This week I read two perspectives on what it means to be a good student. “A History of Education” by Painter addressed a more traditional view compared to “Against Common Sense” by Kumashiro. Painter writes about how a student must be trained to have a good moral nature in order to be a good student (pg. 2). Painter writes about two different cultures and their connection to education. Chinese classrooms have no comfortable furniture and the product method is the main teaching style. Severe discipline is used for any student that does not conform to traditional classroom protocols such as sitting quietly, writing, reading, and paying attention. This type of education is called ancestral education (pg. 13). In this case, the Chinese people are defining a good student as someone who can meet outcomes and memorize information. Painter also talks about India’s education system. The cast system in India controls education quite a bit (pg. 17). Classrooms are usually outside and consist of the whole student body at once. Their first lessons are drawn in the sand and discipline is much milder than the Chinese. Their teacher must be of a certain cast in order to be classified as a good teacher. Being a good student in India means you pay attention in class but have more opportunity to be outside in nature learning. Kumashiro defines a good student as someone who can understand the political implications of what is being learned and critically examine what and why we learn.

In Painter’s definition of what it means to be a good student, the students who are able to write essays well, and sit still are benefitted the most. Students who have a hard time sitting still and learning by reading and listening will struggle to be “good” students. Kumashiro writes about a student called M and how M was rowdy, didn’t like to sit still, and had trouble listening but would focus on creative projects with less structure. In a similar way, Kumashiro mentions a student called N. N questioned the teacher on whether they enjoyed what they taught or just followed the curriculum. N essay’s were last minute and sloppy but N’s creative writing projects were well done. Both M and N benefitted from a less structured and more creative curriculum but would be labelled as bad students in both China and India.

A good student is shaped by historical factors because of the original product model. The product model was designed to create the perfect factory workers. Students would sit in rows quietly working on independent projects, taking notes, and study for exams. This shapes how good students are seen today. The education system still expects students to be quiet in class, to listen to the teacher, to not talk out of turn, and to work on very structured assignments. Most classrooms are even still organized in rows. Kumashiro mentions that although this method may not work for everyone, losing all structure would end in chaos. It is important to find a balance between the two.