Argument Evaluation "We Should Cherish Our Childrens' Freedom to Think"

 Argument Evaluation
"We should cherish our childern's Freedom to Think"


 Essay I " Freedom to think without freedom to know?"
Xanthi Papadopoulou
Language Development
08/13/2010

In his article "We should cherish our children's freedom to think" Kie Ho aims to weaken complaints concerning the American education system by stressing that contrary to all other educational systems it is the only one which offers children the freedom to think and work creatively.
According to Ho this is the main impulse leading to the fact that America is the country of innovation.
The idea of freedom to think as a meaningful and indispensible part of education is a point one can definitely agree on with Ho.
Still, a problematic aspect of his essay is the fact that he restricts this idea to America, claiming that it is the only country which realizes this freedom.
Also, Ho reduces the importance of factual knowledge stating that creativity is the main skill which should be encouraged at schools.

In order to support his argument he integrates some personal and not verifiable reports of immigrants who complain about the American education system, as it does not teach their children factual knowledge sufficiently.
In regard of the fact that those people have no expertise knowledge of the subject , the counter side of Ho's argument is not represented appropriately.
To decrease the meaningfulness of those complaints, Ho reports about a personal experience at the Laguna Beach Museum where some creative artwork of schoolchildren was exhibited.
He regards this exhibition as representative for the American education system as a whole.
But can a special exhibition presented in a museum be seen as a general concept?
Rather, this is a very limited image of his argument which cannot be regarded as representative.
Besides, can students’ creativity exclusively be found in America?
Certainly other countries encourage their students’ fantasy in a similar way.
Thus, Ho’s argument draws an idealistic picture of the American education system while ignoring the systems’ of many other countries which might work in a comparable way.


Also, Ho tends to generalize and cast sweeping judgments.
This becomes apparent in his statement "unlike his counterparts in Asia and Europe" (p. 113) he claims, his son has the freedom to think.
This assertion is subjective as no data is provided which supports his argument.
In addition his final conclusion stating: " our public education certainly is not perfect, but is a great deal better than any other" (p. 114) gives evidence for Ho's ignorance of other educational systems and his tendency to exaggerate.

As Ho’s argumentation is strongly one-sided , he presents the opposing view in a sarcastic manner aiming to devalue it:
“ Would we, however, prefer to stuff the developing little heads of our children with hundreds of geometry problems, the names of rivers in Brazil and 50 lines from the Canterbury Tales” (p 113).
By using irony Ho ignores the importance of factual knowledge completely.
But doesn’t factual knowledge, when it is taught to an appropriate amount, help to enforce creativity and broaden one’s horizon?

Concludingly, it can be said that Ho's article lacks credibility as no verifiable data is provided which proves his claims.
In my opinion, Ho tends to degrade the educational systems of other cultures while placing the American system at the top without reasonable evidence.
I like his passionate idea of the freedom, still, in my opinion a compulsory amount of factual knowledge is necessary, as I do not think it is acceptable to put Dostoevski in the same category with Mussolini.