'All men are created equal'. This often lauded concept is one of the supposed building blocks of American Society. British and Canadian society refer to it as 'The Rule of Law,' implying that all people are equal under the law. But should this maxim apply to education?

In any given classroom, there is a ratio of students who require a higher learning curve, who can absorb more complex concepts faster than their classmates, and there are those who require a much more timely method of teaching. However, in the general public school system students are usually treated as equals.

Accepting these ideas as fact, couldn't this system of equality in the classroom be creating more problems than it solves? Students who easily excel in their classes recieve good grades, but find themselves without challenge. So much so that many who leave the public school system for post-secondary education find themselves unable to cope with their sudden drop in elevation above their classmates or with the challenging new material. Likewise, students who could have benefitted from more attention in the classroom often end up with a much lower sense of self-worth than the more robustly intellectual students. However, a poor or sub-par education does not imply a person's lack of worth.

A student may be poor at math, but an excellent musician. One student may have the potential to be a suberb author, while another may have what it takes to become a masterful tactican. But under the current system, students may find themselves discouraged because a formulaic and archaic system has told them they are lacking.

Shouldn't these abilities be nurtured and given space to grow? In a society where we increasingly acknowledge the need for better public education, isn't it time we accepted that all students are not equal in all areas?

Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors.