebanese Baccalaureate system, which seems more likely to be designed with the goals Gatto refers to in mind than the US system. Kids take a standardized set of classes, with no flexibility within the curriculum, so everyone memorizes the same classical Arabic poetry and learns about the same rivers and mountains. The era-defining civil war of 1975 is not even taught in school because of how it makes the government look. It is perhaps because I’ve been exposed to this kind of educational system – and because I see the American education system as appealing – that I can’t agree with Gatto’s thoughts on the American system.

A final thought on the solution proposed by Gatto, which is basically for parents to teach their kids differently from the public education system. I think the solution is idealistic and likely to do more harm than good. It can’t be taken seriously as a potential solution to the problem he describes.