I agree with that. If you get that score, it is not only possible to learn what you learned in college. When two people with very different college entrance examination scores go to the same university, their achievements and future in the university may have nothing to do with it.
The only problem is the limited resources, limited places and limited opportunities in society. So there are various tests and qualification requirements to distinguish people. If you get it, life will be a new world. If you don't get it, the probability of getting a good opportunity in the future will become smaller.
However, there are exceptions. The survey found that for children with more family resources who are eligible to choose a prestigious school but have no choice, their future prospects have not been greatly affected.
Therefore, how much effort should be made for the college entrance examination may be a personalized question, which is related to parents' education, family resources and children's endowment.
In short, the more resources, the more choices children have in the future, and the less they need to pay too much for the college entrance examination, because there is a brighter future waiting for them anyway. At this time, many things can be done to broaden their horizons or make them happy. The less family resources, the less choices children may have in the future. It may be worthwhile to pay for the college entrance examination, because if you don't get the ideal results, your children will still return to their existing lives and circles, and if you get the ideal results, you may realize a leap in a family.
Let's start with the point in the book: rigid study is meaningless.
This is consistent with my cognition. My mother will show me some videos showing off children's reading and literacy, and she will marvel at how other children are so powerful!
I have always disapproved, disdained and angry. I hate this practice of forcing rigid knowledge into children and then showing it off. This is obviously encouraging children to hurt them. How can you show it off? !
But my mother wouldn't listen. She also thinks that these children are very powerful and are little geniuses!
Let me share the author's point of view: What's the use of letting a 3-year-old child learn words that she can easily know when she is 5 or 6 years old, or deliberately learning what she will naturally master when she grows up?
The book mentions an experiment. A few decades ago, in Germany, it was proposed to educate young children at an early age. Fortunately, the government did not implement it immediately, but made a survey involving hundreds of kindergartens, some of which are mainly teaching knowledge and some are mainly playing.
The follow-up found that when these children first arrived in primary school, the children in the early education group did have an advantage because they had all learned those contents; But from the fourth grade, these advantages disappeared, and the children in the game group quickly surpassed them and kept ahead.
To make matters worse, children who have received early education for one or two years are not only generally backward in grades, but also have more social and personality problems.
Through this study, it is found that it is harmful to children's life to impart knowledge to them too early. Children who don't have fun when they should play, but are asked and bound, and the nature of free exploration and play is not fully respected and released, which almost affects their life development.
One of my little nieces is in the first grade this year. My brother says that she is very relaxed at school now, because she has learned everything the kindergarten teacher taught her, and she often says that it is too simple, and she knows everything the teacher says.
This is not a happy thing. The first-grade course is very simple, but when children are new to school and need to develop some important habits and qualities such as concentration, seriousness, modesty and exploration, because they know these contents, they think it is unnecessary to go to class again, which will inevitably lead to a series of problems such as distraction, complacency and impatience with what the teacher said.
What should children do in the first two years of primary school if the kindergarten teaches above the first grade of primary school? How to form recognition and respect for teachers? Will you start to listen attentively to what the second-grade teacher said because you haven't learned it yet?
These are all questions that I can't understand. Therefore, I don't like all the ways to control children's so-called "knowledge".
When the child's body and brain develop to that extent, he will naturally understand why these meaningless things should be taught in advance when playing.
Moreover, children's individual differences and natural endowments are not the same, and there should be no unnecessary comparison.
However, I don't agree to leave the children alone, because the family environment in the city is relatively simple. My understanding of "early education" is enlightenment. More importantly, try to create opportunities for children to get in touch with different environments and atmospheres. Don't set so many rules and regulations for children, and plant seeds for her that she likes the world, likes sharing, likes exploring and is always curious.
This is the concept of three corresponding social roles.
Industrial products, as the name implies, are cheap, mass-produced and easily replaced, corresponding to the majority who have no autonomy and go with the flow.
Handicrafts, with high value and small quantity, are often placed in exquisite windows, but in the final analysis, they are still a "commodity" that can be standardized. It's beautiful, but it's clearly marked. This corresponds to a relatively small number of social elites, which is the goal pursued by most of us. Dress up carefully and wait for the price, such as a famous watch or a high-grade solid wood furniture. Even if it is expensive, it is within certain expectations.
Works of art are priceless and unique. Of course, many so-called "artworks" are now in commercial operation, waiting for a good price to buy. Then here I think the author's original intention may be closer to "collectibles". It has unique artistic value, ideological value, commemorative value, unique original value and significance. This corresponds to fewer pioneers pursuing a certain realm.
Let's go back to the first part. Our education is not to make everyone excellent. This has been the case since ancient times.
Society, like life, doesn't need so many works of art. On the contrary, what it needs most is low-cost industrial products, which do not need to be beautiful or different. They only need to have the most basic functions to meet the basic needs of our lives.
The pursuit of a higher level may be a change from "ordinary" to "exquisite". We are not satisfied with eating vegetables watered by pesticides, but demand "organic and natural". We don't want bookshelves to be made of only a few pieces of wood, but we want precious and exquisite solid wood. We don't want an ordinary 1000 TV, we want a clearer 4k Sony ... but these may not be as good as some people's homes.
Even fewer families have art collections, as people say.
If everyone can have it, it will no longer be a luxury or a collection.
Although part of the significance of education is to hope that the world will become better, it is undeniable that it is more important to hope that society will continue to operate smoothly.
Many people marvel that the prerequisite of American elite education is that you belong to the "elite" class. What we see is just the tip of the iceberg.
If the whole world is an elite, who will care about their food, clothing, housing and transportation? Who will pave the way and build the bridge for them? Who will serve the life of the "elite"
Of course, the so-called "elite" actually only serves the rulers.
The book describes the education of four classes in American education, which profoundly embodies the "different from person to person."
The first category is often children from poor families. Teachers only talk about right and wrong, emphasize obedience, and are not allowed to doubt. There is no concept of respecting teachers and valuing morality.
The second category, children from ordinary families, is somewhat similar to the education we received from childhood. The quality of teachers has improved. Aside from right and wrong, they have begun to pay attention to their children's calculus, reasoning and logic, that is, they must have their own problem-solving ability, but they still focus on exams.
The third category is the education of the "elite" class that we often know. Generally speaking, children from families above the middle class will often be sent to prestigious schools in the future to engage in "finance, doctors, lawyers, consulting" and other work. From the beginning of primary school, they will start to study topics independently and have the ability to solve problems through continuous practice.
The fourth class is the ruler of society and the biggest owner of wealth. What they learned from primary school is not the concept of right and wrong, but decision-making, deduction of results and responsibility.
It is conceivable how deep the roots of different education planted from childhood are and how it will affect children's life. Of course, from birth, many children's lives are often doomed. Education is to make their future move towards its proper position.
Therefore, there is no right or wrong in education, only thinking and choice. You choose what kind of education you want in the future. What most of us need is not a leap in class, but a decent life.