According to ‘common sense’, a ‘good’ student is one who is not loud or rowdy, follows instructions, and listens quietly (“Kumashiro Chapter 2”). This presumption can be quite a problematic one. Not all students who are loud, rambunctious, or can’t sit still behave in this manner because they are not ‘good’ students. In fact, the term ‘good student’ in itself can be seen as problematic, why are we judging students based upon their learning behaviours? Every student is different, and that mentality applies to learning as well. Why are we categorizing students as ‘good’ or ‘not good’ based solely on how they follow instructions that only apply to a textbook classroom?

Students who are privileged from this presumption of a ‘good’ student, are those without mental/physical/learning disorders, and those who learn best in a textbook classroom. Many students may not sit still, may be loud, and may not listen because of learning disabilities. Of course, this is not a fault of anyone’s, but yet people may see them as being someone that’s not a ‘good’ student. Some students may also just learn differently, and the sitting-in-a-desk method may not help them learn. 

There is a history of the presumption of a ‘good’ student. A History of Education by F. V. N. Painter tells us, “it is clear that education, both in its subjects and methods of instruction, should have some reference to the demands of practical life” (Painter, F. V. N. 3). This shows that even in history the learning type of schools was product based, and a ‘good’ student was one who could follow instructions based on what was considered necessary to learn.

Works Cited

Painter, F. V. N. A History of Education. University of California Libraries. New York : D. Appleton, 1886. Internet Archive, archive.org/details/historyofeducati00painiala. 

“Kumashiro Chapter 2” Google Drive, Google, drive.google.com/file/d/1kkJc7k2AyKB-Usl3pujiMAeWpfzmpZRK/view. PDF.