Language class - Evaluation Essay

Sema Culhaci


Language class

Responsive Essay

8/11/10

When Freedom Meets Education

„We should cherish our Children's freedom to think“ proclaims Kie Ho (112) and relates to the most important value of the US educational system: freedom. In his same essay by name he rigidly attempts to defend the US schooling system by highlighting the US students' remarkable skills to “[...] freely speak, write and be creative“ (114). The author emphasizes the aspect of creativity and thinks that education is not about acquiring as much content knowledge as possible. What exactly is his opinion about this topic and which arguments are being put forward to support his view? Indeed, he seems to have a one-sided line of argumentation and this can be seen by evaluating his arguments.

Kie Ho explains that both Americans and Immigrants complain about the US educational system and he gives several concrete sample cases to illustrate this point. He then asks why these people cannot appreciate the US education since it is “[...]the country of innovation“ (113). Referring to an art exihibition run by US High school students, Ho underlines the students' creativity and the potential of the American system since school “[...]provided these children with opportunities and direction to fulfill their creativity“ (113). He then includes his personal experiences by telling that his son used to confuse the Argintinian capital Buenos Aires with Mexican food. Despite this lack of specific content knowledge, he argues that US students are able to express their ideas and thoughts and that it strengthens their self-esteem. Additionally, he talks about the traditional system and opposes it to the current American system. He regrets that he did not have “[...]a chance to choose, to make decision.“ (113). This means that he did not have the freedom that today's students might have with regard to critical thinking, expressing ideas and being creative. Nonetheless, he also criticizes the American system because it does not meet high standards in certain competencies. Despite to these concessions, he concludes that the US education system fosters the students' freedom to think and that the system “[...] is not perfect, but it is a great deal better than any other“ (114).

Indeed, Ho's essay is one-sided since he only tries to convince the reader that „the freedom to think“ (113) is the most beneficial aspect of the US system even though the US students do not succeed in the national standardized tests. Ho supports his idea by providing examples drawn from personal experience – for instance the art exhibition – to illustrate his point about the benefits of the US education system. In fact, he also considers other people's opinion by including counterarguments and concessions1, so he does not ignore other issues. Nonetheless, he fervently tries to see the US system in the light of its positive outcomes like creativity and the freedom to think. All in all, Ho does not have any objective evidence. Rather, he includes examples and so it is more a personal and non-scientific essay based on his personal experience and point of view. The examples he relates to are based on immigrant parents that complain about different aspects of content-based learning and their disappointment towards the schooling system. Are these examples trustworthy? Indeed, there is a lack of credibility because it is a personal essay and there are no statistics or other concrete data he could refer to.

Some arguments he presents are convincing but he could have left out counterarguments intentionally in order to have the balance between his point of view and opposing stances disrupted. For example, he does not present any facts about the failure and success of the US educational system. Therefore, he could conceal the fact that the system needs major improvements and cannot only be cherished because students are “[..] able to experiment freely with ideas.“ (113) Furthermore, Ho only states the negative aspects of the traditional schooling system because the students often had to memorize facts and the main focus was on acquiring content knowledge. Why is he only presenting it in a negative light? This lack of acknowledgement of traditional education strengthens his point of view because there is less caverage.

All in all, Ho has a clear point of view but it is based on personal experience rather than any objective evidence. Thus, it is more a personal statement on the current US educational system. Since he neither includes any expert statements nor facts, it is a populistic and not very convincing essay. Nevertheless, it is appropriate in this context and it appeals to the reader. I believe that Ho intends to see the US education in a positive light but he cannot do this without admitting that eduaction is more than creative thinking. When education meets freedom, free thinkers are fostered but it does not help them to stop believing that Buenes Aires is Mexican food.