Even a well-run school that’s actually directed at useful teaching requires some structure. And that structure must be enforced on the children because only the most incredible children naturally follow the rules all the time.
Some of the rules that could be imposed don’t really have correct answers. (I’d offered something like dress code as an example, but I predict that there has been some research on what dress codes are “best” for education outcomes). But having no rule is strictly worse than any plausible rule. So the principal picks a rule. The teacher doesn’t agree with the chosen rule, but enforces it anyway for one reason or another (he doesn’t object that strongly, he is concerned about punishments for his deviance, he is logrolling to get support for some other issue, etc).
And that’s one way status enforcement rules get into the education system. Since the usefulness of education is not easily measured, there’s a significant risk (as others have noted) that this and similar issues become more important than useful education.
Even a well-run school that’s actually directed at useful teaching requires some structure. And that structure must be enforced on the children because only the most incredible children naturally follow the rules all the time.
This presumes that the structure needs rules. Some “free” schools get by with very few, and little or no status impositions. Also, homeschooling is another case where “structure” can be arbitrarily simple and tailored to the needs of a single child.
Really, the only reason rules are required to be “enforced on the children” is when you have the same rules for every child, regardless of fit. This is not a problem if your school has a 1:1 teacher:student ratio. ;-)
Even a well-run school that’s actually directed at useful teaching requires some structure. And that structure must be enforced on the children because only the most incredible children naturally follow the rules all the time.
Some of the rules that could be imposed don’t really have correct answers. (I’d offered something like dress code as an example, but I predict that there has been some research on what dress codes are “best” for education outcomes). But having no rule is strictly worse than any plausible rule. So the principal picks a rule. The teacher doesn’t agree with the chosen rule, but enforces it anyway for one reason or another (he doesn’t object that strongly, he is concerned about punishments for his deviance, he is logrolling to get support for some other issue, etc).
And that’s one way status enforcement rules get into the education system. Since the usefulness of education is not easily measured, there’s a significant risk (as others have noted) that this and similar issues become more important than useful education.
This presumes that the structure needs rules. Some “free” schools get by with very few, and little or no status impositions. Also, homeschooling is another case where “structure” can be arbitrarily simple and tailored to the needs of a single child.
Really, the only reason rules are required to be “enforced on the children” is when you have the same rules for every child, regardless of fit. This is not a problem if your school has a 1:1 teacher:student ratio. ;-)