So I think I'm starting to lose interest in the book. It started out at a great pace, with interesting and insightful passages, but it seems to have turned into talking about specific examples of people, that I need to measure up to. This chapter is like the last one, in the way that it takes a successful adult (Shanna Tellerman this time), and goes into detail about how they were raised. It has become predictable that the childhood was slightly unconventional, with the child being able to make a lot of important life decisions for themselves, mostly in relation to schooling, but that this unconventional childhood lead to the person in question becoming a wonderfully creative adult with an amazing job. I think that when a student reads this book, they will feel as though they need to aspire to be as wonderfully creative or smart as these examples, and that when a parent (or aspiring parent) reads this they will feel like they have to raise their children exactly how the parents of the examples given in book raised their kids. The interesting part about the latter issue is that in the beginning of the book, the author stated that one of the biggest problems that first-time parents make is trying to raise their children exactly how someone else raised their kid, to try and have their child turn out the as smart or creative or sporty as someone else's child. I understand that the author is just trying to give examples of how some parents raised their children differently, and their children turned out really great, but I think the book is still being a bit "preachy" about how to raise a child the "right" way. Hopefully the coming chapters will stray away from giving specific examples of "perfect" people, and turn more towards more interesting topics.
There was one part of this chapter that I did find interesting though, and that was when Tellerman was explaining a program she did in grad school: "There were no classes or tests. Teams were usually given a real-world client or problem to solve. Grades were determined by the presentations we did at the beginning of our project, halfway through, and then at the end when you'd showcase your project to everyone in the program to be critiqued." I found this interesting because it reminded me of the communications for entrepreneurs class. I found it interesting that she chose to mention this class as a large part of her success later in life, and I hope that I can get as much out of the communications for entrepreneurs class as she did out of her grad school program. Unfortunately, this was the chapter's only highlight.
Thanks for reading,
Zank
Rachel: If this book is getting boring, feel free to switch. The whole point of this assignment is to stimulate your thinking about entrepreneurship. Don't waste your time on something that you're not finding all that engaging.
ReplyDeleteIn light of what this book said about the grad school class, you might be interesting in this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blake-boles/give-high-school-students_b_6354654.html
It's an interesting way to think about how high school might be run.
I read the article. I thought it as very interesting, and something that I have thought about many times. But then I thought about school systems in other places. Take England for example, they chose their study path very early (sixteen instead of college age). Although this means they can avoid the subjects they don't like, it also means they make a potentially life altering decision at a very young age without very much to go on. I have spoken with people from other countries who are jealous of the way our system works. They think we are lucky to have the opportunity to try everything, before having to make up our minds. I don't think the author of the article is saying that we shouldn't take subjects we aren't interested in, but I think there would have to be a lot of meticulous planning that went into the rules of how this new system would work, so that it didn't turn into something different, and probably worse than the original system.
ReplyDelete