(catching up on LTP blog posts)
Lots of school owners say they run their schools to cater to the needs of their students.
In a survey in 1981, 93% of U.S. drivers rated themselves as having above-average driving skills. This is obviously impossible. It demonstrates illusory superiority and shows how irrational, even deluded, people can be when judging their own skills and their own worth.
Perhaps school owners do cater to the needs of their students. Perhaps they dictate what the needs are, and cater to those.
Let’s assume this is not the case and most schools are set up to cater to the real needs of their students.
In some groups in Japan, it’s gratifying to see that school owners will look for a receiving, trustworthy school when one of their students moves location.
If, though, we are concerned only with the needs of the students, if there is a school nearby we knew would cater better to one of our student’s needs, would we send them there?
If that was true for more than just one student, how many would we send?
Two? Ten? 50% of them? All of them?
What if we knew their real needs were better served by YouTube, a workbook and an Internet connection to the Philippines?
Do schools really exist to cater to students’ needs?
Are we any better than average?