Good Student and Commonsense

  1. What does it mean to be a “good” student according to the commonsense?

Kumashiro (2015) states that an expectation of a good student is someone who can complete “certain assignments and [repeat] on exams the correct definitions or themes or analyses in a strong essay format” (pg. 21). Kumashiro also assumed back then as he stated:

“I remember consistently feeling quite frustrated by such students, not only because I assumed that being student required behaving and thinking in only certain ways…I felt pressure from schools and society to produce this type of student” (pg. 21)

In China, according to Painter (1886), students “repeat after the teacher the names of the characters in the book given to them to study” (pg. 12). He further stated that a good student will be “ready, like a steam-engine, to be turned to any kind of work, and spin the gossamers as well as forge the anchors of the mind” (pg. 3) On a general note, the three readings suggest that a good student is someone who is robotic. Someone who is able to absorb any information that is handed to them without any hesitation. A student who can be told to do anything and they will do it. This is a student with no authority whatsoever.

2. Which students are privileged by this definition of a good student?

In India, they have this hierarchy called the “caste system” in which the “Brahmans” controls most of the education. Any student that is in the Brahman caste will have this privilege to be in school. Since the teachers are also required to be Brahmans, they would teach everything to Brahman students. On the contrary, “the students of the warrior caste” are only taught “partial courses, which immediate reference to the wants to practical life” (Painter, pg. 20). In Kumashiro’s text (2015), students who follow teacher’s orders are the privilege ones. Students who have a different way of learning are often forced into the learning style of the majority.

3. How is the “good” student shaped by historical factors?

India and China use abuse to shape a “good” student. For instance, in China, the teacher uses “rattan or bamboo” as well as “scolding, castigation, starving, and imprisonment” to discipline pupils (Painter, pg. 13). In India, whenever “admonition” fails that “bodily pain is inflicted by the rod, by placing the pupil in an uncomfortable position, or by pouring cold water upon him” (Painter, pg. 18). Generally, students are forced into a learning style that not everyone can adapt to. Students that can not adapt are hit or verbally abused so they would not cause any “trouble” to the class and the teacher. In China, they focus on teaching students so they will become future politicians, whereas in India students cannot rise in ranks therefore good students are basically Brahman students.

 

Reference:

Kumashiro, K. K. (2015). Against common sense: Teaching and learning toward
social justice (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Painter, F. (1886). A History of Education (Vol. 2). D. Appleton and Company.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *